Mixed Reality and Games: Theoretical and Practical Approaches in Game Studies and Education 9783839453292

Table of contents :
Contents
Preface
Federal Ministry of Labour, Family and Youth
University of Klagenfurt
KPH Vienna/Krems
Mixed Reality / Contributions to the 13th Future and Reality of Gaming Conference 2019 in Vienna
Introduction to Mixed Reality and Games
Mixed Reality / Design & Aesthetics
An Introduction to Design & Aesthetics
Warning: Not Suitable for Robots
Game Engineering for Hybrid Board Games
Creating Digital Gamebooks with Twine
Strategy Games as Neoliberal Historiography
The Flaneur in a Masticator
Cortana: A Digital Personal Assistant between Space Opera and Speech Recognition
Is This the Real Life? Is This just Fantasy?
Mixed Reality / Society & Culture
An Introduction to Society & Culture
Players Unite Legally
“As You Command”
Gender Portrayals in Videogames
Periphery: The Departure from Avatar-Sexual Characters in BioWare’s Dragon Age: Inquisition
When the Future Becomes the Present
The Case of Pokémon GO or How an AR-Game Influences Our Lives
Mixed Reality / Theory
An Introduction to Theory
Save Gamer
Gotta Go Fast
Mixed Reality Is Already There!
Settlement of Digital Land
Archaeology and Videogames
An Introduction to Gambling in the Context of Game Studies

Citation preview

Emir Bektic, Daniela Bruns, Sonja Gabriel, Florian Kelle, Gerhard Pölsterl, Felix Schniz (eds.) Mixed Reality and Games

Media Studies  | Volume 80

Emir Bektic (BA) is a student of the Game Studies and Engineering programme at Klagenfurt University. Daniela Bruns (MA) until recently worked as a university assistant at Klagenfurt University and organizes the universityʼs annual Game Pics Event. Her research focused on cultural studies, popular culture, and videogames. Sonja Gabriel (Prof. Mag. Dr.) is a professor for media literacy at the KPH Vienna/ Krems, teaching teachers in the use of digital media. Her research is focused on digital game-based learning and its teaching values. Florian Kelle (BA) is student of the Game Studies and Engineering programme at Klagenfurt University. He is writing his masterʼs thesis on archaeological approaches to videogames with a focus on object-oriented ontology and hyperobjects. Gerhard Pölsterl (Mag.) works for the Austrian Federal Ministry of Labour, Family and Youth, focusing on media and pedagogy. He also teaches media-related courses at the University of Vienna and organizes the annual FROG conference. Felix Schniz (MA) is director and co-founder of the Game Studies and Engineering programme at Klagenfurt University. He is writing his dissertation on the experiential dimension of videogames.

Emir Bektic, Daniela Bruns, Sonja Gabriel, Florian Kelle, Gerhard Pölsterl, Felix Schniz (eds.)

Mixed Reality and Games Theoretical and Practical Approaches in Game Studies and Education

This book is dedicated to all the gaming enthusiasts, everyone involved in the organisation of the conference and its pre-events as well as the contributors and the audience for making possible fruitful discussions throughout the conference and in the written contributions. Without the concerted efforts of everyone involved, the FROG conference 2019 and its pre-events would not have been possible. We would like to thank the whole editorial team for all their time, energy, and meticulousness put into editing and proofreading this book. This book is a product of people involved with the Ministry of Labour, Family and Youth, Klagenfurt University, and the KPH Vienna/Krems. We kindly thank the Ministry of Labour, Family and Youth and the University Foundation of the Archdiocese Vienna for co-funding this work.

Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http:// dnb.d-nb.de © 2020 transcript Verlag, Bielefeld All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Cover layout: Maria Arndt, Bielefeld Cover illustration: Austrian Federal Ministry of Labour, Family and Youth Proofread by Emir Bektic, Daniela Bruns, Sonja Gabriel, Florian Kelle, Gerhard Pölster, Felix Schniz Printed by Majuskel Medienproduktion GmbH, Wetzlar Print-ISBN 978-3-8376-5329-8 PDF-ISBN 978-3-8394-5329-2 https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839453292 Printed on permanent acid-free text paper.

Contents

Preface Federal Ministry of Labour, Family and Youth .................................. 11 University of Klagenfurt ........................................................... 13 KPH Vienna/Krems ................................................................... 17

Mixed Reality | Contributions to the 13th Future and Reality of Gaming Conference 2019 in Vienna Introduction to Mixed Reality and Games Emir Bektic, Daniela Bruns, Sonja Gabriel, Florian Kelle, Gerhard Pölsterl, and Felix Schniz .. 21

Mixed Reality | Design & Aesthetics An Introduction to Design & Aesthetics Florian Kelle and Felix Schniz.............................................................. 31

Warning: Not Suitable for Robots A Human-Centric Game Design Approach Alexia Bhéreur-Lagounaris ............................................................... 33

Game Engineering for Hybrid Board Games Wilfried Elmenreich ...................................................................... 49

Creating Digital Gamebooks with Twine Richard Hahn ............................................................................. 61

Strategy Games as Neoliberal Historiography David Praschak, Stefan Ancuta, and Max F. Schmidt....................................... 79

The Flaneur in a Masticator Virtual Walking and the Philosophical Experience in Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs Felix Schniz .............................................................................. 89

Cortana: A Digital Personal Assistant between Space Opera and Speech Recognition Rudolf Inderst and Pascal Wagner ........................................................ 101

Is This the Real Life? Is This just Fantasy? Alternate Reality (Games) Polliwog 2019 Michaela Kempter ........................................................................ 111

Mixed Reality | Society & Culture An Introduction to Society & Culture Emir Bektic and Gerhard Pölsterl ........................................................ 123

Players Unite Legally Katharina Bisset ........................................................................ 125

“As You Command” Male-Male Desire, Love, and Relationships in Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey René Reinhold Schallegger .............................................................. 133

Gender Portrayals in Videogames A Reflection of Production Contexts? Christina Obmann ....................................................................... 145

Periphery: The Departure from Avatar-Sexual Characters in BioWare’s Dragon Age: Inquisition Armin Lippitz ............................................................................ 161

When the Future Becomes the Present Detroit: Become Human as Social Science Fiction Daniela Bruns ........................................................................... 173

The Case of Pokémon GO or How an AR-Game Influences Our Lives Sonja Gabriel............................................................................ 187

Mixed Reality | Theory An Introduction to Theory Daniela Bruns and Sonja Gabriel ......................................................... 205

Save Gamer Gamification is Making Us Less Thoughtful; Are Gamejams a Testbed for the Cure? John N. A. Brown........................................................................ 209

Gotta Go Fast Insights into the Human-Machine-Interaction in Speedrunning Dejan Lukovic ........................................................................... 237

Mixed Reality Is Already There! The Player’s Body as Foundation of the Videogame Experience Frank Fetzer ............................................................................ 251

Settlement of Digital Land Living Part of Your Life in the Sandbox MMO EVE Online Gernot Hausar .......................................................................... 259

Archaeology and Videogames Towards the Nature of Artifacts as Hyperobjects Florian Kelle ............................................................................ 267

An Introduction to Gambling in the Context of Game Studies Alexander Pfeiffer and Georg Sedlecky................................................... 281

Preface

Federal Ministry of Labour, Family and Youth

12

Bernadett Humer

The Austrian Federal Ministry of Labour, Family and Youth has a clear position on the medium of digital games. This is characterized by a resource-oriented access to that medium. Thus, the ministry distances itself from a pedagogical handling of digital games that includes prohibition, and advocates for a curious, attentive and regulated handling of games in education. This would mean that parents and professionals take the lives of their children and adolescents seriously, accept digital games as part of them, find out about their effects, and then make an informed decision. I recognize playing digital games as part of the individual and social possibilities for children and adolescents, including the organization of their free, restful, active, and self-determined leisure time, furthermore as a legitimate right in the sense of article 31 of the “UN Convention on the Children’s Rights”, so the ministry’s policies need to be based on the current findings of science and research. As a result, digital games can develop a promotional potential in various dimensions and it is primarily the condition of the play, which decides how far the potential of games actually unfolds or negative and undesirable effects occur. And that is the reason why we established close collaboration with scientific institutions, which research, publish, and educate in the field of game studies/gaming, collaboration above all through the ministry’s scientific symposium FROG – Future and Reality of Gaming. Mixed Reality has been the topic of the 2019 edition of FROG and I wish you a great reading experience with mixed perceptions on the medium digital games. Bernadett Humer Director General Division II – Family and Youth, Federal Ministry of Labour, Family and Youth

University of Klagenfurt

14

Alexander Onysko

With the 21st century now well under way, academic research and teaching institutions have realized the necessity to critically engage with the digital transformation of societies. Pushing the boundaries of understanding the transformative potential of digital media, their affordances, their risks, and their potential to foster humane values is of utmost importance for academic institutions all around the world. It is not only the mere technological progress in itself which propels humanity forward but also, and crucially, it is the informed and multifaceted, critical reflection that is needed to guide this process towards a better future for humankind, addressing current global challenges. As part of the digital world, in an age of mixed realities, the role of digital games cannot be underestimated judging by the sheer popularity of online and offline gaming across the globe. It is high time that thorough interdisciplinary research keeps a close eye on this phenomenon and provides society with deep insights into the social, cultural and psychological implications of digital games and gaming. What makes digital games so attractive is that they are by definition multi-medial and immersive in nature, granting agency and meaningful configurative interaction to their players like no other medium in human history. Augmented and virtual reality add further experiential dimensions to digital games, providing novel possibilities to interact, and opening up a hybrid space between the virtual and the actual. Digital games have a cultural, social, and economic impact that cannot be neglected. As the largest global entertainment industry, the medium not only provides distraction, but it is a driving force behind innovations. In times of mixed realities, digital games offer new ways of connecting people and of learning and developing cultural as well as technological knowledge. The current challenging times highlight the importance of digital games in our societies. Several hundred million players around the world come together in specific cultures and fandoms revolving around digital games. In physical conventions but also increasingly at digital online events, people gather in dedicated spaces reaching across the actual/virtual divide to play together, to communicate, and to watch streams of others playing. This volume has taken up the challenge of pushing research on digital games forward by showcasing insights into the social, cultural, and technological domains of digital games and gaming. The contributions emerged from the annual FROG – Future and Reality of Gaming conference in Vienna in 2019. The editors of the volume are keen researchers and active participants at this cultural, technological, and deeply human movement. FROG hosts a wide variety of speakers every year, proving how versatile and multifaceted the medium and the people working with digital games are. Inviting speakers from all over the world, the conference series answers a truly global need to discuss digital games in an open, creative, and constructive environment. The essence of these latest discussions is now condensed into this book, so that they can be shared with people around the world who are

University of Klagenfurt

critical participants in the new and mixed realities that we are currently building together. Alexander Onysko Head of the Department of English University of Klagenfurt

15

KPH Vienna/Krems

18

Christopher Berger

As an institution that trains pre-service and in-service teachers, dealing with digital media is an important concern as children and teenager do not only use media in their spare time but also bring them to school, focus on media contents in their discussions among friends and use them for communication and (informal) learning. Especially smartphones are used by pre-teens and teens no matter where they are and no matter which time it is. Using smartphones and social networks means that games also play an essential role in children’s and adolescents’ lives. Therefore, it is necessary that education also deals with opportunities and challenges that these digital games bring with them. On the one hand, games might be a social connector among peer-groups but can on the other hand also be used to exclude and isolate. They might be a source of infinite creativity but also lure them into overuse or spending too much money. Technologies like augmented or virtual reality add another aspect to digital games, making them more real and offering also additional possibilities for education. All kinds of games have been used for teaching for a long time – they often provide the opportunity to simulate processes, to slip into the role of other characters and enable experiences that would otherwise not be possible. Good games which can be used for learning and teaching, however, need to be developed and discussed by game designers, teachers, game developers, researchers as well as youth workers, students, and gamers. Only by taking into account all the different points of view of these groups, the potential of games can fully be tapped. Therefore, conferences like FROG – Future and Reality of Gaming which enable all these groups to come together and share their ideas and experience are the basis for developing digital games that can not only captivate their gamers but do more than that: They make people think, dream and learn in an environment that is full of fun and excitement. The interdisciplinarity of this conference as well as the motto “Mixed Reality” shows that games have stopped being only virtual and entered our real lives. This book unites many different approaches towards digital games and thus provides a broad audience insight into a digital medium that is far more than mere entertainment. Dr. Christoph Berger, MA Rector KPH Vienna/Krems

Mixed Reality | Contributions to the 13th Future and Reality of Gaming Conference 2019 in Vienna

Introduction to Mixed Reality and Games Emir Bektic, Daniela Bruns, Sonja Gabriel, Florian Kelle, Gerhard Pölsterl, and Felix Schniz

When talking about mixed reality, we often refer to interactive systems in which the human perception of the world and everything that surrounds us is mixed with synthetic stimuli. When a computer-based technology requiring immersive participation is used, the mixed reality experience can be anything between completely real and completely virtual. Since our everyday life is supported and enabled by technological applications in manifold ways, it has become difficult to imagine a day without getting in touch with the virtual: Social contacts, daily tasks as well as work processes are increasingly organized through smartphones, tablets, computers and other electronic gadgets. Devices that allow their users to talk to digital images of their friends and colleagues via video calls, engage in conversations with artificial intelligence or track other people’s movements on screen in real-time are blending real and virtual spaces on a daily basis. Mixed reality games, as part of this societal and technological development, do not only deliver virtual reality but also playful interactions into real environments and place ludic interludes within a context of ordinary experiences. A walk in the park is no longer just for breathing fresh air and admiring nature, but also for catching Pokémon and defeating opponents in battles. As per Huizinga’s Magic Circle (1955), games are separated from the ordinary, because they are played in certain spaces at certain times by certain players. Thereby, the rules and norms of the real world are temporarily suspended, actions and behavior are interpreted by other players within the playful mindset of the game. Playing in public spaces as for example in the park illustrates that the magic circle is not as self-contained as it seems: While being focused on the screen, other pedestrians, who are non-players in this scenario, can be disturbed by the player’s inattentiveness or the player can be distracted by real world events. Specific game designs that aim to perforate Huizinga’s magic circle can be found in pervasive games, which “pervade, bend, and blur the traditional boundaries of game, bleeding from the domain of the game to the domain of the ordinary” (Montola 2009, 12). Pervasive games offer a mixed reality experience by systematically extending, expanding or even breaking this magic circle. According to Montola (2009) this expansion can be seen as a spatial, temporal or social one.

22

Emir Bektic, Daniela Bruns, Sonja Gabriel, Florian Kelle, Gerhard Pölsterl, and Felix Schniz

Having a look at the spatial expansion, games can provide many locations simultaneously, take place in unconventional places or reclaim public spaces. The gaming areas are not always clearly defined which makes the game more interesting. Another factor is that the spatial context of each player affects the game – either in relation to physical places or other players which means that location tracking technologies are used to determine spatial context. Also features of the physical environment as game objects might be used. Thus, a combination of physical and virtual spaces can often be found – either using augmented reality or combining physical and virtual players. Temporal expansion, however, might refer to an interlacing and intermixing of the game with everyday life, either by the game being interrupted for long periods of time or giving alerts to the player to resume the game at any given time. Quite often, mixed reality games are used to make use of waiting time – for example when waiting at the bus stop or at the doctor’s office. Finally, social expansion refers to playing in unexpected places and at unexpected times leading to unexpected people making a difference to game play. Observing others play a game might indirectly lead to playing a minor role without knowing that one is part of the game. Sometimes, changes in one (or more) of these areas might either be explicit, implicit or even unknown to players. However, in all cases they deliberately disrupt the known definitions of player, session and space by exploiting the ambiguity of expanding beyond the boundaries of the conventional magic circle which can be seen as kind of game play itself. Mixed reality games might even create the illusion of games not being games. The magic circle as a theory to frame play has its critics among those scholars and researchers, who understand the separation of the virtual and the real as socially constructed in the first place. When considering digital games as a resource for physical and social experiences, it becomes difficult to maintain this construct. According to Muriel and Crawford (2018, 89–90), the designed experiences of videogames are part of our everyday real-world experiences without differing qualitatively from them. Players talk about their gaming experiences in the same way they talk about events that have happened in the physical world. While filmic experiences are particularly described with emotions, such as fear, anger, sadness, and laughter, the reports about videogame sessions resemble those about birthday parties or trips: “Video gamers talk in terms of what happened and what they or others did or felt when they were playing a video game” (89). When interviewing players of Football Manager (since 2004) and Championship Manager (since 1992), Crawford (2006) recognized that the narratives flowed smoothly from in-game reports to real-world football events. Based on Goffman’s frame analysis, Gary Alan Fine (1983) identifies three frames in which the players of games operate mentally: Firstly, they have an understanding of themselves and the social context in which they are embedded as a subject. Secondly, they see themselves as players of a game with a specific gameplay. Thirdly, they identify with the character they con-

Introduction to Mixed Reality and Games

trol within the game. Players alternate dynamically between these three frames of interpretation or occupy several at the same time. Thomas Malaby (2007) suggests that instead of grasping play as a safe and pleasurable activity separated from everyday life, it is more productive to investigate games as social artifacts, subjected to change in practice and meaning. The differentiation of western society between real and virtual as well as work and play fosters exceptionalistic stances, setting them apart, but “the wide-ranging unpredictability of our everyday experiences and the contrived unpredictability of games point towards a bridge, rather than a gap, between games and other aspects of our lives” (107). Therefore, play can be understood as a lived experience that is not only initiated through gameplay but is also connected to the socio-cultural context of the player. The virtual world of the videogame is extended by affiliated practices and meanings of the physical world and vice versa. On the one hand, players are mentally engaged with videogames, on the other their physical body is essential to get in contact with the gaming system and the virtual world it is offering. Seth Giddings (2005, 1) pictures the process of starting a videogame as plugging oneself into a cybernetic circuit, where computational as well as human components are working together to bring the game to life. In his article As We Become Machines: Corporealized Pleasures in Video Games Martti Lahti (2003, 163) describes the gaming experience in a similar way: The “[…] delirium of virtual mobility, sensory feedback, and the incorporation of the player into a larger system thus ties the body into a cybernetic loop with the computer, where its affective thrills can spill over into the player’s space. This desire is perhaps best exemplified by players’ attempts to control the game world more fully with their own empathetic bodily movement.“ Encountering a videogame does not just mean setting virtual bodies or items in motion but also being set in motion by them, feeling a physical bond to what is represented on screen. Gregersen and Grodal (2009, 65–69) understand embodiment in two ways, related to each other: Our physical and biological body, equipped with body surface, interior and senses for absorbing the world, as well as the experience of ourselves as an embodied being that can be extended for example by a tool or a virtual representative. According to Gregersen and Grodal (2009, 67) a playable avatar can be described as a “body image in action – where one experiences both agency and ownership” of a virtual entity. Therefore, playing a videogame does not only mean being an agent, taking actions in virtual worlds, but also being a patient, subjected to the events happening to us and our avatar. Even if only our virtual body is killed in the game, real feelings and emotions are provoked, palpable in every fibre of the body. Virtual worlds increasingly pervade real worlds in the matter of space, time and social life, pushing mind and body further into the gray area in between, but realworld matters are as important for the creation and evolution of virtual worlds. One aspect where real and virtual are apparently intertwined in this way is the

