“The goal of a game, we
may say, is winning the game“[3]. While playing Ninja Turtles on the NES, I
dare say, even though I was looking forward to win or beat the game (over and again!),
my main purpose was to enjoy my time playing with friends, in one of the few
and extravagant multiplayer games of its time. Thus my main motivation to play
was always to spend time with friends and to measure how we coped together, in
one way or another, which ultimately affected our relationship for the rest of
the day if not the entire week, “The player is stimulated to emulate himself,
permitting him to take pride in his accomplishment, as against those who share
his taste” [2]. In this blog I intend to critique the various elements and
features of Ninja Turtles’ effects on my family, my friends, and even myself in
real life, versus the definitions of games provided by Huizinga, Caillois and
Suits in The Game Design Reader.
One of the most
puzzling things with respect to the NES in general, and Ninja Turtles explicitly,
was watching family and friends from various generations, including my parents,
play the game and actually express enjoyment and excitement, as if “the ‘fun’
of playing resists all analysis, all logical interpretation”[1]. Yet play
seemed to be something irrational. For example, as my mother taught me that
violence could never be the solution to a problem, I found it hard to believe
her when I watched her kill the enemies in the game, and actually enjoy it! Such
dilemmas provided me with a different perspective of the world around me, and
the effect of games on it. One thing was apparent though everyone playing was
trying to waste time, taking their minds off of work, life, and their
individual problems to be able to reach a state of much needed leisure, and
entertainment. Such results led me to believe that there is much more to games
than I could possibly understand, the state of play itself is an “occasion of
pure waste: waste of time, energy, ingenuity, skill, and often of money” [2]
yet a much needed sate “for relaxation” [1]. Ninja turtles particularly touched
on an aspect pretty much only found in board games prior to its existence and
that is the need of a positive social atmosphere in order for players to be
able to cooperate, which in many ways simulates a work-like ambiance but for
the fun of it and thus “Games therefore might be expected to be what work, in
some salient respect, is not” [3].
Thus Play must be
defined as “a free and voluntary activity, a source of joy and amusement” [2],
something that ninja turtles accomplished and provided to individuals from all
ages, groups and backgrounds. From my perspective, I felt that the three
authors did a great job at defining what a game is, but I feel that they lacked
the subliminal portion of the message, it has been proven that games indirectly
affect the minds of the players and could help shape them.
By thus, I conclude that as humans, we do not always take on at playing games
knowing all the exact limits, especially which appear to reach out beyond time
and place.
[1] -- Huizinga, Johan.
"Nature and significance of play as a cultural phenomenon." The Game Design Reader. Ed. Salen
and Zimmerman. Boston: MIT, 2006.
[2] -- Caillois, Roger. "The definition of play and the classification of
games." The Game Design Reader. Ed. Salen
and Zimmerman.
[3] -- Suits, Bernard. "Construction of a Definition." The Game Design Reader. Ed. Salen
and Zimmerman.
Nice job of looking at personal experience through the lens of the readings.
Posted by: gamegrrrl | 10/24/2009 at 07:13 PM