23

24

Emir Bektic, Daniela Bruns, Sonja Gabriel, Florian Kelle, Gerhard Pölsterl, and Felix Schniz

production process of games, where people from different professions, motivations and cultures are coming together to co-create virtual playgrounds. Not only do game designers bring their own beliefs, values and perspectives into the production process (cf. Flanagan and Nissenbaum 2016), but legal and technical requirements also have to be considered. Widely known regulations refer, for example, to the protection of minors, copyright infringements and the distribution of unconstitutional symbols. Because game enthusiasts take on an important role in the production process of today’s games, by providing self-created content and mods to other players or testing and reviewing early access games, the circle of responsible contributors has expanded. Additionally, the emergence of social media poses new questions concerning image, sound and video material, which is edited and shared by players in order to express their fascination or criticism. As well as the gaming experiences are not limited to the gaming situation, but are generously shared by the players, the things we learn while playing a game are also transferred into other areas of life, unconsciously or purposefully. In this regard, the question of how and by whom the game is played is as important as examining production context, game design and game content. Learning with videogames happens outside as well as inside the classroom, in informal as well as formal settings. The latter one has gained tremendous importance over the last years for various institutions. While first attempts to utilize videogames took place in the military, today’s field of application is manifold and no longer narrowed to physical and cognitive training or behavioristic learning theories. Complex videogames work across online and offline spaces, making players search for solutions to in-game problems, work out strategies or develop new skills (Beavis 2017). Many of these learning processes take place in affinity spaces where organization of space and organization of people is both equally important (Gee and Hayes 2009). On the one hand, educating a generation that has grown up as part of a participatory culture (Jenkins 1992), confronted with interactive media and the possibility to participate actively in public spaces from a very young age, comes with new challenges but also opportunities. On the other hand, today’s requirements for students have changed because of the effective ways to preserve, share and retrieve knowledge. Thus, the ability to find and use information, to interact critically with it and solve complex problems is more valued than mere memorizing and repeating. James Paul Gee (2007) argues that videogames offer effective learning principles to meet these requirements of the late 20th and 21st Century. Adapting them for educational environments as well as using games or game-like technologies can help to engage students with powerful forms of learning. In this respect not only playing videogames can be a productive learning activity but also the creation of videogames can teach valuable abilities like networked thinking, problem solving and programming skills (cf. Squire 2008). At the same time “we have to be careful not to co-opt young people’s cultures for our own purposes. We

Introduction to Mixed Reality and Games

need to make them full and productive partners in how we design any enterprise in which we use games for learning” (Gee 2007, 215). To realize the potential of games for learning does not only mean to carefully evaluate what fascinates and motivates players to engage themselves with virtual worlds in the first place but also how gaming culture is lived and which actors are involved. In order to achieve this, teachers and researchers should not only get in touch with gamers and fans but also with game designers and the industry. Accordingly, we as editors consider the circumstances under which this book was created as particularly productive for a multi-perspective examination of mixed reality and games. It is largely based on contributions at the 13th FROG – Future and Reality of Gaming conference which took part between 18th and 20th October 2019 under the subheading of mixed reality. As one of the five pillars of Vienna’s GAME CITY, Austria’s largest gaming event, the FROG Conference attracts representatives of the gaming scene, industry and researchers alike. Apart from academic discourse on various subjects around videogames and the aforementioned theme, the focus of the conference (and this book) is put on bringing together scholars, game designers, young academics and practitioners from various disciplines. Between the end of September and middle of October 2019, three pre-conference events called Polliwog took place in Krems, Klagenfurt and Vienna which combined theory and practical experience of mixed reality even more intensively by providing an alternative reality (games) workshop, prototyping hybrid board games and presenting videogames as an assessment tool to test competences of players. The book is structured into three parts – Design & Aesthetics, Society & Culture, and Theory: The first part of the book provides the reader with several insights into the design of games as well as the aesthetic value that games convey. Various approaches to design show how games can be created and improved by reflecting on the notion of different realities merging and mixing in the process of design. Similarly, the analytical contributions point out how virtual realities reflect upon the history of other realities and how we can experience them through games. The second part illustrates the versatility of games as drivers of sociocultural conversation, by offering up examples of their utility in commentary on topics of law, diversity, representation and a changing landscape for humanity. Intrinsically, the contributions comment on problematic trends in games and society, extrinsically they are a blueprint for using the medium as a tool for promoting positive change. The contributions of the third part illuminate practices, skills, and experiences that spill over from everyday life into the gameworld and vice versa. By questioning dichotomies like virtual – real, gaming – ordinary and playful – serious on a social, physical and mental level, they open up a discussion about rethinking established

25

26

Emir Bektic, Daniela Bruns, Sonja Gabriel, Florian Kelle, Gerhard Pölsterl, and Felix Schniz

beliefs. Those insights can help to create a basis for new theories of games and gaming that are needed to address challenges and opportunities, for today and in the future.

References Beavis, Catherine. 2017. “Living in a Digital World: Literacy, Learning, and Video Games.” In Global Conversations in Literacy Research, 144-154. New York: Routledge. Flanagan, Mary and Helen Nissenbaum. 2016. Values at Play in Digital Games. Cambridge and London: MIT Press. Gee, James Paul and Elizabeth Hayes. 2009. “Public Pedagogy through Video Games: Design, Resources & Affinity Spaces.” Accessed May 11, 2020. https:// mackenty.org/images/uploads/gee_informal_learning.pdf Gee, James Paul. 2007. What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy. Revised and Updated Edition. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Giddings, Seth. 2005. “Playing with Non-Humans: Digital Games as TechnoCultural Form.” In Proceedings of the 2005 DiGRA International Conference: Changing Views – Worlds in Play 3. Accessed May 11, 2020. http://www.digra.org/wpcontent/uploads/digital-library/06278.24323.pdf Gregersen, Andreas and Torben Grodal. 2009. “Embodiment and Interface.” In The Video Game Theory Reader 2, edited by Bernard Perron and Mark J.P. Wolf, 65–83. New York: Routledge. Huizinga, Johan. [1938] 1955. Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Element in Culture. Boston: Beacon Press. Jenkins, Henry. 1992. Textual Poachers: Television Fans and Participatory Culture. New York: Routledge. Lahti, Martti. 2003. “As We Become Machines: Corporealized Pleasures in Video Games.” In The Video Game Theory Reader 2, edited by Mark J.P. Wolf and Bernard Perron, 157–170. New York: Routledge. Malaby, Thomas M. 2007. “Beyond Play: A New Approach to Games.” In Games and Culture 2 (95), 95–113. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555412007299434 Montola, Markus. 2009. “Games and Pervasive Games.” In Pervasive Games: Theory and Design, edited by Markus Montola, Jaakko Stenros, and Annika Waern, 7–24. Burlington: Elsevier. Muriel, Daniel and Garry Crawford. 2018. Video Games as Culture: Considering the Role and Importance of Video Games in Contemporary Society. London and New York: Routledge.

Introduction to Mixed Reality and Games

Squire, Kurt. 2008. “Open-Ended Video Games: A Model for Developing Learning for the Interactive Age.” In The Ecology of Games: Connecting Youth, Games, and Learning, edited by Katie Salen, 167–198. Cambridge and London: MIT Press.

27

Mixed Reality | Design & Aesthetics

An Introduction to Design & Aesthetics Florian Kelle and Felix Schniz

Game design and aesthetics are intricately interwoven. Whereas a large portion of the game design process are either inaccessible or invisible within the game, the aesthetics clearly are a representation of that process. As such, the process of game design is just as important as the aesthetic experience that games provide to their users. This, however, becomes more complicated under the omens of mixed reality. The necessity to incorporate more than just one instance of reality adds a layer of complexity that is both challenging and rich with opportunity. It is therefore that an understanding of design cannot be seen in isolation and must be complemented by an understanding of the possibilities of aesthetic realisation across realities. When mixing realities, integrating the physical body into the design process is integral. Alexia Bhéreur-Lagounaris shows that play is just as important as the game itself. Biological and psychological processes during play need to be taken into consideration to make games more engaging. Taking a holistic approach that moves away from a technological focus towards a design focus of the whole body makes for more engaging aesthetic experience. Beyond the importance of the body in connection with play, an understanding of design should equally be knowledgeable about how to mix physical and digital elements. Games need not necessarily be limited to just one system and one mode of operation. Wilfried Elmenreich’s approach to game jams showcases a mixture of more than one mode can make for novel games that provide new possibilities but obviously also new challenges. Understanding where and how to combine elements is crucial when de-signing games for mixed reality. Similarly, our increasing procedural literacy deserves inquiry. Richard Hahn elaborates how a simple software like Twine can easily be employed by anyone to convey educational content through playful interaction. This, however, requires of a growing group of creators to be sensitive to just what makes games engaging as well as how content should be conveyed and what technology should be involved. While educational games are often designed explicitly for just that purpose, this does not mean we cannot educationally assess and use games designed primarily for entertainment. Here, David Praschak, Stefan Ancuta, and Max F. Schmidt portray how ideological and historical perspectives can be revisited through games. By em-

32

Florian Kelle and Felix Schniz

ploying rules and simplifying real world notions, games manifest and perpetuate ideological manifestation and transpose them from one reality to another. In a similar fashion, Felix Schniz demonstrates games can serve to revive old traditions and wrap them in a new, digital aesthetic experience for a new generation to experience. As such, we can experience anew a past reality inside of a different kind of reality. Here, games allow us to ponder philosophically about both the past with its traditions as well as their manifestation in other realities, encouraging us to see the realm of experience in a new light. Just as old traditions can be perpetuated over time, so can branded icons. According to Rudolf Inderst and Pascal Wagner, game worlds situ-ate inside them characters that may be carried over from one installation to another, and, beyond that, even from the reality of games into the reality of operating systems. Clearly, icons that serve a particular function may carry those very functions into other contexts and still retain functionality in this extension and blending of reality. Lastly, Michaela Kempter provides us with an insight into one of the events preceding the FROG conference that combined a mixture of exploration and gamemaking. Here, GPS applications are employed to facilitate playfulness. Applications such as Geocaching intersect with physical places in such a way that alternate realities emerge through geocaches or GPS doodles. Making such location-based games showcases how intricately mixed reality already is today. This chapter provides the reader with a broad selection of contributions that showcases the importance of combining design thinking and an eye for aesthetics. A general approach to rethinking design is complemented by particular instances of design approaches. Additionally, critical analyses of historical and philosophical inquiries raise awareness of what impact and implications specific design instances can provide on an experiential and ideological level.

Warning: Not Suitable for Robots A Human-Centric Game Design Approach Alexia Bhéreur-Lagounaris

Abstract: This paper starts with an a priori that, despite the many games we play using objects, the players and the game makers themselves are nevertheless humans with bodies that feel. While this seems obvious, the gaming industry has not properly developed the use of the whole body in the playing experience. To best study this ‘crime scene’ (of why the body has been left immobile), we are going to use Dewey’s pragmatic method of inquiry. This practical approach, combined with discoveries by neuroscientists, will help us to understand why the body has been left motionless in the game design processes and how we can revive it. This paper concludes with a hypothesis that promotes what truly makes us human, moving and sensitive beings. The use of natural subjects can better facilitate harmonization with our natural ecosystem using embodied and human centric game design as the vector. Keywords: Epistemology, Humancentric Design, Humancentric Game Design, Humanity, Games studies, Approach, Game design, Nature, Future, Methodology.   Alexia Bhéreur-Lagounaris has a multidisciplinary professional background that includes music, writing, dance and choreography before becoming an event creator and a game designer. Trained at Montreal’s contemporary dance school, she performed for many productions, was an Art Scout for Cirque du Soleil, a creative director, scriptwriter for Radio-Canada, Wasabi, Lalala Human Steps and event creator for Québec Cinéma. She’s also a research geek Wizard at INRS (Institut national de la recherche scientifique) and her expertise in human-centric design is used in all her projects where collaboration and collective intelligence is enhanced. She holds a Bachelor’s degree in interactive multimedia communication from UQAM and a master’s degree M.Sc. A. in games with a social impact from University of Montréal. In 2016, she founded her game events productions with ABLBLALAB, and creates social games, gives workshops, coaching and conferences.

34

Alexia Bhéreur-Lagounaris

Introduction Warning: Not Suitable for Robots is a continuous stream of reflections beginning in 2013 about games, social impacts, human interactions, and values. The conclusion of this thesis (Bhéreur-Lagounaris 2018) is that these are values that need to be addressed at their core should we want to humanize rather than robotize ourselves in the game design process. The core design question is: What do you make the player feel? This question addressed an aspect of introspection and the values of embodiment and personal feelings that are common in the pragmatic design field (Dewey 1934; Morleau-Ponty [1948] 2005) and which are well addressed by engagement and motivational aspects of game design practices (Norman 2004; Schell 2015; Sicart 2013; Flanagan and Nissembaum 2014). The affect and feelings in games are an important bond that links the player to the experience, but which is rarely addressed as a source of creation in game production The obvious state that designers have a body and that they feel their life experiences is not valued has a ressource to create and input the games. Why is it that feeling is undermined in the design process and yet, we hope to imbue ‘feeling’ into the player experience? How is it that game design methods have invested so heavily in the imaginary and cerebral virtual world and yet retain such passivity of the body and at the same time, they also strive to produce highs and lows through the circulation of dopamine and oxytocin in our bodies? These paradoxes and questions will be addressed in this inquiry into humanizing our game experiences.

The Inquiry As the pragmatist philosopher Dewey showed us (1934), inquiry is a method that accentuates knowledge through practice. The approach taken by Dewey and MerleauPonty ([1948] 2005) led us to see the possible imprint of a felt experience as a bodily sensation that is not only emotional, but also active and constitutive of biological and physiological experiences. Thus, the first stage of this inquiry is not in the players themselves, but rather stemming from the designer. The bodily experience is not only a matter of what is being taken on during the game being played, it is also present in the bodies of those who conceive the games themselves: Feeling, runs right from the germ of ideation, to its conception and then through to its production. Feeling is more than the just the imaginary. By putting oneself in the player’s place, we are paying attention to the invisible relationship between imagination, fiction and feelings—even before interest in game production begins. The pragmatic approach which uses feeling as an inquiry of design brings intention and attention to what we feel at an earlier stage. This begs the following:

A Human-Centric Game Design Approach

What do I feel about _________________? (insert your own subject and design issues: ethical choices, values, power human relations, animal and natural relations, what is encouraged or punished.) What motivates me to share these feelings with other humans (players)? Why would we want players to feel like X or Y? In this way, a human centric design approach considers the value of sensitivity and feelings to help decision-making by being curious of inner intentions which are linked to feelings. This inner motivation as a data being valued proceeds the stage of adding other data and constraints in the creative, design and production processes. Before going any further with this investigation, let us look at why first-person data hasn’t been considered, why it should be, and how it is embedded in the stories we tell ourselves about our body.

Operating from Feelings: The Embedded Approach In addition to the Dewey and Merleau-Ponty methods, our research brought us closer to the body itself from a holistic aspect. In his book Le sens du mouvement ([1997] 2013), Alain Berthoz follows in the footsteps of pragmatic philosophers and pushes their approach even further by postulating that we think with our body. To the five traditional senses – touch, sight, hearing, hearing, smell –, indeed, we must add the sense of movement or “kinaesthesia”. Its originality lies in the use of several sensors. It is remarkable that it has been forgotten in the counts of the senses. Probably because the sense of movement is not identified by consciousness and his sensors are hidden. (Alain Berthoz [1997] 2013, 32) Berthoz leads us to see that the kinaesthetic sense is neglected in preference of the other senses, fully recognizing it as a sixth sense. He also points out an unconscious and unspoken aspect of corporeal movement which is that it is generally not perceived consciously. Game playing experiences also see motion lived viscerally without being perceived consciously. In the book Emotional Design, Don Norman explains the importance of emotional design and its impact on behavioural effects, decision-making and actions (Norman 2004, 38). He points out that emotional design and actions are interrelated and that we must consider this as a visceral bond. For psychologist Geoff Kaufman and game designer and researcher Mary Flanagan (2015), there is also a psychological aspect that needs to be considered via a non-directional path. In a study of teenage girls playing a game about self-esteem, they discovered that to have the desired impact, they were better off not mentioning that it was about that specific subject. They concluded that the unconscious also needs to be considered in a game’s design message and values can be more effective when hidden from the

35

36

Alexia Bhéreur-Lagounaris

player. In the article “A psychologically ‘embedded’ approach to designing games for pro-social causes (2015)“, Kaufman and Flanagan demonstrate that socially relevant games sometimes use a direct and explicit approach to raising awareness about a specific subject, but that this approach can create an inverse effect, i.e., limiting the persuasive aspects and the benefits, especially when the subject of the game awakens a psychological stimulus in the players. The strategy that these authors propose to counter this effect can be summarized in two key concepts: Embedded Design strategies: (1) intermixing: combining ‘on-topic’ and ‘off-topic’ game content to make the focal message or theme less obvious and more accessible (2) obfuscating: using game genres or framing devices that direct players’ attention or expectations away from the game’s true aims. (Kaufman and Flanagan 2015, 165) The result of their research emphasizes nested messages being less obvious. It even goes so far as to propose drawing attention away from the main subject. This aspect allows us to see the importance of sublimating the subject through the use of metaphor and indirect values and messages for the senses not being perceived consciously.

To Value or Not to Value the Body: That Is the Question Aside from Berthoz, other scientists have also looked at why we devalue the “intelligence”1 of our body. Neuroscientist Damasio in Descartes’s Error ([1994] 2010) sees an important marker in Descartes’s famous quote “I think; therefore I am” (Descartes 2011[1637]). Science has generally looked at the body from third person and mechanical perspectives since that quote. “In (Descartes’s vision), nature is seen as a mechanism; (even) animals are machines” (Chiapello 2019, 136). Perhaps this is where the separation began, associating our body as being mechanical and objectifying it. Perceiving ourselves as mechanical beings made us not feel, almost like robots—as a human ‘doing,’ not as a human ‘being’. Damasio points out that we, as a society, have adopted ‘I think; therefore I am’ as a maxim since 1637 and this has provoked an important separation between

1

The term body “intelligence” is in quotation marks that should be read to mean ‘for lack of another word’. For the whole story regarding the 2019 FROG conference, Attila Szantner and I had numerous debates over this idea at the conference, after it and then for days afterward by email. We both concluded that we actually needed to invent a new word for the phenomenon of body ‘intelligence’ …again, for lack of a better word.

A Human-Centric Game Design Approach

cerebral activity and an undervaluation of the body’s corporal language and connection. As seen by Berthoz in the idea that we think with our body, Damasio reiterates ([1994] 2010): “Thinking does not only mean being passive; it means moving. ‘I become aware of myself; therefore I act’” is a more precise description of a firstperson perception that combines the body has a whole. The brain being one organ connected to the heart and its pulse and in multi-receptors in relation to a sixth sense of corporeal movement. Damasio suggested replacing ‘I think; therefore I am’ with ‘I become aware of myself; therefore I act.’ In Latin, the expression better emphasizes movement: “Cogito ergo moveo”.

It Isn’t Personal, It’s Cultural (Or Is It? The Paradox of the ‘I’ in the ‘We’) As stated in the introduction, there are a few paradoxes that nurture and polarize our inquiry. What we have discovered so far is that there is a depreciation of body intelligence though this is not solely a personal value. Descartes influenced many generations and we adopted this value personally—because it was adopted culturally. This maxim, and the value it holds, was so widely shared that it became the norm to undervalue the body’s own intelligence. While this is difficult to perceive, we are perpetuating this personal devaluation. According to researcher Rilla Khaled (2014), the difficulty of perceiving cultural values in the choices of designers is the reason we need to collaborate with cultures that are different than our own, helping each other’s biases and blind spots on values choices in the process of creating new games with different values. Rilla Khaled’s research on Gamification and Culture (2014), uses Schwartz’s seven cultural values (Schwartz 2006) to explain how each culture prioritizes the values variable. Schwarz named seven values: “Harmony; Embeddedness; Hierarchy: Mastery; Affective autonomy; Intellectual autonomy; Egalitarianism” (Khaled 2014, 303). Khaled explains that the value ‘Mastery’ we see in many videogames is an American value, but not a Swedish one. The Swedes prefer to focus on ‘Egalitarianism’ and in Slovenia, as a further example, ‘Harmony’ is a more favoured value. Khaled also explains that cultural values come in opposing pairs, i.e., ‘Mastery’ opposes ‘Harmony’. These cultural values support people who adopt them, and encourages connection with others such as ‘appreciating nature’ and the social environment rather than wanting to dominate or change it. The emphasis is on peace, unity with nature, and the culturally valued notion of protecting the environment. In contrast, the ‘Mastery’ value encourages people to assert themselves in their social and natural environments, to change it, transform it… in other words, control and dominate it. Success, ambition, competition, strategy, risk taking and competence are given high priority. ‘Mastery’ is a common value in the world of videogames and we see why it is such a widely adopted practice culturally. Without

37

38

Alexia Bhéreur-Lagounaris

going too far into values systems, we see nevertheless how cultural values have an important impact on individuals which is well represented in the opposing pair ‘Mastery’ and ‘Harmony’. This shows how designers might easily be blinded about the choices they make if they are from a culture where a certain value is prominent. As we progress further in our investigation, we now have more clues about the reasons the ‘dead body’ is so heavily adopted for playing games. Old beliefs about the body being separate from cerebral thoughts have made us undervalue our body intelligence, while cultural values reward control and master nature and the natural in us all (rather than the desire to be in ‘Harmony’ with it).

Values at Play in the Immobilization of the Playing While games are a social fiction (De Koven 2013, xxiii), all designers and players are participating in the creation and perpetuation of this social fiction. However, let’s not give designers and players more responsibility they deserve. The narrative of social fiction and immobilization is a contemporary social phenomenon that is observed as a part of a massive form of communication in cultural media on a daily basis. Mass media itself is seen as a fourth power (in addition to legislative, executive, and judicial powers) (Ramonet 2003). Mass media shares information from all parts of the world on all media platforms, at any hour of the day. This news includes humanitarian crimes, murders, genocide, rape, corruption, torture and injustice and other horrible situations we have no power over. These messages trigger our natural sense of empathy, feeling sorrow as a reaction to other humans suffering (cf. Krznaric 2014). These textual, auditory and visual messages are sent to our ears and eyes as helpless spectators, repeated in a continuous stream of messages that are called “news”, but which could, if we were to observe their quality of neutrality, rather be called “bad news”. This omission of a qualifier, making ‘bad news’ just ‘news’, calls into question a double constraint. At the same time, it represents danger and powerlessness but without a qualification of sensitivity. The repetition of media messages reinforces our non-action and our position is a clear immobilization. Thus, accustomed to no longer acting, simply freezing when we hear and see atrocities, our body position is accentuated by the shift from one source of news to another, contributing to an increase in these immobilized feelings. This subtle shift in neutrality is also accentuated by another factor—the fragmented shift and repetition. Not only does it perpetuate our desensitization, it is also done in a rapid fragmentation, mere seconds between the news of an atrocity, to news of sports, to news of the weather, in a fragmentation of flow that forces us to cut ourselves off from our empathic feelings. These two elements are not unlike the theories proposed by Chomsky in his book Manufacturing Consent (1988) about consent for our immobilization. In psychology, the term barrier is used to refer

A Human-Centric Game Design Approach

to a protective mechanism that forms mentally to desensitize oneself or take the form of repression, a defence mechanism we use to desensitize. Therefore, the idea of immobilization within society as a whole needs to be investigated from many levels, from inner micro cuts of stopping the feeling to macro level of mass media cultural reaffirmation of the immobility. In games, desensitization is named as a problem in controversial studies about violent games and can be understood within a broader lens of social and cultural contexts. Without going too deep into the catharsis vs. violence debate in games (though it is indeed worth much more inquiry!), what we are paying attention to here is the idea of immobilization of the body and the essence of desensitization2 (Grizzard 2016). With the a priori that humans are sensitive beings, like all natural beings, we wonder what and whom it serves to promote a numbing our sensitivity to being robots. Or not being—only doing. Desensitization is not solely social or psychological, it is also biological and physiological. When we are faced with potential danger, the gland located in the amygdala nucleus of the brain secretes adrenaline into our body. This adrenaline rush in the face of danger biologically propels us to move physically through space, to help flee or run away from danger.3 Commonly called the” fight or fly” reaction (Cannon 1929; Kendra 2019), this stimulus is thwarted, because we are not really facing danger, but in front of a representation of danger while being asked to not move. Whether we are in front of news on the web, listening to the radio in the morning, in the car, on a bus or in front of our TV set or hearing a tragic message on the news, we are far removed from the dramatic or tragic situation. Thus our ’fight or flight’ impulse becomes desensitized through repeatedly not moving when faced with possible danger. In a succession of media messages already sent on a daily basis, where we are passive and powerless, videogames are just one of many channels for this cultural immobilization value. There is much more to be said about this subject, but what is essential here is the idea that this behaviour is part of many other forms of behaviour activated in our contemporary era of computer/device relations. This leads us to our next chapter on the passage from one era to another.

2

3

“Cross-sectional studies suggest that playing violent video games can cause emotional desensitization. A longitudinal experiment examined a) whether repeated violent game play leads to emotional desensitization and b) whether desensitization generalizes to other play and real-life experiences.” (Grizzard et al. 2016, 267) More images to represent the circuit here: http://www.medecine.unige.ch/enseignement/apprentissage/module3/pec/apprentissage/neuroana/stress/stress2.htm

39

40

Alexia Bhéreur-Lagounaris

Historical Context and Our Inner Biology In the book The Gameful World: Approaches, Issues, Applications (2014) bridging together forty texts by important authors, co-publisher Sébastien Deterding introduces a historical and philosophical question that invites reflection in terms of the century: “whether the nineteenth-century industrial age and twentieth-century information age might be followed by a ludic age today. In this they articulated an essential question of the Gameful world: does this demarcate a historical shift?” (Deterding and Walz 2014, 15, underlining by me) Looking sequentially from one century to the next, we can see one era following the other. After being overwhelmed and inundated with tons of information, we now need the kind of space that allows for a re-appropriation of this information by a playful ludic era. The enigma, the mystery or the code to be deciphered (which is specific to game design) allows for a space of “non-information” before receiving new incoming data. Thus, obliging us to look to our inner references for the part that is not provided from the outside. Stimulus, like ‘saliva’ prepares us to integrate information which is about to come in. It invites us to look for what is missing. We are better prepared, committed and engaged to absorb and ‘digest’ its arrival. In this process, we are better prepared for its integration. This cerebral activity of searching for the missing part and finding the answer (e.g., finding the missing piece of the puzzle) allows for a kind of a-ha or eureka moment which sends a small charge of dopamine into our brains. Like a mini reward of fun through our neurotransmitters called the “reward circuit” in neuroscience (University of Pennsylvania in Science Daily 2019). According to a study by researchers at North Western University (Kounios and Beeman 2009), puzzle-like solutions are actually found more quickly when the participant involved is having fun, has a sense of humour and is in a positive mood. Dopamine, gut laughter, and feeling good appear to participate in our being able to come up with new solutions and solve puzzles. Another study using magnetic resonance imaging showed that “people are more likely to solve problems insightfully if they are in a positive mood before they arrive at the lab than if they are in a neutral or negative mood” (Subramaniam, Kounios, Parrish et al. 2009). Thus, fun, positive moods help us to solve puzzlelike dilemmas when they are felt before, while feeling good. This brings us to the importance of using fun, laughter and positive feelings in innovation. Are we not at a moment in time where we have a seemingly overwhelming number of problems to solve together?

A Human-Centric Game Design Approach

Out and About – Playing Freely in Space In the broad spectrum of games, many games are not videogames or even technology driven. There are numerous types of playing and gaming that permit, welcome and use the body as part of the play in space. To wit: Any videogame that uses Kinect and Motion sensor devices; Live action role play (LARP) games, urban games, virtual and augmented reality games and, of course, all the board games that welcome players to use their body in motion like Twister, Hide and Seek, tag, and the many iterations of treasure hunting, geo-location and other outdoor quests. The purpose of focusing on the dead body in this investigation was to reveal the reasons why it has become more popular to sit and only use the power trio of the brain, eyes and finger tips and to shed light on gaming’s relationship with the natural aspects of the body and the freedom of movement in action, especially this particular moment in history where ACTION is asking us all as humans to face the climate crisis. Live action role-playing for example leaves traces of behaviour from the role to the emotion felt by the player. Feelings fade after the role stops being played but the sentiment remains as a memory in the body. These vestiges of action can be used when practising social actions, via trial and error even failing (though with the safety net of a magic circle). These physical interactions are what lead us to more cohesive and collaborative practices. Working together, practising trust, harmony, and using our differences as the complementary forces are needed to take the next steps on the planet. We need to work together, and the action is being asked of us not “soon” but now. Continuing to be numb, unfeeling, killing the ‘other’ and practising the art of war seems irresponsible in our current era. Asides from the impulse for destruction, what we need as a planet-wide effort is a creative and innovative push towards constructing a new paradigm which is adapted to the specific need of tomorrow’s reality in ACTION.

Games as Vectors to Transform the Relationship Between Humans and Nature Aside from the parallel we made between methods of design, pragmatist philosophy and values we have about our body, there is another important layer affected by this phenomenon–the definition of play itself. According to Kati Salen and Eric Zimmerman “Play is free movement within a more rigid structure” (2003, 304). This simple definition of play lends greater importance to the aspect of movement and the importance of freedom. Where does play happen? No matter where play occurs, it is always a sensation experienced by our senses, through our eyes, fingertips, hands, brain, ears, heartbeat and muscles as we travel the fictional roller coaster or

41

42

Alexia Bhéreur-Lagounaris

through imaginary Zen lands. We experience it in our bodies. Movement and the body are intrinsically intertwined in an interconnected circulation of hormones, heartbeats, stimulus, hand and eye movement and through the manifestation of actions within games. Action is also a verb taken from the scientific world that calls upon us to make collective changes, to help combat the climate crisis. As Bogost writes, there is a possible crossover from one world to another, a space where it “[…] exceeds the game and spills into the world.” (Bogost 2004, n.p.)

From Object to Subject Playing As we move from one clue to the next in this inquiry, we find more evidence of the benefits of using the whole body and the richness of feelings as a natural characteristic in future designing games that can practice harmony with nature. As Merleau-Ponty points out “The body as the driving power (…) gives meaning to its surroundings, makes the world a familiar realm, draws and unfolds its Umwelt, in an act of feeling and its natural insertion in space and with other humans.” (Angelino 2008, 170) Other epistemology such as Somatic Science recognize the power of the body and the mind as a living affair, felt from within, emphasizing the importance of connecting the felt body and first-person perception.4 As seen earlier, first person data is one that is no longer being considered since we adopted Descartes’s perception of ourselves. As Thomas Hanna, presents it: We have trained our sensory awareness to be essentially external, relying on visual and oral input. If you limit your sensory information to just those things, you automatically, by definition, end up by limiting the individual’s motor possibilities and motor programs, because all living processes are, after all, sensory motor. A somatic culture is a culture which encourages sensing. Therefore, if we have a culture that encourages only certain kinds of survival-oriented, practical, engineering types of sensory awareness, which is externally directed, we blind individuals to their own genetic capacities. The exteroceptors are terribly important in all traditional education. If you encourage only this, you limit the development

4

What is somatic? “The body as it is perceived from within, a first-person perception. When a human being is observed from the outside, i.e., from the point of view of the third person, it is the manifestation of the human body that is perceived. However, when the same human being is observed from the first person, from their own proprioceptive sensations, it is a completely different manifestation that is perceived: the human soma” (Hanna 2017, under “La distinction entre le soma et le corps”, own translation).

A Human-Centric Game Design Approach

of human beings to motor patterns which move people to dependency on other experts. Everybody feels […] (Hanna n.d.). In his book Play Matters (2014), Miguel Sicart discusses the importance of adopting a playful attitude. This playful attitude is not so much about doing, but about ‘being’. Taking a subjective posture with the nuance and spontaneity that entails. This emphasis draws greater attention to the human subject playing than the object played. In this book, Sicart lingers on a vision that is more humanizing than objectifying and even proposes that “game design is dead, welcome the architecture of play” (Sicart 2014, 91). He thus invites us to offer greater freedom and appropriation for the player, focusing more on the human experience. It is like he is inviting the players to become involved as the co-designers of their own experience and adopt an invested, interested, creative, and alive posture when we play. A posture with fewer constraints and rules of play with (slightly more) free movement within a (lightly less) rigid structure.

A Summary of Deductions As we continue to move toward our reflection on these matters and keeping them alive for future conversations, here are a few of the findings which should be tested pragmatically and felt in the open air: 1. Valuing body intelligence allows designers to feel 2. Using the body in a freely and with sensitivity humanizes choices in game design 3. An embedded approach to social messages can be better integrated by the body via kinaesthetic sense 4. Collaborating with other cultures in the design process can help reveal our cultural value biases 5. A playful attitude welcomes spontaneity and helps encourage a direct connection from feelings to actions 6. Urban game genres and spatial settings enhance and sharpen our instincts by putting us on our feet with a totally 360-degree awareness of our body in space 7. Body during play in relation to actions leaves an imprint on our real-life actions 8. Respecting human nature creates a closer bridge to nature 9. Having fun and practising feeling alive can direct playersʼ attention away from the game’s aim (therefore, be kinder to the player’s appropriation process) 10. Regardless of high-tech or low-tech accessories used in the process, moving physically is healthy, makes us stronger and physical activities help build our immune system

43

44

Alexia Bhéreur-Lagounaris

“We need to be touched to act” (Reeves 2018) In this moment in history where climate crisis and environmental issues are preeminent, we cannot design experiences for the future without the awareness of our connection to mother nature. Recognizing feeling, allowing ourselves to feel and touch and considering the somatic as an inner set of data which is complementary to other points of view are essential for a game design that humanizes our proposition. The paradigm of violence with desensitization, not caring about wanton destruction needs to be made obsolete and replaced by a new paradigm where harmony with nature and our social environment is a design that is as appealing and fun. If we can be made to practise feeling, we can win this challenge. It is a huge one, and we need all the help we can get to start imagining a future with feeling. These aims are not unrelated to what some people call the ‘urgency to act in the course of history’ where we are reaching the limits of our biosphere. In the words of astrophysicists Hubert Reeves: “we must act, it is a question of attitude, the role of affect must be considered, we must be touched so that our conscience makes us act and everyone is dynamic” (Reeves 2018, 3:40–4:00, own translation). Pleasure, joy, dynamic ups and downs, and conquering a new challenge are all emotions that are lived in games and that are connected to values. As proposed by McGonigal (2011), we can practise values in games that we want to see in the real world. More than ever, humans need to practise the issues that make us human by playing and moving through what we are—beings within a body, alive, moving, sensitive and natural. We need to be touched and to touch others for us to act and unfreeze in the face of danger.

Nature within Us: Two Little Elements to Die For Before we conclude, two little comments need to be considered. We are alive thanks to the air we breathe in and out continuously until we die. This contact is a direct fact of our inner connection to being natural beings and we are in complete dependence on the natural world. Besides air, there is a second crucial element that is so obvious we undervalue it, is the scientific fact that we are made of water. According to scientists, more than 60% of the body is made of it. There just wouldn’t be any you, me, or Fido the dog without the existence of an ample liquid water supply on Earth. […] The cells in our bodies are full of water. The excellent ability of water to dissolve so many substances allows our cells to use valuable nutrients, minerals, and chemicals in biological processes. (U.S. Geological Survey, n.d.)

A Human-Centric Game Design Approach

Conclusion In the past two centuries the human footprint on earth has multiplied many times over. Our science and technology are powerful beyond anything imagined by the confident founders of the modern world. But our sense of proportion and depth of purpose have not kept pace with our merely technical abilities. Our institutions and organizations still reflect their origins in another time and in very different conditions. Incoherence, disorder, and violence are the hallmarks of the modern world. If we are to build a better world—one that can be sustained ecologically and one that sustains us spiritually—we must transcend the disorder and fragmentation of the industrial age. […] By whatever name, that philosophy must connect us to life, to each other, and to generations to come. It must help us to rise above sectarianism of all kinds and the puffery that puts human interests at a particular time at the center of all value and meaning. (Orr 2002, 3–4) This article was finalized during the COVID19 pandemic and it has never been clearer how interconnected we all are on natural, biological, physical and mortal levels. This historic moment is also a crisis. The etymology of the term Krisis, is Greek and it has a double meaning: “decisive point in the progress of a disease” and also “vitally important or decisive state of things, point at which change must come” (Etymology Dictionary n.d., n.p.). Will we take this opportunity to reflect and make changes to our value system? Can games humanize players instead of numbing the senses and producing play that makes us feel alive and human, so we can act, touch and be touched and therefore take action on what needs to be transformed? Since gaming is a language that engages, that lights the social fiction we want to see in our future, can we retune it so that it may help us achieve the building of a new paradigm through embodiment? As Buckminster Fuller said: “You never change things by fighting against the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the old model obsolete.” (Sieden 2011, 259) May we make games that make it fun to be alive and feel so in harmony with nature that we move our history from human doings, to human beings and maybe eventually to humans becoming.5 5

This conclusion is actually not from me but from the collective reflection made at the end of my Keynote conference on October 19, 2019, in Vienna. It wasn’t described in this article, but the conference I gave included three moments of public participation, first with an interactive software within PowerPoint presentation to vote with our phones, then with a matching random game two by two to have a discussion with a stranger and then a third moment with everyone talking together. The three stages from techno solo intimacy, to empathy dialogue towards a collective conversation at the end, permitted a sequence that considered a more

45

46

Alexia Bhéreur-Lagounaris

References Angelino, Lucia. 2008. “L’a priori du corps chez Merleau-Ponty” Revue internationale de philosophie 2 (244): 167–187. Berthoz, Alain. (1997) 2013. Le Sens du mouvement. Paris: Poche odile Jacob. Bhéreur-Lagounaris, Alexia. 2018. Jeux à portée sociale: vers une nouvelle appellation de divertissement responsible. Master’s Thesis. Montréal: Université de Montréal. Bogost, Ian. 2004. “A Response to Critical Simulation: A riposte to the Critical Simulation section of Noah Wardrip-Fruin and Pat Harrigan’s edited collection First Person.” Ian Bogost (blog). Accessed May 5, 2020. http://bogost.com/writing/a_ response_to_critical_simulat/ Cannon, Walter. 1929. Bodily Changes in Pain, Hunger, Fear, and Rage. New York: Appleton. Chiapello, Laureline. 2019. Le pragmatisme comme épistémologie pour le design de jeux: Enquête sur la créativité et le processus de design. Doctoral Thesis. Montréal: Université de Montréal. Chomsky, Noam and Edward Herman. 1988. Manufacturing consent. New York: Pantheon Book. Damasio, Antonio. (1994) 2010. L’erreur de Descartes: La raison des émotions. Paris: Odile Jacob poche. De Koven, Bernard 2013. The Well Played Game: A player’s philosophy. Cambridge: MIT Press. Deterding, Sébastien, Steffen P. Walz. 2014. The Gameful World: Approaches, Issues, Applications. Cambridge: MIT Press. Dewey, John. (1934) 1980. Experience and Nature. New York: Perigee Books. Etymology Dictionary. 2020. “Crisis.” Online Etymology Dictionary. Accessed May 12, 2020. https://www.etymonline.com/word/crisis Flanagan, Mary and Helen Nissenbaum. 2014. Values at Play in Digital Games. Cambridge: MIT Press. Grizzard, Matthew, Ron Tamborini, John L. Sherry and René Weber. 2006. “Repeated Play Reduces Video Games’ Ability to Elicit Guilt: Evidence from a Longitudinal Experiment.” Media Psychology 20 (2): 267-290. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 15213269.2016.1142382 Hanna, Thomas. 2017. “Qu’est-ce que la somatique ?.” Recherches en danse, translated by Agnès Benoit-Nader. https://doi.org/10.4000/danse.1232

natural process of personal to collective expression and reflections and many felt welcomed to reflect collectively, at the end. This last collective intelligence permitted a group welcoming of questions that, perhaps, if we use basic characteristic of what makes us human in the plural of “we become aware of ourselvesCogito ergo moveo”, we might not be human doing nor human being, but: humans becoming…

A Human-Centric Game Design Approach

Hanna, Thomas. N.d. “A Conversation with Thomas Hanna, Ph.D. by Helmut Milz, M.D.” Clinical Somatics. Accessed 12 May, 2020. https://somatics.org/library/ mh-hanna-conversation Kaufman, Goeff and Mary Flanagan. 2015. “A psychologically “embedded” approach to designing games for pro-social causes.” Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace 9 (3): N.p. https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2015-3-5 Kendra, Cherry. 2019. “How the Fight or Flight Response Works.” Medically reviewed by Steven Gans. VeryWellMind. Accessed May 12, 2020. https://www. verywellmind.com/what-is-the-fight-or-flight-response-2795194#citation-1 Khaled, Rilla. 2014. “Gamification and Culture.” In Gameful World, edited by Steffen P. Walz and Sebastian Deterding, 301-321. Cambridge: MIT Press. Kounios, John and Mark Beeman. 2009. “The Aha! Moment: The Cognitive Neuroscience of Insight.” Psychological Science 18 (4): 210–216. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01638.x Krznaric, Roman. 2014. Empathy: Why it Matters, and how to Get it. London: Tarcher Perigee publication. McGonigal, Jane. 2011. Reality is Broken: Why Games Make Us Better and How They Can Change the World. London: Penguin Books. Médecin. N.d. “Les circuits du stress.” Médecin. Accessed May 20, 2020. http://www.medecine.unige.ch/enseignement/apprentissage/module3/pec/ apprentissage/neuroana/stress/stress2.htm Merleau-Ponty (1948) 2005. Phenoménologie de la perception. Paris: Gallimard. Norman, Don. 2004. Emotional Design. New York: Basic Books. Orr, David. 2002. The Nature of Design: Ecology, Culture, and Human Intention. Oxford: University Press. Ramonet, Ignacio. 2003. “Le cinquième pouvoir.” Le Monde diplomatique. Accessed May 12, 2020. http://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/2003/10/RAMONET/10395 Reeves, Hubert. 2018. “La biodiversité et l’espèce humaine en danger, avertit Hubert Reeves.” Interviewed by Radio-Canada. Published April 13, 2018, 9:03. https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1094832/biodiversite-especehumaine-danger-hubert-reeves-documentaire-la-terre-vue-par-le-coeur Salen, Katie and Eric Zimmerman. 2003. Rules of Play Game: Design Fundamentals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Schell, Jesse. 2015. The Art of Game Design – A book of Lenses. Burlington: Taylor and Francis Group. Schwartz, Shalom H. 2006. “A theory of cultural value orientations: Explication and applications.” Comparative sociology 5 (2/3): 137–182. Sicart, Miguel. 2013. Beyond Choices, the design of ethical gameplay. Cambridge: MIT Press. Sicart, Miguel. 2014. Play Matters. Cambridge: MIT Press.

47

48

Alexia Bhéreur-Lagounaris

Sieden, Steven. 2011. A Fuller View – Buckminster Fuller’s Vision of Hope and Abundance for all. California: Divine Arts Media. Subramaniam, K., J. Kounios, T. B. Parrish, M. Jung-Beeman. 2009. “A brain mechanism for facilitation of insight by positive affect.” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 21: 415–432. U.S. Geological Survey. N.d. “The Water in You: Water and the Human Body.” Accessed May 12, 2020. https://www.usgs.gov/special-topic/water-scienceschool/science/water-you-water-and-human-body?qt-science_center_objects= 0#qt-science_center_objects

Game Engineering for Hybrid Board Games Wilfried Elmenreich

Abstract: Hybrid board games integrate aspects of a physical board game and a computer game. Such a setup creates new possibilities for game design, but also defines new challenges and open questions. This paper investigates several aspects of hybrid board games including: (i) useful allocation of tasks and game elements between the analog and the digital part, (ii) hardware platforms for hybrid board games, and (iii) software frameworks supporting the development of the digital part of a hybrid board game. In the second part the paper reports about the setting and results of a hybrid board game jam that was organized as a pre-conference event of the Future and Reality of Gaming conference 2019. Keywords: board game, design, game engineering, hybrid game, prototyping, platform   Wilfried Elmenreich is Professor of Smart Grids at the Institute of Networked and Embedded Systems at the Alpen-Adria-Universität Klagenfurt. He studied computer science at the Vienna University of Technology and in 2008 received the venia docendi for technical computer science. In 2007 he moved to the Alpen-AdriaUniversität Klagenfurt as Senior Researcher. After a visiting professorship at the University of Passau Elmenreich in 2013, he followed the call to the University of Klagenfurt. Wilfried Elmenreich is a member of the Senate at the Alpen-AdriaUniversität Klagenfurt, Counselor of the IEEE Student Branch, and is involved in the master program on Game Studies and Engineering. He is the publisher of several books and has published over 150 articles in the field of networked and embedded systems. Elmenreich researches intelligent energy systems, self-organizing systems and technical applications of swarm intelligence.

Introduction Hybrid games, defined as the combination of an analog and a digital game part are an exciting game category. The concept of hybrid games is not new, since tabletop games with electronic or digital elements have been realized since the 1970s (Kankainen and Tyni 2014), but up to now hybrid board games have received much

50

Wilfried Elmenreich

less attention than pure videogames or pure board games. A possible reason for this might be the increased complexity of games that had to be shipped with electronic components, electric wiring, and required batteries to be played. With today’s increased penetration of computers and, especially mobile devices, the tables have turned. A hybrid board game that is able to outsource part of its materials into a virtual digital portion now becomes more economically feasible than a game without digital elements. Moreover, developing software for such games became easier due to the availability of simple programming languages for beginners and easy to use software frameworks for game design. This paper addresses the possibilities of designing hybrid board games and discusses hardware and software implementation aspects for creating a hybrid board game. For the motivation we build upon the fact that there is already a strong market for analog board games and we discuss the augmentation of such games towards a hybrid board game. While there is also the possibility for a transition from pure computer games towards hybrid board games, we assess this to be the less frequent path and, therefore, consider a discussion of advantages/disadvantages between digital games and hybrid board games out of the scope of this article. In the last part of the paper, the creation of hybrid board game prototypes from scratch is addressed by the example of a game jam.

Properties of Hybrid Board Games When designing a hybrid board game, there are many possibilities for parts of a game that could be implemented as the digital component. Table 1 gives an overview on different aspects. A video introduction of rules or an electronic rulebook would be the easiest form of adding a digital component to a board game. This marks also the least intrusive way, since it leaves the rest of the game as a pure analog board game. Still, such a digital component might improve games with complex rules significantly in terms of startup time and gameplay. Overseeing gameplay and rule compliance can be a difficult task in analog board games. Apart from the fact that a player might cheat intentionally, some game mechanisms are prone to mistakes in counting, missing parts of a game situation or forgetting an update. For example, the game Crude: The Oil Game (St. Laurent 2004) has a mechanic where certain double dice configurations trigger an update of the economy phase card. This action is in addition to the usual effects of dice in the game and is, at least among inexperienced players, a frequent part of the game that is forgotten. Implementing such a mechanic in a digital part could relieve the player from a double update and ensure that it is always handled correctly. A similar aspect is the updating of the game state which can be a cumbersome task for the

Game Engineering for Hybrid Board Games

players. These chores could be easily translated into computer logic, however, those chores could also be an essential part of the social interaction of the game (Xu et al. 2011). The digital part could also be used as a random number generator. Some games require sophisticated random functions in order to be correctly balanced, which is usually solved by non-standard dice, multiple dice, a dreidel, or spinners customized for the game. In a computer program, a random function can be easily implemented with arbitrary complexity. Furthermore, the digital solution can hide the underlying mechanic from the player, if the game design involves the assessment of a random chance. Some games feature unexpected events, which are brought into the game by drawing a card containing information that has to be read out loud to the other players. A well-known example for such a mechanic are the chance and community chest stacks in Monopoly (Magie and Darrow 1935). Moving the content of such unexpected events from a card stack into a computer program reduces the limits on different events and description length. By adding generative content, the unexpected events could even be made truly surprising, while keeping the narrative of the game. Some mainly cooperative games like role playing games require an antagonist, typically played by a game master. Notable exceptions are pure cooperative games like Pandemic (Leacock 2008) or Game of Clones (Fuchs et al. 2020) where the complexity of the competitor emerges from a set of simple rules. For both cases, the implementation of the antagonist’s turn could be automatized digitally, leaving a clear separation between ‘good’ (the players in the analog domain) and ‘evil’ (the computer). As discussed by Frapolli et al. (2007), the modes of communication in analog games are limited when it comes to mediated secrets or private communications. Systems with networked digital devices could augment the communication possibilities with respect to this issue. The pace of a board game is often determined by the speed of the players, which may vary a lot and can lead to discussions. As a consequence, a certain play duration is hard to predict or to guarantee for many analog board games. As discussed by Elmenreich (2019), game length could be a hindering factor towards enjoying games. Games featuring a countdown or a clock defining turn-time could reduce the playtime for one game significantly. The most prominent example is the usually slow-paced game Chess which was made significantly faster in its variant Blitz Chess by utilizing a chess clock with a few minutes of time budget. The size of the game world is naturally confined by the amount of game materials and the size of the table to put the game board onto. A few exceptions are RPGs without a direct mapping of gameworld to game board. Moreover, the contents of the gameworld can be only varied by re-arranging existing elements (which

51

52

Wilfried Elmenreich

is nicely exercised in Die Siedler von Catan (Teuber 1995)). These limitations can be overcome by generating the game board in the digital part. In this case, the players need suitable devices (tablets or mobile phones) that can replace the game board or become part of the game board. A final aspect is the production cost of the game, which is heavily affected by the amount of game materials. In contrast, purely digital parts come with zero marginal cost, which means that additional copies do not affect the production cost once the digital parts are finished. This becomes especially a factor for digital components that are provided as a download without the production of a DVD or a similar data carrier and run on the players’ own hardware. Note that making parts digital should not be overdone to keep the character of a board game. In addition, the interface between the analog and digital part should be simple. An excellent example for a well-defined interface is given by Ravensburger’s Family Game Schnappt Hubi! (Bogen 2012), where a few buttons on a dedicated hardware device are sufficient to keep synchronization between analog board and virtual gameworld data.

Hardware Platforms Depending on the intended task for the digital part, several hardware platforms could be an option.

Standard PC or Laptop A PC or laptop typically provides a large screen and a possibility to issue music and sound. While there exist different operating systems (Windows, Linux, Mac OS) the provided features are nearly identical, which are networking capabilities, large working memory and disk space, fast processor, and good support of various programming environments. As a standard user interface, a keyboard and mouse (or trackpad) is provided, while the system can be easily extended with additional hardware (e.g., camera, fingerprint reader, joystick, buzzer) via USB and wireless interfaces. Disadvantages are size and cost. Mobility, especially in the case of a PC, is very limited. Therefore, it might be cumbersome to move a PC to the game table to play a hybrid game. In addition, while the current penetration of PC and laptop systems is about 40 percent in developing countries (Holst 2020a) and over 80 percent in developed countries (Holst 2020b), there is an ongoing trend of declining PC sales in the last years (Titcomb 2016).

Game Engineering for Hybrid Board Games

Possibilities for augmenting an analog board game

Mobile Platforms Mobile platforms encompass mobile phones and tablets. Especially mobile phones have a high penetration so that it is safe to assume that a group of players would have at least one such device. Both mobile phones and tablets provide input features for location, acceleration and position, allowing for challenges like balancing or moving the device. The screen size of a mobile phone is considerably small, which can be an advantage (fitting onto the game board) or disadvantage (having prob-

53

54

Wilfried Elmenreich

lems to display all relevant information). Due to security restrictions and walled garden concepts, an app usually can only be easily installed when it is available in the app store. Unfortunately, adding it to the app store can be costly and cumbersome. An alternative is the use of software that runs in a web browser.

Customized Embedded Platforms If the game interface requires specific features such as motors, specific button or lamp layouts, an implementation with an embedded platform is the most feasible. Possible platforms are the Arduino series providing a suite of different sizes and capabilities or other single board computers like calliope Mini or the Raspberry Pi. The latter comes with impressive capabilities for computation, multimedia tasks networking, and storage and can be connected to a standard TV as output device. Peitz et al. (2005) discuss the augmentation of games with electronics on the example of game tokens with RFID tags. Another possibility are dedicated installations or even small robots that would interact with the players physically. To enhance such a design, customized cases and manipulators can be produced using 3D printing technologies.

Consumer Electronic Devices Consumer electronic devices such as smart TVs, DVD/Blue-ray players or audio systems can host a video or audio sequence that guides through the game. The DVD specification supports also the implementation of interactive games that are played with the remote. While such approaches have been used in previous hybrid tabletop games (for example in AtmosFear (Clements and Tanner 2004)), the effort to create a playable image and the dependence on a particular device make this option less attractive nowadays.

Designing the Software Part In pure computer games, the multimedia content of the game typically requires a huge effort in the game design. For a hybrid board game, where the visible haptic parts of a game stay in the physical domain, the digital component is significantly reduced. Tasks like bookkeeping of players’ stock are easy to implement in any programming language and even the multiplication of such a task to a high number of entities is straightforward to solve in a computer. The major challenge arrives from the interface to the player and/or the analog board. Using specific hardware like a touch sensitive game board, an RFID token or a camera system with dedicated image processing can require a huge implementation effort. Furthermore, the success of a user interface depends also on the surrounding elements. The same

Game Engineering for Hybrid Board Games

implementation of a digital game part might be successful in a setting where the interactions and user interfaces harmonize the analog design while failing in a setting where the analog design does not match. Moreover, testing procedures could be more complicated for software of a hybrid board game since an integration test case would require playing the full game including the analog part, which makes it impossible to apply automated software tests. In some cases, the selected hardware platform forces the choice of the programming language (or at least reduces the options significantly). For example, the Arduino Platform is typically programmed in C or Assembler and the Calliope Platform uses the programming language Swift. The majority of platforms, however, leave several options for the software design.

Dedicated Software Platforms Anyboard (Mora 2016) is a platform specifically targeting hybrid board games. It aims at providing tools for mapping traditional board game interaction to a hybrid medium. It provides a library in JavaScript to support coding of games and interacting with hardware in form of augmented game tokens. The Anyboard software is available as open source on Github.1

Game Design Engines Game engines like Unity 3D, Unreal Engine, Game Maker Studio, etc. are designed to provide easily accessible features to display game graphics, implement sprite objects with physics and collision detection, integrate game sounds, etc. While those features are not of prime interest for the digital part of a hybrid game, those game engines are still chosen for two reasons: First, they provide multi-platform support, so a game can be exported for web, PC, or mobile platform without additional effort. Second, a game designer might be already familiar with a particular game engine and, therefore, decides to use it to make a simple digital part of a game.

Standard Programming Languages Another possibility is the implementation in a programming language supporting the minimum requirements for the task. If the digital part should mainly do some bookkeeping in lists, the resulting program will not need sprites and might not even need a graphical user interface. In this case, programming languages like Python, Java, Javascript, C#, Lua, BASIC, etc. are an option. For teams without an experienced programmer, beginners’ programming languages could be the best 1

https://github.com/Anyboard/anyboard

55

56

Wilfried Elmenreich

approach. For example, Scratch or Snap! consist of simple, block-based elements that can be assembled into a program in an online editor. The resulting project can be hosted on the Scratch or Snap! webpage online so that the people playing the game would need only a device with a web browser to use the program.

Case Studies from a Hybrid Board Game Workshop As a pre-conference event of the 13th Viennese Future and Reality of Gaming conference, a hybrid board game workshop was organized at the University of Klagenfurt on October 4–5, 2019. The workshop scheduled a registration for participants and then two presentations. The first presentation introduced game design and hybrid games while the second presentation featured a short tutorial introducing game programming tips. The tutorial was specifically aimed at people with no or low programming experience. The remaining part of the workshop was organized as a game jam: after announcement of the topic, ‘Sustainability’, participants were assigned to random groups for brainstorming game ideas. This also marked the end of day one. On the beginning of the second day, all game ideas were presented in short pitches. After the pitch presentations, the participants could decide to join a team for making one of the pitched games. After this phase, five teams with between two and six people had formed and started working on implementing their game ideas. Participants were provided craft materials and tools that they could use for making their analog game materials. Computer hardware was brought by the participants themselves.

Workshop Results Considering that the teams had only one working day to elaborate a game prototype, the resulting games looked very promising. All five teams finished with presenting their games at the end of the workshop. The resulting games had the following characteristics: The game HexaChess2 is based on a hexagonal board with triangle-shaped tiles. Two opponents are trying to capture the enemy pieces, where the movement possibilities vary based on markings on each field. The digital aspect is brought in as a clock timer application that manages the players’ time budget and urges the players to turn the board every now and then. The sustainability aspect is considered at a meta-level, since the game is designed in such a way that it can be produced locally from simple materials.

2

https://firetotemgames.itch.io/hexachess

Game Engineering for Hybrid Board Games

The game Rock-Paper-Scissors-Pollution features a game map with a digital part implementing conflict rounds in a rock-paper-scissors mechanism. For this game, the digital part contained the main elements of the gameplay. Unfortunately, the game prototype and software had not been published. The game Bigger Picture Spaceship has a strong focus on the analog part. As shown in Figure 1, the game features magnetic game pieces that form parts of a space station. The slim digital part contributes interaction and random number generation. The gameplay requires to balance resources in a way so that the operation of the space station is sustainable.

Figure 1 Analog parts of the game Bigger Picture Spaceship (own image)

The game Environmental Auction provides a gameplay where a player has to collect a proper set of power plants. The original game has a board and differently colored game chips that have to be collected. In a post-jam version of the game, Energy Auction3 , these elements had been integrated into the digital part of the game, providing a mostly digital game in the end, with the auction being the only offline element. The game Seawatch4 addresses the situation of people in distress in the Mediterranean Sea and the problems in getting accepted into a harbor with refugees on board. The game, depicted in Fig. 2, features typical elements like stocking and movement on a printed map with hexagonal tiles. Updating of stocks like fuel and 3 4

https://csdb.dk/release/?id=184990 https://csdb.dk/release/?id=185191

57

58

Wilfried Elmenreich

food has to be done by the players manually. In contrast, all events and actions that are not under the control of the player or that could not be foreseen are managed by a computer program. The chance of being accepted into a haven is based on a hidden random variable that is defined at game start by the computer. Thus, part of the game is also to find out which harbors are more open towards bringing in saved people.

Figure 2 Game elements of Seawatch (own image)

Summary and Conclusion A typical board game offers many aspects where a digital part could be used to improve gameplay or to relieve the player from cumbersome tasks. To keep the character and social interaction of a board game it is advised to find a good balance between the two parts. The current penetration of computers and mobile devices in western households allow for games that rely on the players’ hardware. In addition, existing game engines and software frameworks support rapid development of the software part. Experiences with a short workshop have shown that prototypes of hybrid board games, including the digital part, can be created by a small team in a single day.

Game Engineering for Hybrid Board Games

References Elmenreich, Wilfried. 2019. “Short Games.” In Savegame, Perspektiven der Game Studies, edited by Wilfried Elmenreich, René Reinhold Schallegger, Felix Schniz, Sonja Gabriel, Gerhard Pölsterl, and Wolfgang B Ruge, 41–53. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. 41–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-27395-8_4 Frapolli, Fulvio, Béat Hirsbrunner and Denis Lalanne. 2007. “Dynamic Rules: Towards interactive games intelligence.” In Workshop at the 2007 Intelligent User Interfaces Conference (IUI’07): 29–32. Fuchs, Anneliese, Christina Pichler-Koban, Arthur Pitman, Wilfried Elmenreich, and Michael Jungmeier. 2020. “Games and Gamification – New Instruments for Communicating Sustainability.” In The Sustainability Communication Reader. A Reflective Compendium, edited by Franzisca Weder, Larissa Krainer, Mathias Karmasin. Berlin: Springer. Holst, Arne. 2020a. “Share of households with a computer at home in developing countries* from 2005 to 2019.” statista. Accessed January 23, 2020, https://www.statista.com/statistics/748564/developing-countries-householdswith-computer/ Holst, Arne. 2020b. “Share of households with a computer at home worldwide from 2005 to 2019.” statista. Accessed January 23, 2020, https://www.statista.com/ statistics/748551/worldwide-households-with-computer/ Kankainen, Ville and Heikki Tyni. 2014. “Understanding Smart Device Tabletop Games.” In Academic MindTrek Conference 2014, November, Tampere, Finland: 238–241. https://doi.org/10.1145/2676467.2676511 Mora, Simone, Tomas Fagerbekk, Matthias Monnier, Emil Schroeder and Monica Divitini. 2016. “Anyboard: A Platform for Hybrid Board Games.” In International Conference on Entertainment Computing ICEC 2016, edited by Günter Wallner, Simone Kriglstein, Helmut Hlavacs, Rainer Malaka, Artur Lugmayr, and HyunSeung Yang, 161–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46100-7_14 Peitz, Johan, Daniel Eriksson and Staffan Björk. 2005. “Augmented Board Games – Enhancing boardgames with electronics.” In Proceedings of DiGRA 2005 Conference: Changing Views – Worlds in Play. Titcomb, James. 2016. “Mobile web usage overtakes desktop for first time.” The Telegraph. Accessed January 23, 2020. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/ 2016/11/01/mobile-web-usage-overtakes-desktop-for-first-time/ Yan Xu, Yan, Evan Barba, Iulian Radu, Maribeth Gandy and Blair Macintyre. 2011. “Chores Are Fun: Understanding Social Play in Board Games for Digital Tabletop Game Design.” In Proceedings of DiGRA 2011 Conference: Think Design Play.

59

60

Wilfried Elmenreich

Ludography Bogen, Steffen. 2012. Schnappt Hubi! Ravensburger. Clements, Brett and Philipp Tanner. 2004. AtmosFear: The Gatekeeper. Flying Bark Productions. Leacock, Matt. 2008. Pandemic. Z-Man Games. Magie, Lizzie and Charles Darrow. 1935. Monopoly. Parker Brothers. St. Laurent, James. 2004. Crude: The Oil Game. Stronghold Games. Teuber, Klaus. 1995. Die Siedler von Catan. Kosmos.

Creating Digital Gamebooks with Twine Richard Hahn

Abstract: Digital gamebooks reanimate a previously almost abandoned genre of paperbased non-linear fiction. This article explores the possibilities of digital gamebooks in educational contexts. After a short introduction to the genre, its advantages and possible use cases, the three main elements of educational gamebooks, content, story, and game mechanics are examined, putting special emphasis on planning branching narrative structures. The third section is dedicated to the open-source software Twine, which allows the easily accessible creation of digital gamebooks for online publication. By adding zones for collaboration, social learning can be added to digital gamebooks and the interaction with physical objects provides further possibilities for learning experiences. Keywords: gamebook, interactive fiction, nonlinear fiction, storytelling, transfer of knowledge, twine   Richard Hahn taught German as a second language as well as regional and cultural studies in the Czech Republic, Spain, Ukraine, Slovenia, and Slovakia, where he also conducted countless educational projects. (Digital) game-based learning and gamification have always played an important role in his activities. As project manager of digital learning, he is currently involved with the development and implementation of an e-learning strategy for a vocational training company. For his master thesis, he conducted research on the potential of chatbots for knowledge transfer in 2019.

History, Possibilities and Advantages of Gamebooks in Education Gamebooks – Origins and Present State The term gamebook usually refers to a genre of interactive or non-linear fiction, which was particularly popular in the 1970s and 1980s. Unlike linear fiction, which is ideally read from the beginning to the end, gamebooks allow readers to determine the progress of a story by providing choices at certain points. Therefore, they

62

Richard Hahn

are often referred to as chose-your-own-adventure-books (CYOA-books), which are typically written from a second-person-perspective. The following example illustrates how readers can decide, how a story will evolve: You glance out the window. It’s about a twelve-foot drop to the soft grass. Maybe you can jump for it and escape from the thugs waiting on the stairs below. If you continue to follow the plan and roar to terrorize Vargas, turn to page 116. If you try to jump for safety, turn to page 49. If you try to call the police to tip them off, turn to page 111. (Packard and Mitchell 1982, 23) With other forms of interactive media becoming increasingly popular in the 1990s, the production of paper-based gamebooks declined massively, but thanks to an active community and a variety of tools to design pieces of digital interactive fiction, the genre is not only alive but also managed to integrate advanced features such as audiovisual elements and programming logic.

Gamebooks in Educational Contexts Even though their roots go back to entertainment, gamebooks can also be used for educational purposes and the playful examination of (micro-)learning content respectively. Möslein-Tröppner and Bernhard (2018, 18) quote several advantages of using their idea of gamebooks on knowledge transfer: • • • • • • •

ease of use and simplicity clear structure personalization temporal and local flexibility integrated zone of cooperation direct command over story action online availability

Aldrich (2019, n.p.), whose concept of short sims has multiple similarities with digital gamebooks, encounters some additional advantages: Short sims are an emerging type of interactive educational media that are typically five to 12 minutes long, with few words and many decisions. They tend to focus around a single subject area and can be embedded in traditional course material. They are simple to engage by design, typically with a multiple-choice interface. [...] Interactivity can enable learners to customize their experience, from engaging optional levels to asking for more information only when needed to choosing their

Creating Digital Gamebooks with Twine

avatar or business industry. Interactive experiences allow online role plays and give participants the opportunity to deftly apply skills. These advantages can trigger multiple effects which facilitate learning and the acquisition of competencies (Möslein-Tröppner and Bernhard 2018, 19): • •

• •

• •

•

visualization: The text-based information in gamebooks leverages the power of imagination and helps learners to create a “cinema of the mind”. playful learning: Playing is an innate and necessary interaction with the world and an increasing number of tendencies such as (digital) game based learning and gamification have entered the range of methods of educators worldwide. learning through cooperation: Gamebooks which include zones for cooperation (see section 4) foster social learning. microlearning: Gamebooks in an educational context typically focus on a single topic and give learners the opportunity to interact with learning content in a self-regulated way, providing them with frequent feedback on their decisions. This makes digital gamebooks an ideal vehicle for microlearning. motivation through competition: Gamebooks can feature leaderboards, which might motivate learners extrinsically to improve their score. personalized experience: Gamebooks create learning experiences by providing choices and foster interaction with learning content. According to the choices that learners take, they are presented with different pieces of content, thus ensuring replayability. Aldrich (2019) also underlines that “interactive media are more engaging (and less numbing) than linear media. They help learners process and begin to internalize and own new information, not just cache it. And creating interactive media even changes the culture of content producers, from focusing on experts and top-down leadership to concentrating on collaborating with learners and considering their application of the knowledge.” (see section 4). mobile learning: With digital gamebooks typically being provided online and having a playtime of less than an hour, they can be played virtually anywhere. Hence, in order to provide an aesthetically appealing learning experience, they should be designed to work on mobile devices.

Use Cases of Digital Gamebooks in Education Regarding the use of digital gamebooks in educational contexts, there is a broad range of possibilities, depending on the pursued instructional goal. The following figure matches several use cases with the cognitive process dimension of Anderson and Krathwohl’s (2001) taxonomy of learning goals:

63

64

Richard Hahn

Figure 1 Gamebook use cases and cognitive processes.

Designing a Digital Gamebook for Educational Contexts A gamebook for education consists of three main elements: content, story and game mechanics. Each of them depends on the pursued learning objective, but there are also mutual dependencies between the elements, which need to be taken into account.

Content When designing a digital gamebook in an educational context, the content to be conveyed is the basis upon which all consecutive design decisions are taken. The content itself is determined by the learning objectives. Boller and Kapp (2017, 41) take the following situation as their starting point: You have a clear business problem, a related instructional goal, and a clear picture of your players. Your next step is to define your learning objectives. Learning objectives should help you answer this question: To achieve this instructional goal, what do my learners need to • • •

know know how to do believe or feel?

Aldrich (2019, n.p.) follows a very practical approach when designing his short sims: When determining content, the best single question to ask any subject matter expert is “What are common mistakes in this area?” From this question and followups, break down the SME’s responses into six categories of (virtual) note cards:

Creating Digital Gamebooks with Twine

starting points, successful outcomes, unsuccessful outcomes, moments of truth and interesting decisions, story beats or process steps, and interesting facts and phrases. Most of these note cards become the nodes that are organized into short sim levels and structures. Breaking up the content into smaller sections using virtual or paper notes beforehand can save a lot of work when transferring the gamebook into Twine, the software suggested in this article (see section 3). This is because in Twine, content is organized within so-called passages (see section 3.3) in a very similar way:

Figure 2 Twine screenshot.

Story Being based upon interactive fiction, gamebooks need a compelling narrative structure in order to maintain the learner’s interest – even if it is for just a couple of minutes. While the content observed in the previous section represents the hard facts connected with the desired learning outcomes, the story does not only create an emotional connection between the learner and the content, but also “provides relevance and meaning to the experience. It provides context for the application of tasks.” (Kapp 2012, 42)

65

66

Richard Hahn

While the content is comparatively easy to determine, picking a story for a gamebook in an educational context can be a challenging task. Möslein-Tröppner and Bernhard (2018) distinguish between two fundamentally different approaches: 1. Picking a story from within the environment of the learning content. 2. Picking a story outside of the environment of the content to be learned. The first and probably most frequent approach has various advantages: When picking a story from the environment of the desired learning outcome, the designer or SME is usually quite familiar with the content and can provide details, insights and real-life situations, which can serve as inspiration. Therefore, this approach seems to be the most advisable, when a tight connection to e.g. a business case is desired. However, such a strong relationship of the story with the expected environment can hinder creativity, as reality sets rather rigid boundaries. The other approach of searching for a story outside the learning content massively enhances creative possibilities, allowing to connect virtually any story with the given learning objectives. The disadvantage of this method is, however, that it might be difficult for learners to transfer their learning from a disconnected setting to the desired context.

Picking a Story Plot Once a decision for a story environment is taken, the plot for the story needs to be developed. Entire books can (and have been) written on developing story plots, hence the following observations are mere suggestions for further reading: Kapp (2012, 43) refers to the classic monomyth or hero’s journey described by Joseph Campbell, which is a universal template for stories he found comparing the myths, legends and epics of cultures all over the world. This model, which is heavily used in literature, screenwriting and game design, comprises 17 stages (not all of them have to be undergone by the hero), divided into the three acts: departure/separation, initiation, and return. Möslein-Tröppner and Bernhard (2018) suggest picking one of Booker’s seven basic plots for the development of educational gamebook stories: • •

•

Overcoming the monster: The hero(es) set(s) out to defeat a predominant evil antagonistic force. Examples: Dracula, James Bond, the Hunger Games series. Rags to riches: This plot typically features an underdog protagonist who has to work hard to acquire wealth, power or social status, overcoming oppression or adversity. Examples: Cinderella, Slumdog Millionaire, Pretty Woman. The Quest: A hero or group of heroes sets out for an important mission, like retrieving a desired object, getting to a specific location, etc. Throughout their

Creating Digital Gamebooks with Twine

Figure 3 Illustration of the hero’s journey: CC0 (Wikipedia).

•

•

•

•

mission, they are facing multiple threats. Examples: the Odyssey, Siddhartha, The Goonies. Voyage and return: Common in children’s literature, this type of plot takes the protagonist to a strange, often magical land, where they have to overcome certain struggles. In the end, they return as a wiser and more experienced person. Examples: Alice in Wonderland, Around the World in 80 Days. Comedy: The protagonist overcomes a series of awkward or confusing events in a positive manner to be finally rewarded with success or happiness. Examples: Much Ado about Nothing, The Big Lebowski, Bridget Jones’s Diary Tragedy: Quite often, the protagonist of a tragedy is an evil character, who – in pursuit of something forbidden – enters a downward spiral. On some occasions, the death of the hero represents a happy ending. Examples: Joker, Breaking Bad, Romeo and Juliet. Rebirth: An evil, misguided or otherwise unlikeable character redeems herself or himself throughout the story, often inspired by love, family or the greater good. Examples: A Christmas Carol, Despicable Me, Pan’s Labyrinth.

67

68

Richard Hahn

A third valuable source of story plots comes from the acknowledged American writer Kurt Vonnegut. In his (rejected) master thesis in anthropology for the University of Chicago, he took a very simple approach to analyzing stories: “The fundamental idea is that stories have shapes which can be drawn on graph paper, and that the shape of a given society’s stories is at least as interesting as the shape of its pots or spearheads.” (Jones 2014) To determine the shape of a story, Vonnegut plots out the protagonist’s fate between the G (good fortune,) and the I (ill fortune,) endpoints on the vertical axis along a horizontal timeline:

Figure 4 Kurt Vonnegut’s (2004) view on the shape of stories

Vonnegut does not only analyze some of the most popular shapes of stories of Western society, but in doing so provides creators of stories with a powerful tool to outline and plan new stories.

Designing Non-Linear Fiction The suggestions made in sections 2.2 and 2.3 make a solid basis for taking some first decisions concerning the narrative structure of the gamebook, but they leave a major issue uncovered, which Short (2016) condensates in this simple question: “My story is made of pieces of content. How do I choose which piece to show the player next?” Designing a non-linear gamebook with multiple passages and several branches requires exact planning to ensure that each of the subplots leads to a/the desired end. In the early days of nonlinear fiction, there was a limited number of approaches, which Ashwell (2015) analyzed, categorized and visually represented: •

time cave: heavily branching, multiple possible endings

Creating Digital Gamebooks with Twine

Figure 5 Time Cave pattern (Ashwell 2015 )

•

gauntlet: mostly linear, possible endings form mostly towards the end

Figure 6 Gauntlet pattern (Ashwell 2015 )

•

branch and bottleneck: frequently branches, but the branches frequently rejoin at common nodes

Figure 7 Branch and bottleneck pattern (Ashwell 2015 )

69

70

Richard Hahn

•

quest: different varying branches which tend to rejoin towards the end

Figure 8 Quest pattern (Ashwell 2015 )

•

open map: structured by geography rather than by time

Figure 9 Open map pattern (Ashwell 2015 )

•

loop and grow: multiple loops through a central thread

Creating Digital Gamebooks with Twine

Figure 10 Loop and grow pattern (Ashwell 2015 )

In addition to these basic types, Ashwell mentions hybrid forms as well as newer types, which are possible only in computer-based stories and lack any central structure. Short (2016) has divided these alternatives to classic branching into three categories: quality-based, salience-based, and waypoint narrative structures. These offer a multitude of new and interesting possibilities for creating complex structures and keeping track of character development but might be hard to implement on a learning and development budget. Besides, the software suggested in this article (and most of its competitors) is mainly designed for traditional branching scenarios.

Game Mechanism The final basic element of a digital gamebook is the game mechanism, which ensures motivation, replayability and provides learners with feedback on their learning (and playing) progress. One of the main tasks is to choose a game type which matches the learning objectives determined previously. The following table by Boller and Kapp (2017, 42) matches the cognitive skills in Bloom’s taxonomy (a

71

72

Richard Hahn

combination of three hierarchical models used to classify learning objectives into several levels of complexity) with different game types:

Table 1 Bloom’s Taxonomy and Game Types

Creating Digital Gamebooks with Twine

This overview is not specific for gamebooks and not all the mentioned game types can be adequately covered with the possibilities provided by them. Constraints like development time and resources as well as the technical skills of the game developer will have a strong impact on the final outcome. The software Twine is powerful enough to create a variety of quiz-, story-driven- and decision game types as well as simulations.

Feedback Feedback is a topic which both game designers and instructional designers pay close attention to. For players, feedback is important because it gives them vital information on the consequences of their actions and keeps them motivated by displaying scores, levels and progress. As far as instructional design is concerned, learning theories such as social cultural theory, meta cognitivism, and social constructivism (Thurlings et al. 2013) underline the importance of feedback during learning processes. Kapp (2012, 36) distinguishes between two forms of feedback: •

•

Informational feedback indicates the degree of rightness or wrongness of a player action and is designed to “evoke the correct behavior, thoughts or actions.” Guidance feedback points the learner towards a more appropriate solution without telling them exactly what to do.

For his short sims, Aldrich (2019, 30) points out the importance of guidance feedback: Directive leadership is giving people orders and expecting them to obey—the curse of linear media. Collaborative leadership is working together to solve a problem. Think of sim as an assistant. As much as possible, the dominant on-screen character should be there to help and support the player, not judge. Kapp (2012, 36) also refers to the concept of juicy feedback, which game designers usually strive for. It has the following characteristics: tactile, inviting, repeatable, coherent, continuous, emergent, balanced and fresh. From a technical perspective, most of these characteristics can be implemented in a gamebook using Twine.

73

74

Richard Hahn

Twine There are several commercial and non-commercial applications for creating digital gamebooks (e.g. Inform 7, Inklewriter, AXMA Story Maker). For this article, Twine is suggested because it is open source software, is versatile and provides a vivid community.

What is Twine? Twine is an open-source (GPLv3) tool for writing interactive fiction, text-based adventure games and visual novels. It was created by Chris Klimas in 2009 and is now maintained by several contributors at different repositories. Twine works both as a downloadable application for Linux, Windows and Mac OS as well as a browserbased application. It features an intuitive, visual interface, which makes it ideal for people without coding experience. Games, interactive fiction and other works designed with Twine can be exported to an .html file, which can be uploaded to a web server in order to share it with a broader audience.

Story formats Twine depends on so-called story formats, which do not only determine the look and feel of the finished work, but also vary in technical complexity as well as range of possibilities. The three most prevalent story formats are: •

•

•

Harlowe is best suited for beginners and is the default story format. It does not require any programming knowledge and allows users to quickly develop their first stories. A set of pre-built macros, which can be thought of as functional blocks, allows users to integrate interactive elements (such as random or time-sensitive events) as well as multimedia elements (images and sound). For simple gamebooks focusing on simulation or dialog, these functionalities are sufficient. SugarCube uses the TiddlyWiki markup and comes with a vast number of macros which allow for implementing more complex gamebooks. Its appearance can (as well as the above-mentioned Harlowe story format) be controlled by CSS, and its functionality can be extended using Javascript, which makes it a very versatile option for more complex projects. Snowman follows a minimalistic approach and is aimed at users familiar with HTML, JavaScript and CSS. All desired functionalities have to be coded from scratch, at the same time, Snowman provides the highest degree of creative freedom.

Creating Digital Gamebooks with Twine

Both the second and the third option provide the necessary possibilities to implement most of the game types mentioned in section 2.5.

Structuring gamebooks with Twine As mentioned in section 2.1, stories are split up into so-called ‘passages’ in Twine, each of them containing a discrete part of the overall narrative structure, which is represented by text or other media. The concept of passages is similar to storylets, which according to Short (2019, n.p.) have the following properties: • • •

there is a piece of content. It might be a line or a whole section of dialogue, it might be narration, it might be an animation or scrap of film there are prerequisites that determine when the content can play there are effects on the world state that result after the content has played

Passages are connected to each other by links. Adding a link anywhere in a passage automatically generates the respective new passage, which then can be filled with content. Creating links is a straight-forward process: For example, the following code in the SugarCube markup creates the two passages ‘red’ and ‘blue’: [[take the red pill->red]] [[take the blue pill->blue]] By using just links and passages, it is possible to create a wide range of simple gamebooks following one of the structures suggested in section 2.4 with minimal technical effort. The basic functionality can be extended using the above-mentioned macros: text input fields, audio and video content, radio buttons and checkboxes for single and multiple-choice activities allow for a variety of more interactive forms of user interaction. Variables can be used to track user decisions and character development. By implementing conditional logic, static linking between passages as suggested above can be replaced by dynamic linking, which opens possibilities beyond the standard structures described in section 2.4.

Crossing the Boundaries of Gamebooks Up until now, the approaches and techniques described in this article all strive towards gamebooks which provide a single-user and single-device experience. This is due to the fact that digital gamebooks – just as their paper-based counterparts – are a single-user genre and the software for designing them does not per se provide any cooperation mode often to be found in other types of computer games.

75

76

Richard Hahn

In case that quick-to-play experiences such as Aldrich’s short sims are desired, this might be an advantage, as cooperative games usually do not provide the necessary temporal flexibility needed for on-the-job-training. But the lack of interaction between learners leaves the potential of social learning completely unused. In order to compensate this shortcoming, MösleinTröppner and Bernhard (2017, 90) suggest integrating zones for collaboration by simply linking to platforms such as: • • • •

etherpad (used for collaboratively editing text documents online) padlet (managing boards, documents and web pages collaboratively) MOODLE (taking advantage of the built-in forums to allow discussions) Microsoft Sway (for creating online presentations together)

In accordance with the technical constraints at the place where the digital gamebook is supposed to be used, this list could be extended with e.g.: • • •

Google Drive / MS Office 365 Suite (for online collaboration) platforms for collaborative drawing, such as draw.chat or aggie.io Vocaroo, a platform which allows recording audio files using the browser and sharing them easily

Adding such functions by simply linking to the corresponding platform or embedding certain kinds of content is a straightforward task and massively enhances the possibilities of digital gamebooks. It does not only open new ways of communication and collaboration, but can also turn a usually isolated and finished training item into a work in progress, in which learners can e.g. suggest new possible outcomes for a given scenario by continuously adding content to it. Another possibility of breaking the boundaries of digital gamebooks is by allowing interaction with objects and channels from the physical world in order to create e.g. an escape-room-like activity. Such links could be provided by: •

• •

QR codes (which contain passwords/hints to unlock passages in a gamebook) or any other type of code that can be revealed by interacting with a physical object RFID cards or tokens (When held near an inexpensive RFID reader device, a numeric code is entered, which again can unlock new sections of a gamebook.) twitter feeds (which reveal hints tweet per tweet, which is only useful for timeinsensitive activities)

Creating Digital Gamebooks with Twine

With only very little effort on the coding side (e.g. implementing text boxes and comparing the input with the correct solution), a gamebook can be turned into an exciting educational breakout activity.

Conclusion Digital gamebooks provide a wide range of possibilities for educational and training purposes. Their ludic approach and interactivity have the potential to maintain the learner’s attention and train cognitive skills on different levels. A compelling story can ensure an emotional tie between the learners and the learning content. With the open-source software Twine suggested in this article, users with basic computer skills can create simple gamebooks for online use. Advanced users with knowledge of (or willingness to learn) HTML, CSS and JavaScript will be able to design complex and visually attractive gamebooks for e.g. simulations, strategy or planning games. It is highly advisable to thoroughly plan the story structure beforehand in order to ensure that all plots and subplots lead towards the expected end. With some creativity and willingness to experiment, it is possible to cross the boundaries of the genre and turn gamebooks into social and cooperative experiences, which can even interact with the physical world.

References Aldrich, Clark. 2019. “Try Short Sims: The synergy between meaningful interactivity and cost effectiveness lies in short sims.” In TD magazine, 26–31. Anderson, Lorin W. and David R. Krathwohl. 2001. A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Complete Edition. New York: Longman. Ashwell, Sam Kabo. 2015. “Standard Patterns in Choice-Based Games.” These Heterogenous Tasks. Accessed February 28, 2020. https://heterogenoustasks. wordpress.com/2015/01/26/standard-patterns-in-choice-based-games/ Boller, Sharon and Karl M. Kapp. 2017. Play to learn: Everything you need to know about designing effective learning games. Alexandria: ATD Press. Josh Jones. 2014. “Kurt Vonnegut Diagrams the Shape of All Stories in a Master’s Thesis Rejected by U. Chicago.” Open Culture. Accessed February 25, 2020. http://www.openculture.com/2014/02/kurt-vonnegut-mastersthesis-rejected-by-u-chicago.html Kapp, Karl M. 2012. The Gamification of Training: Game-Based Methods and Strategies for Learning and Instruction. Hoboken: Pfeiffer.

77

78

Richard Hahn

Möslein-Tröppner, Bodo and Willi Bernhard. 2018. Digitale Gamebooks in der Bildung: Spielerisch lehren und lernen mit interaktiven Stories. Wiesbaden: Springer. Packard, Edward and Judith Mitchell. 1988. You Are a Monster. New York: Bantam. Short, Emily. 2016. “Beyond Branching: Quality-Based, Salience-Based, and Waypoint Narrative Structures.” Emshort.blog. Accessed February 25, 2020. https://emshort.blog/2016/04/12/beyond-branching-quality-based-andsalience-based-narrative-structures/ Short, Emily. 2019. “Storylets: You Want Them: Storylet systems are a way of organizing narrative content with more flexibility than the typical branching narrative.” Emshort.blog. Accessed February 28, 2020. https://emshort.blog/ 2019/11/29/storylets-you-want-them/ Thurlings, Marieke, Marjan Vermeulen, Theo Bastiaens and Sjef Stijnen. 2013. “Understanding feedback: A learning theory perspective.” In Educational Research Review 9: 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2012.11.004

List of Figures and Tables Figure 1: Gamebook use cases and cognitive processes: Own representation Figure 2: Twine screenshot Figure 3: Illustration of the hero’s journey: CC0: Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Hero%27s_journey#/media/File:Heroesjourney.svg Figure 4: Own representation based on Kurt Vonnegut, Shape of Stories (2004): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOGru_4z1Vc Figures 5–10: Own representations based on Ashwell (2015) Table 1: Bloomʼs Taxonomy and Game Types. Boller/Kapp (2017:42)

Strategy Games as Neoliberal Historiography David Praschak, Stefan Ancuta, and Max F. Schmidt

Abstract: This article examines the prevalence of neoliberal ideology in strategy games and their effect on the medium as history. It poses that strategy titles are uniquely suited to accommodate neoliberal narratives. This is due to several factors, such as the genre’s historical and production context, commodification, and underlying themes. By acknowledging the potential of games to serve as history, the implicit theories that games formulate become discernible. This, together with a unique symbiosis between neoliberalism and strategy games, makes the game’s theory an exponent of neoliberal thought, thus naturalizing its proclivities. The player ultimately has a choice to engage this content in a reflective and critical manner, as one would with any history. Keywords: building, control, history, narrative, progress, history   David Praschak is a student of history at the University of Vienna, currently finishing his Bachelor’s degree. He has been an avid gamer for years and combines this with his historical studies. He has focused so far on evaluating historical games‘ authenticity. Stefan Ancuta is a master’s student at the University of Vienna and has been a passionate gamer for many years. His main interest is in games’ mediation of the past and on the portrayal of myths in videogames. Max F. Schmidt is a master’s student at the University of Vienna with a focus on global history. His main interest in games has been to analyse their portrayal of historical events with a focus on the Second World War.

Introduction If one were to grab a game studies article at random, chances are high that it will start with a justification of why games are worth studying. They might include sales numbers, numbers of people playing different types of games, or breakdowns of demographics. This incessant need to legitimize one’s scholarly interests, especially by emphasizing their economic impact is a perfect example of the neoliberal

80

David Praschak, Stefan Ancuta, and Max F. Schmidt

paradigm permeating all aspects of human life. The objects of our inquiry, as would be expected by products made and consumed in a neoliberal capitalist system, also function according to its logic and presumptions. More than what one would call traditional audio-visual media, such as film or TV, games are more than just representations, they are simulations that offer us a seemingly inexhaustible amount of choice. Strategy game designers such as Sid Meier, who conceptualizes games as a series of interesting choices,1 make especially strong efforts to enable many ways of responding to problems and manage the played entity. Strategy games challenge players to manage the perpetual growth of the entity they control (be it a nation, a civilization, or group of soldiers) better than their opponents (be they other players, AI-controlled competitors, or the formal system of the game itself). Through their better understanding of games’ underlying systems, the ‘right’ choices can often be made to outmaneuver the competition and ‘win’. Even when there is no explicit win condition, strategy games often incentivize growth and expansion as the “grand strategy” (Münkler 2013, 21) that the dehistoricized player can follow across multiple lifetimes of actual historical actors. In this way, games not only engage with the past, but they also fulfill multiple functions of history, becoming just another iteration of it. Games work similarly: they develop a theory, they create a set of principles to abide by, and they simulate the outcome of this process. Even in a practical sense, historians have begun using simulations to test out their theories. The question, then, if games can be considered history, is one half of an equation that will help to further understand and analyze the ideological components that games’ narratives unconsciously transport. How ideology connects so well to specific games is the other half. Ideology, as will be shown in this article, has multiple points on which to attach itself into the game. This is rooted in several factors: games’ history, their surrounding economic conditions, their commodification as well as their tendency towards reinforcing ideology in general, and neoliberalism in particular. This becomes the meta-narrative, which frames all the player’s possible actions. Strategy games have neoliberal influences imprinted into their coding, as they are especially close to the military-entertainment complex (Lenoir 2000) they originated from. This article will outline how these different constituent factors enabled games to function as neoliberalism’s specific form of history.

Simulation as History If we understand history as a simulated narrative rather than a retelling of facts, similarities between games and history start to become more obvious. We no longer 1

“Interesting Decisions”, April 10, 2020 (https://www.gdcvault.com/play/1015756/Interesting).

Stategy Games as Neoliberal Historiography

only ask what happened, but why something happened, to better orient ourselves. According to Kocka, history not only reconstructs past events, but interprets the past as important for our present (2010, 15). The playing of games is not a new historiographical account each time a new session is played, but only in the sense that the process of playing is a simulation of the game’s underlying historical theory. This is especially true for historical games, as they allow you to alter history’s course and diverge from real life events. After all, what are diverging histories other than a test run of a theory? Frasca loosely defines simulation as a model that imitates a system while maintaining some of its behavioral characteristics, in contrast to a representation which only imitates audio-visual characteristics of the source system (2003, 223). Werning, on the other hand, defines simulation in opposition to emulation, which is the transfer of a specific system onto a different, usually contemporary, technological platform (2009, 199–200). People who are fans of older games, which often do not work on modern operating systems anymore, use emulators to fool the game into thinking it is being run on its originally intended system. Sid Meier’s Colonization (Micropose 1994) for instance runs on an emulation of DOS called DOS-Box. In this case, simulations are conceptualized to model different systems in an incomplete way, like taking a shortcut, while the emulation creates an accurate representation of the original system. Chapman defines all histories as a simulation and refutes a string of arguments made by Galloway, which the latter used to discredit the idea that the Civilization videogame franchise constituted a form of historical theory (2013). Chapman points out directly that the mere engagement of historians with videogames and their historical properties already makes those games history, insofar as historians’ engagement with cultural artifacts integrates them into the discourse. Historical games often utilize a setting and veneer that is oriented toward recognizability for the historically interested. Game characters are modelled after historic personalities, recreating their opinions and ambitions; (Frasca 2003) the modelled world resembles certain situations and settings as precisely as possible; people perform crafts corresponding to their biography and social status and even social structures, like hierarchies, are reproduced. All these aspects of historical performativity already constitute history on a diegetic level, and most closely resemble historical reenactment. Indeed, it is the modelling, the measurement and scaling, the interdisciplinarity of history which enables us multiple levels of analysis. Yet, the historic substance of games is also more than their performative imminence. Going further than just recreating and replaying history, they offer a deeply theoretical framework in which to experience it. The games’ rules make up its understanding of historical significance: which factors are declared important, and which aspects are deemed neglectable.

81

82

David Praschak, Stefan Ancuta, and Max F. Schmidt

The measurement of resources games offer the players as an indication of their status concentrates on a few key elements, such as money or productive capability, whilst challenges to the players’ progress are also given as numbers or effects, like fuel consumption2 or barriers like political resistance to expansion.3 All of this is delivered in a top-down perspective and supported by mathematical realities. This results in a deeply abstracted understanding of the historical situation the game is set in. And this abstraction, in turn, gives the game’s algorithmic answer to the question of what it considers history. Games are then contrastable to all other forms of performative media, insofar as they allow for both a mimetic and diegetic experience, the ability to not only passively experience historical narratives, but to alter them. However, the developer directs these player efforts who in turn allows the player to utilize strategies on their way to the top: they seem to allow for several ways to reach one’s objective. Over the game’s duration, the means and methods by which goals are pursued, is subject to changes and usually diversified, thereby portraying the player’s rise to power and his growing material advantage. The player is thus engaged in simulating the developer’s understanding of history (Friedman 1999, 133–134).

Neoliberalism As a developers’ understanding of history is influenced by the ideological constructs surrounding them, their games in turn subconsciously reproduce these constructs and feed them back into society, which in turn gives society the option to ideologically justify consumption. Also, the layers of abstraction put into representing the game’s subject as well as the developer’s decision to emphasize, downplay or outright ignore certain aspects of the portrayed situation and its underlying effects is an additional source of theoretical complexity. All the games’ parameters function like an argumentative theoretical text: they are only portraying certain aspects to emphasize their importance for a situational outcome. By subjecting these underlying themes and mechanisms to an analysis, one can portray a game’s theory as well as its innate ideological components. These ideological components are important, because they subtly and indirectly reinforce existing narratives, values and prejudices of society, like any other cultural artifact does. More than other media, however, games serve as powerful amplifiers of these messages by giving the player agency. As Bailes notes:

2 3

Referring to a mechanic in Hearts of Iron IV with the “Man the Guns” DLC (Paradox Development Studio, 2019). See ‘aggressive expansion’ and its surrounding mechanics in Europa Universalis IV (Paradox Development Studio, 2013).

Stategy Games as Neoliberal Historiography

There is also something especially significant in the way that many videogames function as power fantasies, which grant their characters, and through them their players, a sense of agency and control that they generally cannot experience in everyday life, whether saving the world from aliens or taking control of their favorite football team (2019, 4). As such, the ideological components mentioned above inform and contextualize the game, and therefore the player’s experience of it. Other authors have already recognized the chance to subject games to a cultural and ideological critique. For this article, we conceptualize neoliberalism as an ideology that justifies constant growth and expansion, viewing the free market as absolute and uses the concept of personal responsibility as the preferred explanation for societal ills and accomplishments. Thus, economic hierarchies are naturalized because individuals can perceive themselves as having earned their position through a shrewd understanding of market mechanisms. This leads to a concentration of power and to a perpetual striving for more growth, known in game terms as snowballing. Growth is not to be pursued simply for its own sake: it is a method of self-protection from implicit destruction. After all, since the free market is paramount and your responsibility is limited to your own survival, everyone else is also pursuing growth at any price. In turn, the passive non-expanders risk to get overtaken by their fellow humans, making growth a means of (economic and social) survival. Neoliberalism classifies and justifies this as self-interest, which it perceives as a moral mode of competition. It is remarkable how well this ideology can be represented through videogames. Because of that, ‘game’ has become a metaphor for many of the processes we take part in. Elections, for instance, have long been conceptualized as games, with candidates even defining themselves as players.4 Gamification is not necessarily limited to societal processes, as any activity can be viewed metaphorically as a challenging game: tests, construction manuals, lifestyle changes like diets, and even caring for pets all fit into being framed as a challenge to be achieved by completing levels. This development also naturalizes the impression that such games have unchangeable rules and that their implied meritocracy is justified. These effects permeate society and are, via cultural transfer, appropriated by several of its spheres: A Game of Thrones is a fantasy novel which portrays politics as a game with practical mechanics (such as the double-cross or bluffs), several reality TV programs such as The Bachelor or America’s Next Top Model utilize elimination round systems and even the realm of motivational training refers to the rules for the game of life.

4

“Should First Primaries Be in Whitest States? Warren Says, ‘I’m Just a Player in the Game’”, November 11, 2019 (https://www.democracynow.org/2019/11/11/should_first_primaries_be_ in_whitest).

83

84

David Praschak, Stefan Ancuta, and Max F. Schmidt

These developments are ultimately rooted in a neoliberal understanding of the free market. As the ultimate game to be played, the market is the societal institution in which conflicts should be arbitrated, as it is conceptually neutral to outside influences and, therefore, seemingly fair. All societal input: lawful arbitration, corruption, political processes as well as moral or ethical considerations, are thereby presented as alien obscurations that tamper wrongfully with the natural economic hierarchization. Similarities between ‘gaming the system’ in real life and glitches or exploits in games both imply that the free market’s supposed neutrality is quite like a game’s rules. The presence of neoliberal ideology in games is not surprising if one considers how games are produced, marketed and consumed in a neoliberal economy. The process by which games are produced is predicated upon marketability, clearly manifested in the broad perception of games as toys. Easy reproducibility and advertisement are integral to achieving this (Nichols 2010, 43). The game industry – as a part of the overall neoliberal economy – also participates in the material and societal exploitation of the global south and acts as a driving factor of capitalism (Dyer-Witherford and de Puyter 2009, 52–53). Apart from these direct connections of gaming to economic realities, the game industry also leaves its mark on culture. Games, by virtue of their cultural heritage, process of creation and intended mode of use work as engaging cultural signifiers that let the player partake in them. Due to this engagement, the player embraces the game’s narrative and assumptions, which in turn can reinforce certain existing perceptions and even create entirely new ones. The ambiguity of this reinforcement was aptly portrayed by Bailes, who pointed out that “[…] they [games] simultaneously criticize existing social conditions and reaffirm certain common assumptions about how the world works.” (2019, 4) You may be able to change the outcome, but not the game’s rules. This way, neoliberalism may, under certain circumstances, enter the mind of the player through the backdoor of entertainment, an effect furthered by a lack of critical engagement and analysis with videogames.

Strategy Games Games, to orientate consumers, have in practice been subdivided into several different genres, which each emphasize different aspects of their gameplay mechanics, narrative theme, the context of their production (see Triple-A and Indie games) and similarities to genre-defining traits (‘Metroidvania’, ‘Roguelike’). The term genre, then, is a fluid one: the interlocking nature of genre traits makes narrow categorizations obsolete, giving way to genre-merging categorizations. Strategy games, for this article, are defined as games which emphasize strategic

Stategy Games as Neoliberal Historiography

thinking and decision making. In this common understanding, they offer strategic choices to the player, which are arguably managerial. This strategic approach to problem solving is one of the reasons why neoliberalism was adapted so eagerly by the strategy games genre. They are fueled by a constant need for numbers which explain the situation, ranking the strategic decisions of the players through their success in the narrative. Conflict between entities is the foundational principle (they are hostile to each other, the most powerful rises) by rules that cannot be meaningfully changed, determining the players’ experiences as well as directing their outcomes. As mentioned above, the outcome of this competition is eliminatory. Neoliberal thinking is, in that sense, integral to the strategy experience overall, making it necessary to pursue growth and expansion, which in turn secure earlier earnings. Most strategy games group their narrative around general themes associated with military action. Scholars have traced this narrative reliance on violence back to the Cold War Era. These narrative themes are rooted in gaming’s origins, as tools in the fight against the Soviet Union (Deterding 2010, 29–30; Dyer-Witheford and de Puyter 2009, 101). With the technological improvements made in the last fifty years of the second millennium, computers could be used to utilize game theory for military planning: armed forces were able to calculate the outcome of different scenarios and consider varied options – a form of risk management (Baerg 2009, 123). Parts of this heritage of gaming are reflected in narrative themes that are applicable to games overall (e.g. in shooters). However, the exponential rate at which computing power grew, made games available to private users for recreational purposes. Companies that specialized in creating games emerged in the existing neoliberal economy, and by showing real potential for economic growth became new players in the game of neoliberal freemarket capitalism. Strategy games became a prominent genre in those companies’ product portfolio and sold reasonably well to a predominantly young male player base (which they were also geared to appeal to). Even more intricate iterations of strategy games appeared, and more and more consumers were expecting more choices in games with further development. By appealing to that notion, games made themselves accessible to players by functioning primarily according to neoliberal principles. Games companies’ idea of agency led to them offering more flavorful customization options as well as new ways to achieve the games’ goals. These new ways, however, still reflect the game’s interpretation of meritocracy: Success will still be measurable in points or levels and different paths to victory do not subvert the hierarchical logic of strategic conflict. Instead, these perks and bonuses function more like additional arenas in which it is necessary to compete, keep up and dominate. The players’ agency, then, is really a false one, insofar as they are expected to accept not only the supreme necessity of conflict, but also their naturalized insertion into it.

85

86

David Praschak, Stefan Ancuta, and Max F. Schmidt

Whilst games’ narration is influenced by its military beginnings, its mechanics can also be traced back to a different origin: office work. Games’ early inventors were situated in the office cubicles which, since their invention, themselves became a recognizable symbol of urbanism and modern labor. The modern office’s understanding of efficiency gave birth to a fragmented, repetitious mode of production: spreadsheet after spreadsheet, the idea was to standardize processes and raise awareness of one’s economic performance numerically. All strategy games, differing only in degree of emphasis, adapt these managerial tasks commonly associated with an office job in their mechanics. This can be explained through the conditions of their production, which are always present and reflected in the cultural artifact they brought forth.

Neoliberal Historiography The constituent factors of games described above – conflict, capitalism, hierarchization, and work – fuse together in strategy games and form a narrative driven by neoliberal values. By utilizing themes, settings, mechanics, and more, strategy games’ outlook is one of constant competition, tamed and streamlined only by the impartiality of the rules. This way the player is presented with a theory that relies on neoliberal ideological components for the framing of its historical theory. Instead of efforts to critically engage underlying and implicit themes (e.g. serious games), many historical strategy games engage with the past to formulate a theory of human development. This theory is infiltrated by neoliberal ideology, which is so pervasive that it even stretches to the performative elements of gameplay. The historical angle that these games choose for their narrative is not just a veneer, though. The references they compile and the logic by which they connect them fuses these elements to a complete theory: strategy games give explanations for events they portray and fits such happenings into its overarching understanding of historic development. The players’ perception of the game is influenced by its neoliberal perspective: strategic options are ranked by their usefulness to the abstract aim of everlasting expansion, supremacy, and ultimate victory. In that moment, the player experiences the neoliberal character of the game’s internal logic firsthand, because they must adapt to the conditions of competition and combat or succumb to their competitors. Ultimately, though, player participation in neoliberal ideology is not mandatory. Players have many choices as to not succumb to the meritocracy, and instead prioritize other (perhaps non-ideological) aspects of gameplay. Amplified by the communal nature of the internet, a near endless stream of game-engaging content has developed in popular culture. The many ways in which this content analyzes games has shown a wide range of possibilities for critiquing neoliberal

Stategy Games as Neoliberal Historiography

narratives, examples of which include absurd optimization,5 role-playing,6 nonengagement,7 and contrarianism.8 Fan requests, personas and overriding themes can, when exposed to meme culture, even border comedic relief. Every single one of these can have subversive qualities, however, they are contextual and rely on the player’s choices. Taking all these factors into account, the neoliberal character of strategy games becomes fully apparent even in their engagement with history itself. Due to a mixture of game origins, mechanics and outlined goals, neoliberal ideology was able to permanently attach itself into strategy games. The fact that neoliberalism tries to make the player complicit in its historical exercise is somewhat hidden under an alluring proposition: history is not something that you just learn, it is something you can change and optimize. However, the deceitful nature of neoliberalism’s subtle presentation serves as a means to its ideological ends, which becomes a grave outlook when considering that games’ implicit theory is a valid form of historical engagement. The player is at risk of taking for granted the hyper-competitive naturalizations, which neoliberalism proposes as guiding principles of history.

References Baerg, Andrew. 2009. “Governmentality, Neoliberalism, and the Digital Game.” In symploke 17 (1): 115–127. https://doi.org/10.1353/sym.2009.0028 Bailes, Jon. 2019. Ideology and the Virtual City: Videogames, Power Fantasies and Neoliberalism. Winchester and Washington: Zero Books. Chapman, Adam. 2013. “Is Sid Meier’s Civilization history?” In Rethinking History: The Journal of Theory and Practice 17 (3): 1–21. https://doi. org/10.1080/13642529.2013.774719 Deterding, Sebastian. 2010. “Living Room Wars: Remediation, Boardgames, and the Early History of Video Wargaming.” In Joystick Soldiers: The Politics of Play in Military Video Games, edited by Nina B. Hunteman, and Matthew Thomas Payne, 21–38. New York and London: Routledge. Dyer-Witherford, Nick, and Greig de Peuter. 2009. Games of Empire: Global Capitalism and Video Games. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Frasca, Gonzalo. 2003. “Simulation versus Narrative: Introduction to Ludology.” In The Video Game Theory Reader, edited by Mark J.P. Wolf and Bernard Perron, 221–235. New York and London: Routledge. 5 6 7 8

“Arumba”, April 10, 2020 (https://www.youtube.com/user/arumba07), “Florryworry”, April 10, 2020 (https://www.twitch.tv/florryworry). “Pravus Gaming”, April 10, 2020 (https://www.youtube.com/user/LordPravusGaming). “Drew Durnil”, April 9, 2020 (https://www.youtube.com/user/BAStartGaming). “iSorrowproductions”, April 9, 2020 (https://www.youtube.com/user/iSorrowproductions).

87

88

David Praschak, Stefan Ancuta, and Max F. Schmidt

Friedman, Ted. 1999. “Civilization and Its Discontents: Simulation, Subjectivity, and Space.” In CD-ROMs and the Promise of a New Technology On a Silver Platter, edited by Greg M. Smith. New York: New York University Press, 132–150. Kocka, Jürgen. 2010. “Geschichte als Wissenschaft“ In Geschichte: Studium – Wissenschaft – Beruf , edited by Gunilla Budde, Dagmar Freist, Dagmar, and Hilke Günther-Arndt. Berlin: Akademie. Lenoir, Tim. 2000. “All but War Is Simulation: The Military-Entertainment Complex.” In Configurations 8 (3): 289–335. https://doi.org/10.1353/con.2000.0022 Münkler, Herfried. 2013. Imperien: Die Logik der Weltherrschaft – vom Alten Rom bis zu den Vereinigten Staaten. Köln: Anaconda. Nichols, Randy. 2010. “Target Acquired: America’s Army and the Video Games Industry.” In Joystick Soldiers: The Politics of Play in Military Video Games, edited by Nina B. Hunteman and Matthew Thomas Payne, 39–52. New York and London: Routledge. Werning, Stefan. 2009. Real Wars on Virtual Battlefields: The Convergence of Programmable Media at the Military-Civilian Margin. Bielefeld: transcript.

Ludography MicroProse. 1994. Sid Meier’s Colonization. MicroProse.

The Flaneur in a Masticator Virtual Walking and the Philosophical Experience in Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs Felix Schniz

Abstract: The Romantic tradition of Lustwandeln currently goes through a renaissance in virtuality. Walking simulators, a videogame genre focusing on serene movement and reflection in interaction with an aestheticized environment, revive the premise of the philosophical ritual. Depending on the design principles behind a videogame world, the genre can cue players into impactful thought processes. In this paper, I analyse the experiential quality of the horror walking simulator game Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs (The Chinese Room 2013) that arises from its focus on players as flaneurs and the subversion of the concept. The game’s aesthetics disruptively counterpoint freedom and automation, transmuting the walking simulator’s archetypical eclectic procedurality into the machinated player-avatar catharsis of a protagonist who is unable to outsmart the machine he created. Ultimately, Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs thereby proves its capability of facilitating a philosophical experience in the sense of a recondite, movement-evoked revelation. Keywords: digitalisation, experience, flaneur, fin de siècle, videogame, walking simulator   Felix Schniz is the director of studies and co-founder of the master’s programme Game Studies and Engineering at Klagenfurt University. He originally graduated as a Bachelor of Arts in English and American studies from the University of Mannheim, where he subsequently joined the master’s programme Cultural Transformations of the Modern Age: Literature and Media. With a thesis exploring the metamodern tendencies of the third-person shooter Spec Ops: The Line (2012), he concluded the programme with excellence. Today, Felix Schniz furthermore is a PhD candidate and research assistant at University of Klagenfurt, as well head of the Klagenfurt Critical Game Lab. The focus of his dissertation are experiential dimensions of videogames.

90

Felix Schniz

Introduction Mixed reality – the amalgam of what we consider to be concrete reality and what we believe is the virtual – is more omnipresent in videogames than one might initially think. Not only are the values, beliefs, and cultural competences of a developer team inherently embedded in a videogame’s composition, this very composition subsequently encourages players to enact and thereby negotiate their own cultural competencies and practices (Ash and Gallacher 2011, 362). These enactments can have a deep impact on player consciousness, for at the core of every videogame lies one uniting aspect of understanding. At first, when initially starting a videogame, players are met by superficial attractions, such as its graphics and musical score. Immersing deeper into a videogame along what Mihaly Csíkszentmihályi described as flow effect, a state of harmony created by enjoyable progress and a refined sense for one’s activity ([1990] 2008, 97), attributes beyond the basal phenomenological surface reveal themselves. Players begin to see the underlying mechanics beyond gameplay – the way it “feels to play a game” (Egenfeldt-Nielsen, Smith and Tosca 2016, 118) – and learn to understand its audio-visual composition as part of a narration-driven virtual story-world. Moreover, players may notice a state of affection towards this virtual world and their agency in it. Ultimately, this highlights that every kernel of interaction with a videogame may provide a memorable experience. Described as what bridges the experiencing with the experienceable by German philosopher Walter Hammel (1997, 1), it is the foundational component of our very existence and understanding. Experiences link what one wants to question, to learn about (Gadamer [1960] 2010, 368) even though one might not properly grasp it, unable to profoundly understand how one sees the world. In the following, I thus portray how videogames can cue a specific kind of experience that may be referred to as philosophical experience: an experience of profound understanding (Hammel 1997, 48–51). I open with a brief conceptualisation of the term ‘experience’ and condense it down to what it means to make an experience in a videogame’s virtual environment in particular. In a following train of thought, it is established what the idea of a philosophical experience entails, how it can be connected to the act of walking, and how this very act is mimicked in a contemporary videogame genre: the walking simulator. Aiming to prove that videogames are able to facilitate philosophical experiences in a similar fashion to conscious real-world acts, I then provide an analysis of the walking simulator Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs (2013) by the British development studio The Chinese Room. As the game consciously disrupts the archetypical modus operandi of the walking simulator, it creates an intriguing philosophical experience to raise questions about the relation between humankind and machine, individual and systemic apparition and, more contemporary, challenges of the digital age.

Virtual Walking and the Philosophical Experience in Amnesia: A Machine of Pigs

What Is a Philosophical Videogame Experience? Intending to define the term ‘experience’ is, on a general level, bound to end in circular fallacy. Usually, describing what an experience is by relying on the term itself (“to make an experience”) or its verb form (“to experience something”). The core of this problem is the term’s function in our phenomenology between meaningaccumulation and meaning-making. Depending on cultural context and connotation, the term can, for instance, refer to an assembly of things seen and learned (as in the German Lebenserfahrung), the eagerness to learn from trying (as in the French experience), and of course “everyday life and the knowledge resulting from it” (Tournier 1987, 1). Providing definitions becomes even more difficult when trying to define videogame experience. Even neglecting the fact that ‘game’ and ‘videogame’, for that matter, are two key terms of game studies that yet lack an all-encompassing description which fully captures the spectrum of capabilities offered by the medium, intending to define videogame experience proves to inherit a similarly circular tautology when discussing fictional worlds realised in virtual spacetimes. However, there are three criteria rendering a videogame experience as uniquely different from an everyday-experience made in the real world:

1.

Videogame Experiences Are a Hybrid of Recounted and Self-Made Experiences

Walter Hammel makes a fundamental differentiation between what can be understood as first order and second order experiences (1997, 15–20). First order experiences are ‘genuine’ in that they are grounded in physical reality, self-made, and directly generated by our actions. In contrast, second order experiences are mediated experiences. This includes everything that is not directly experienced by oneself but approximated, such as textual descriptions, visuals, or that is understood second hand through a book or film or any other means by which an experience is conveyed to people who did not make it themselves. Thus, they are remote, indirect ways of experiencing, yet at times the only way to allow for an approximation of happenstances. Videogames cover a curious middle ground in this philosophical framework: On the one hand, a virtual environment is a mediated fictional world, a simulation that can range from mimicking real life to caricaturist or even abstract aesthetics. At the very same time however, videogames must still be considered to be sources of genuine first order experiences considering their direct involvement of players. The medium may convey a virtual reality, but it is still founded in player interaction.

91

92

Felix Schniz

2.

Videogame Experiences Are Deprived Of, Yet Enriched with Stimuli.

Videogames are formally set up systems within a technically limited design frame (Salen and Zimmerman 2004, 50). What happens in a videogame is, by and large, predestined by its code, structuring its innate rules and audio-visuals. However, this oversimplified definition should not be taken as the description of a static, but an ergodic work of art that emphasises playful configuration. While a videogame is limited in terms of its predesigned assets and ways of interaction, it is the players who may only interact with a game according to its code but are then rewarded with specific gaming experiences depending on their choices in play. Traversing a virtual world that resembles a park, for instance, can be elevated with effectful music or hyper-realistic graphical effect. The input into a videogame is rewarded with a highly individualised composition of pre-programmed reactions – a personal creation of virtuality.

3.

Videogames are Capable of Cueing Self-Mediated Understanding beyond our Everyday Comprehension.

By bringing together factor one and factor two above, they provide private, selfcreated, meditated understanding by facilitating a self-driven act within a technological framework. Philosopher Daniel Martin Feige poetically refers to this quality of videogames as the act of Sich-selbst-durchspielen (2016, 173). Every interaction with a videogame is, by nature, a mirror image of one’s drive to experiment, to learn, and thus, to experience. Given the described phenomena of the first and second point raised in this list, it is arguable that videogames may be able to cue specific, by chance even larger-than-life experiences by framing first-hand acts of players in complex aesthetic, narrative virtual environments. Such experiences are not always intersubjectively communicable. As Walter Hammel further elaborates, there is an objective experiencing of empirical reality on the one hand, and another, intimate way of experiencing on the other. One such experience is the philosophical experience, which he describes as a momentum of profound understanding. A philosophical experience is one of three possible private experiences according to Walter Hammel. The other two being the aesthetic experience (1997, 43–48) and the spiritual experience (1997, 48–51). Understood as a trinity of intimate phenomenology, they mirror Friedrich Hegel’s Trias des absoluten Geistes ([1830] 1986, 366–367). As such, it is first and foremost private and nonempirical. Consequently, it is also not intersubjectively communicable. A philosophical experience is a revelation about the elemental nature of things. By way of illustration, one can imagine that specific acts of speech may evoke a greater understanding of language in general. Thus, it can be said that the philosophical experience provides a critical reflection on the non-representational through rep-

Virtual Walking and the Philosophical Experience in Amnesia: A Machine of Pigs

resentation (Welte 1965, 63–64). More generally speaking, exposure to an individual act or happenstance may, on a larger scale, rouse an understanding (or interest in understanding) of a grand-scale ontological revelation. While Walter Hammel did not discuss videogames in Was ist Erfahrung? – although he should have considered them in his observations, given the 1997 publishing date of his work – I argue that videogames are able to elicit these experiences – for instance, by simulating realworld acts prone to elicit deep thoughts, such as flaneurism.

Virtual Flaneurism A concept well connected with the idea of genuine and private experiences is the act of conscious and reflective walking, also called promenading. Promenading has a long history in mankind’s cultural practices. Anecdotally, it is ascribed to Socratic peripateticism and his supposed fondness for engaging his followers in thoughtful discussion while walking (Thelwall [1793] 2001, 12–13). A majority of the practice’s cultural magnitude, however, developed in the Romantic era. The depictions of lone explorers in both natural and urban landscapes was the central motif to express “solitary pastoral [wandering]” (Vila-Cabanes 2018, 121). As such, strolling becomes an act of liberating spectatorship for experiential purposes, as Wölfel describes (2007, 9–11). He argues how it takes one out of the confined spaces of bourgeois life, the Bürgertum, such as the salon and the house, and into nature where one may think clearly, walk freely, and experience privately. Most notably though, the 19th century marks the appearance of promenading as a central character trait in fictional contexts. Protagonists such as Edgar Allan Poe’s nameless Man of the Crowd or Henry James’s Lambert Strether are prominently observant characters, dubbed flaneurs and the thing they do flaneurism. Conscious walking is, ultimately, an action of methodological purpose, too. Psychoanalyst Guy Débord, utilises flaneurism as a catalyst for understanding in what he calls dérive, usually translated as ‘drift’. It is “a technique of rapid passage through varied ambiences” ([2006] 1958, 62), encouraging curious minds to walk any given cityscape while paying close attention to how their surroundings change as they pass city quarters. These movements “involve playful constructive behavior and awareness of psychogeographical effects, and are thus quite different from the classic notions of journey or stroll”, he adds ([2006] 1958, 62). This “study of the precise laws and specific effects of the geographical environment, whether consciously organized or not” (Débord 1955, n.p.) emphasises dissolution within the environment, serene reflection as purpose of purposelessness and, most importantly, serves the seeking of authenticity. Promenading still finds ever-developing application in research and cultural contexts. In physical reality, urban exploration has been taken up as a trend “of re-

93

94

Felix Schniz

searching, rediscovering and physically exploring temporary, obsolete, abandoned, derelict and infrastructural areas within built environments” (Garrett 2013, 13) in order to experience a genuine understanding of the surroundings as historically created relics and to grasp an understanding of cityscapes as a geometry of change and eventfulness. In virtuality, the practice finds continuation predominantly in a specific genre of videogames: walking simulators. Games of this genre focus on avatars that enable players to promenade through an intricate virtual environment. Gameplay is usually slow paced in a walking simulator, allowing for exploration at the leisure of their players, who thus, through their avatars, enact the archetypical mode of the flaneur. Walking simulators are a genre of dominant spatial immersion. They are mechanically restrictive by convention in that their rules grant exploration by slow walking, with only minimal derivation from the pattern, and, in turn, they allow for a focus on aesthetic and affective intricacy in that they stylise a player’s surroundings. In this execution, walking simulators enact a rich play with artisan traditions, as Oscar Moralde explores (2014). On the example of another The Chinese Room game, Dear Esther, he notes that “[t]he experience of Dear Esther oscillates between viewing the landscape and moving through it; mobility evokes an awareness of the contingency of our subject positions” (2014, 3). It is up to the player, being the literal artists of their own virtual experience, to frame the things they see. For this very key reason, Rosa Carbo-Mascarell sees them as a virtual reinvigoration of Romantic practices and a true successor of flaneurism in the digital age: Through their careful placing of objects and semiotic arrangement of space, designers create rich, interpretable data the player can immerse themselves in. Interpreting the story becomes a performative act in which the player must traverse and explore landscapes in order to experience its spirit. (2016, 11)

Walking the Conveyor Belt: Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs The protagonist of Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs, Oswald Mandus, explorer, wealthy industrialist and owner of the Mandus Processing Company, a meat factory in Victorian London, may, based on the agency he provides as avatar, be rightfully called a flaneur – although in a rather morbid sense. The game opens as Oswald awakes alone in his dark and abandoned family manor. Panic-stricken because his sons Edwin and Enoch are nowhere to be found, we steer Oswald into a nightmarish rescue mission that takes him out of his upper class living, through working class quarters, and deep into the bowels of his factory, illuminating the amnesia of the past, which hides a horror story of early modern mechanisation. As we progress in the game, we learn that Oswald was on an expedition to the Aztec temples of

Virtual Walking and the Philosophical Experience in Amnesia: A Machine of Pigs

Mexico, where a shocking premonition struck him: His sons would both die as young men, in a catastrophic war lead with strange weaponry – an imagery that we, the players, are able to decipher as a vision of the Great War and the Battle of the Somme. Intoxicated by this primal prophecy, Oswald fabulised a plan of ritual sacrifice. In a feverish state that led up right to the beginning of the game, he had the game’s eponymous machine for pigs built under his factory – a murder machine, hoping that spilling enough blood in its guts might appease the divine and prevent the war to come. Throughout the game, the focus on these gruesome findings, as well as the ultimate revelation of who the pigs and men slaughtered in Oswald’s plant actually are, merge in the game’s aesthetics. ‘Amnesia’ and ‘machine’, the two titular key terms, are not only central to Oswald’s phantasmagorical journey, but also the game’s thought-provoking aesthetics. In fact, they provide incentive to question a higher state of being by providing counterpoints to the thus far elaborated traditions of the walking simulator. Patrick Howell elaborates on such ill-received phenomena as providers for the disruption of ludic knowledge: By introducing game components that disrupt normative conventions and established player knowledge, […] player activity is altered. Rather than attempting to ‘master’ a particular skill or beat a particular game level through repetition and gradual incremental improvement of performance, they are challenged to overcome a problem requiring a new period of learning, creative thought and, depending on the particular context, use of their wider knowledge and wider skills. The player is required to cognitively engage with the game at a deeper level than they may have otherwise, because the game systems are not stable and may change. (Howell 2016, 3–4) Amnesia is the central concept providing a disruption to the game’s narration. In its broadest sense, amnesia is “a permanent global disorder of memory” (Parkin 1997, 85). It not only serves as a central plot device that aligns the player’s and Oswald’s shock and awe in the face of the machine behind the manor, however. While walking simulators commonly make “a kind of alchemy” out of puzzling together narrative bits, “turning the most basic forms of interaction and living into golden discovery” (Cross 2015, n.p.), Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs applies these techniques in an extremely fragmentary fashion. This phenomenon is ideally illustrated through the pig masks that appear regularly. Players first encounter the masks on the cover artwork of the game, being lured to believe that they serve an important purpose in its narration. Following Oswald’s journey below, masks regularly appear in the path of the player – sometimes even only when a path has to be re-traversed, implying that somebody has left them in a spot during the player’s brief absence, invoking paranoia. The masks cannot be interacted with, however, and do, in fact, not play a role to Mandus in any sense. Inquisitive players may find out that the masks’ de-

95

96

Felix Schniz

sign resembles Aztec patterns, alluding to Oswald’s travels to South America. At the same time, it bears a striking resemblance to the traditional Londonian Boar’s Head Ceremony, in which a similarly decorated head is presented to the mayor of London (the gentle author 2014, n.p.). Researching the topic, however, one falls indeed victim to the game’s disruptive quality. They interrupt, in René Reinhold Schallegger’s terms, the immersive interaction of the game in favour of an extradiegetic engagement with its philosophical meaning (2017, 46). Machine is the fitting metaphorical counterpart here, showing how Amnesia: a Machine for Pigs provokes disruption by stress-testing the mechanical genre conventions of walking simulators through interactions with the eponymous apparatus. Exploring the labyrinth of his amnesic creation, Oswald is constantly forced to provide menial labour in order to progress deeper into the shafts. Following fixed paths, valves must be opened, levers pulled, and circuits exchanged. Players are thus constantly torn out of the spectator mode on a most basal level, interrupting the flow of the walking simulator with menial tasks that set an automation into process which we cannot overlook. Similar to the ambiguous imagery the game presents to us during loading screens Oswald’s journey is a morbid path of directly obvious actions and findings, as well as oblivious higher meanings. The idea of walking is systematically disrupted. The graphic is reminiscent of both 19th century technical and medical manual drawings to create a disturbing effect. Slowly, Oswald (and the player) realises what is wrong here. By following the machine’s need for labour tasks and simple repairs, he has not prevented the fate of his sons but unleashed an even greater terror of automation into the world. Towards the end of the game, the machine reveals its true face to Oswald by addressing him directly and foreshadowing the cruelties it is set to participate in: I have stood knee deep in mud and bone and filled my lungs with mustard gas. I have seen two brothers fall. I have lain with holy wars and copulated with the autumnal fallout. I have dug trenches for the refugees; I have murdered dissidents where the ground never thaws and starved the masses into faith. A child’s shadow burnt into the brickwork. A house of skulls in the jungle. The innocent, the innocent, Mandus, trod and bled and gassed and starved and beaten and murdered and enslaved. This is your coming century! They will eat them Mandus, they will make pigs of you all and they will bury their snouts into your ribs, and they will eat your hearts! (The Chinese Room 2013) The machine’s prophetic monologue evokes an imagery of machine-born horrors yet to come over Oswald’s world. It confesses its future participation in the institutionalized war crimes of the Second World War and the Cambodian genocide. It also prefigures the horrors of man-made machine weapons by alluding to a child’s shadow burnt into concrete, the assembly and usage of the first weaponized atomic

Virtual Walking and the Philosophical Experience in Amnesia: A Machine of Pigs

bomb and its drop over Hiroshima. In all these gory recounts of futures past, however, it ultimately reveals a story of unknowing cogs in a greater machine. Like Oswald, these cruelties are not only executed by machines as metallic constructs, but also as organic systems of individuals participating in greater acts of terror without potentially realizing their role in them. It is an image of one being part of it without seeing the whole. Herein lies the most drastic subversion of walking simulator tropes. In the end, Oswald enters the heart of the machine and sacrifices himself in order to activate its self-destruction mechanism – but his supposed victory remains a tragedy tobe. The victims of his machine are countless, and as Oswald takes his last breath, we hear bells in the background. The clock strikes midnight, it is the first of January in the year 1900. The flaneur is, as has been established, a character of movement and spectatorship. Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs disrupts this trait regularly but only in a minor manner. Player-avatar Oswald outgrows his role as flaneur to ultimately engage with the events he creates. In an attempt to negate his history of egotism, the construction of the machine, with an act of utilitarianism, his own sacrifice (Wagner 2019, n.p.), he intends to end the terrors in a fundamental break with the concept of the flaneur and the walking simulator at once. All is happening in vain, however. This one machine may crumble, but the industrial age will be unaffected. With the beginning of the 20th century and all the horrors the machine evoked, the triumphal procession of the machine is inevitable.

Conclusion: A Machine for… Whom Exactly? Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs, is a paradox experiment in automation. It coos players into succumbing to its disruptive qualities, resembling a wrench being thrown into a process that players conventionally expect and follow, only to conclude it nonetheless. Built on the foundational genre premise of walking simulators, it transforms the act of leisurely exploring landscapes into a form of artistic expression in virtuality, a philosophical experience: Just like Oswald, the player realises that they cannot stop progress, but need to be critically aware of it. Fittingly, Adrian Froschauer reads Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs as an artwork imposing a fin de siècle mentality (2017). Reminiscing about the cultural impact of dissolving structures, he sees the struggle between Oswald Mandus, the creator, and the machine, his invention, swallowing him and bringing automated murder into the world as a reference to the artistic Ohnmacht between hopelessness and futurism in the late 19th and early 20th century (2017, n.p.). Moreover, Froschauer reinterprets the horrors of past mechanisation as contemporary horrors of digitisation. Adapting the lessons of shock and awe to a daily life in the 21st century, he remarks upon how the shift from the 20th to the 21st

97

98

Felix Schniz

century is marked by a similar future scare (2017). Big data, unrestricted information collection, and the commercially hailed quantification of the human being happen (Belkhyr 2019, n.p.). Cryptocurrencies and dark web activities show that the technology may connect but also veil values and human interaction in harmful anonymity (Dewey 2015, n.p.). The year 2020 opened with a fatal drone attack on Iranian general Qassem Soleimani (Chulov 2020, n.p.), once more shedding light on and arousing fears of an age of remote killings via robotics. While these examples illustrate that these topics are critically picked up by the media, more often than not inertia seems to be the reaction of the average reader or viewer. Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs meanwhile cues players into realising the effect that lies in acting within the frameworks imposed by technology without reacting to its demands. “Als Vertreter eines modernen Erzählmediums”, explains Froschauer, “stellt A Machine for Pigs einen Bezug zum Verdrängten her, zerrt es wieder ans Tageslicht und aktualisiert es” (2017, n.p.). In a sense, the Machine for Pigs is a machine for us, the player fatstock. The game reminds us of an appropriate course of action. A virtual tour-de-force to our own slaughterhouse which we do not see as the big picture, is veiled in puzzles and idlework. The philosophical experience it provides is an experience of dual afterthought. On the one hand, it is a revelation of cultural pessimism, signalling us that technology has not stopped ethical decay since the industrial age. At the same time, however, it is an important reminder of the crucial role of media literacy and the benefits that new ludonarrative forms of interaction can bring. Due to their uniquely hybrid tone, videogame experiences can educate affectively and empathically in a way unlike any medium before them. And while it cannot be neglected that they invite us into foreign and fictional worlds, it must also not be forgotten that this very same quality is why they are able to inspire us to look beyond the machine as well.

References Ash, James and Lesley Anne Gallacher. 2011. “Cultural Geography and Videogames”. Geography Compass 5/6, 351–368. Belkhyr, Yasmin. 2015. “The terrifying now of big data and surveillance: A conversation with Jennifer Granick.” TEDblog. Accessed April 22, 2020. Carbo-Mascarell, Rosa. 2016. “Walking Simulators: The Digitisation of an Aesthetic Practice.” In Proceedings of the 1st International Joint Conference of DiGRA and FDG, Dundee, August 1–6. Chulov, Martin. 2020. “’A defining moment in the Middle East’: the killing of Qassem Suleimani.” The Guardian. Accessed April 22, 2020.

Virtual Walking and the Philosophical Experience in Amnesia: A Machine of Pigs

Cross, Katherine. 2015. “How ’walking simulators’ allow us to touch other worlds.” Gamasutra. Accessed April 22, 2015. Csíkszentmihályi, Mihály. (1990) 2008. Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York, London, Toronto, Sydney, New Delhi, Auckland: Harper Perennial. Débord, Guy. 1955. “Introduction to a Critique of Urban Geography.” Les Lèvres Nues 6: September 1955, n.p. Débord, Guy. (1956) 2006. “Theory of the Derivé.” In Situationist International Anthology: Revised and Expanded edition, edited by Ken Knabb. Dewey, Caitlin. 2015. “In search of the darkest, most disturbing content on the internet.” Washington Post. Accessed April 22, 2020. Egenfeldt-Nielsen, Simon, Smith, Jonas and Susana Tosca. 2016. Understanding Video Games: The Essential Introduction. London/New York: Routledge. Feige, Daniel Martin. 2015. Computerspiele: Eine Ästhetik. Berlin: Suhrkamp. Froschauer, Adrian. “’This is your coming century!’ Computerspiele als Gegenstand einer kulturgeschichtlichen Literaturwissenschaft am Beispiel von Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs im Kontext von fin de siècle und décadence.” Textpraxis. Digitales Journal für Philologie 2:2017, 1–12. Textpraxis.net. Gadamer, Hans-Georg. (1960) 2010. Hermeneutik I. Wahrheit und Methode: Grundzüge einer philosophischen Hermeneutik. Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck. Garrett, Bradley. 2013. “Undertaking Recreational Trespass: Urban Exploration and Infiltration.” Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 39:1, 1–13. The gentle author. 2014. “At the Boar’s Head Parade.” Spitalfields Life. Accessed April 22, 2020. Hammel, Walter. 1998. Was ist Erfahrung?. Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovac. Hegel, Georg. (1830) 1986. Enzyklopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp. Howell, Peter. 2016 “A Theoretical Framework of Ludic Knowledge: A Case Study in Disruption and Cognitive Engagement” In Proceedings of 10th International Philosophy of Computer Games Conference, Malta, Nov 1–4. Jenkins, Henry. 2004. “Game Design as Narrative Architecture.” In First Person: New Media as Story, Performance, and Game, edited by Noah Wardrip-Fruin and Pat Harrigan. Cambridge: MIT Press. 118–130. Moralde, Oscar. 2014. “Haptic Landscapes: Dear Esther and Embodied Video Game Space.” Media Fields 8, 1–15. Salen, Katie and Eric Zimmerman. 2004. Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals. London: MIT Press. Schallegger, René Reinhold. 2017. “WTH Are Games? – Towards a Triad of Triads”. In Digitale Spiele, edited by Jörg Helbig and René Schallegger. Köln: Herbert von Halem, 14–49. Sigl, Rainer. 2013. “Lost in the dry paper soul of the world: A Machine for Pigs.” Videogametourism.at. Accessed April 22, 2020.

99

100

Felix Schniz

Thelwall, John. (1793) 2001. The Peripatetic. Edited by Judith Thompson. Detroit: Wayne State University Press. Tournier, Michel, Bailey, Ninette, and Michael Warton. 1987. “Experience”. Paragraph 10:1987, 1–3. Wagner, Pascal. 2019. “Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs – (Ver)fütterung der Armen.” Pixeldiskurs. Accessed April 22, 2020. Vila-Cabanes, Isabel. 2018. The Flaneur in Nineteenth-Century British Literary Culture: “The Worlds of London Unknown.” Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Welte, Bernhard. 1965. Auf der Spur des Ewigen. Frankfurt: Herder. Wölfel, Kurt. 2007. Kopflandschaften – Landschaftsgänge: Kulturgeschichte und Poetik des Spaziergangs. Köln: Böhlau.

Ludography The Chinese Room. 2013. Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs. The Chinese Room.

Cortana: A Digital Personal Assistant between Space Opera and Speech Recognition Rudolf Inderst and Pascal Wagner

Abstract: “Amazon staff listen to customers’ Alexa recordings, report says” reported The Guardian, along with many other international papers, in early 2019. Similar accusations were made simultaneously against Microsoft and their software, Cortana. Private information that was believed to be safe from human access was indeed transcribed and analysed by internal and external staff at both media corporations – accessed through Alexa and Cortana devices, respectively. Amazon and Microsoft claimed that manual analysis was needed to maintain the quality standard of the speech assistance products and to develop new functionalities. To people with a certain knowledge of video game history or at least the Xbox game catalogue, a certain irony cannot be denied in that players of Microsoft’s exclusive HALO series could have foreseen parts of this development. Cortana is, after all, one of the main protagonists of the HALO series: The blue-skinned, female artificial intelligence powering the Master Chief avatar’s battlesuit. She appears as holograms as well, manifesting in the game world for players and their (often male) gaze. Over the course of the game series, she changes from a static, tutorialising audiovisual aid into an agenda-driven person out for her own gain. This context of a fictive, ‘playful’ character turned into a meaningful and often dangerous factor for her surroundings neatly fits into the premise of the FROG 2019: Games are “likenesses of cultural phenomena”. What started as an NPC is now a speech assistant A.I. that wiretaps personal information from customers. The paper is driven by this transference from fictional space into real security concern. It furthermore lays out the linguistic mechanisms that underlie speech recognition and critically evaluates if and why corporations need to rely on manual analysis of speech data. Keywords: AI, Cortana, data protection, HALO, voice assistant, human-machineinteraction, XBox   Rudolf Inderst, M.A. (*1978 in Munich) is a double PhD game studies lecturer at the Neu-Ulm University of Applied Sciences. Together with Pascal Wagner and Christof Zurschmitten he has edited the first German anthology about the Souls series in 2019: “Prepare to Die. Interdisziplinäre Perspektiven auf Demon’s Souls, Dark Souls

102

Rudolf Inderst and Pascal Wagner

und Bloodborne”. He is also editor-in-chief at the Suisse online journal Nahaufnahmen. Follow him on Twitter, XBL and PSN: @benflavor. Pascal Wagner, M.A. (*1993 in Offenburg) is a cognitive and cultural linguist and English philologist with a Minor in Human Rights Law and German Media Law. His master’s thesis “Faia, Fira, Feuga” about the naming and translation of fantasy words in Japanese videogames was published in October 2019. He is Founder of the science communication and game studies platform www.languageatplay.de and Editor-in-Chief of the German games culture print magazine GAIN – Games Inside. Find him on Twitter as @indieflock or @languageatplay.

Introduction After Microsoft had successfully pushed other operating systems out of office spaces in the 1980s, the US-based company launched a massive entertainment offensive in 1995. DirectX was being established as a gaming platform; Microsoft also took aim at the market for accessories and invested heavily in well-known gaming companies such as FASA or Bungie (a former successful Macintosh developer). Five years later, Bill Gates himself unveiled Microsoft’s first video game console at the GDC – the Xbox. At the beginning of 2002, the new hardware was taking its first steps in Europe – the starting prize was relatively high in comparison to the older generations of gaming hardware: converted, it added up to about 480€, in contrast to approximately 270€ for the prototypical home console, the Super Nintendo Entertainment System, that was still found on shelves well into 2003. The design language of Microsoft’s console can be described as bulky – but technically, the Xbox brought very promising features to the table. These included a hard disk drive, games with a 5.1. Dolby Digital soundtrack, as well as HD graphics. Additionally, the hardware had an online-enabled interface that kickstarted the inhouse online service, Xbox Live (Forster 2005). When the next generation follow-up hardware, the Xbox 360, was introduced, the older model had sold around 24 million copies with the help of console exclusives such as The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind (2002), Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic (2003) and Fable (2004). In comparison, Microsoft’s main competitor Sony had sold approximately 100 million PlayStation 2 devices. The consoles had also been cheaper to produce for the Japanese manufacturer. Altogether, the first Xbox generation was an expensive entry portal into the US and European console market. The company was willing to accept a loss of four billion US dollars for this strategic milestone. Minimal sales figures in Japan also made it very clear that Japanese players were not interested in the US console.

Cortana: A Digital Personal Assistant between Space Opera and Speech Recognition

With all this known, it is not an overstatement to claim that the history of the Xbox is intertwined with a certain exclusive shooter series called HALO. If one adds the sales figures of all iterations of this series together, over 65 million copies have been sold. In other words, a revenue of almost 3.4 billion US dollars has been generated by HALO alone. This crossmedia science fiction opera has branched out from games into comics, novels, and animation. Accordingly, what started as the base for one single shooter game has now become deep and complex lore.

In Search of Humanity One of the core narrative relationships within the HALO games is the presence of a character by the name of Cortana. When players take the role of Master Chief, the franchise’s iconic super soldier protagonist, it becomes clear that Cortana plays a central ludological and narratological role at the same time. On the one hand, the A.I. (that has been designed after the Egyptian queen and Great Royal Wife of Akhenaten, Nefertiti) introduces peculiarities of the game’s systems and mechanics, on the other hand she also acts as a storytelling device. Steven Jones observes Cortana’s interesting double role in The Meaning of Video Games: Gaming and Textual Strategies (2008), stating that NPCs “that serve as companion or helper figures like Cortana are common in action RPGs. [...] It’s possible [to think about] Peter Pan’s Tinkerbell for example.” He then elaborates (Jones, 74): “Cortana however, is explicitly an artificial intelligence, a kind of diegetic, in-gamehelper, and she is thus implicitly a metaphorical figure, a personification of both the authorial intelligence behind the gameworld and the literal AI programming code that runs the NPCs and other features of the environment in Halo.” While players get used to the close and steady relationship between Master Chief and Cortana within the first three games, the third HALO could well be labelled “Cortana’s story”. It presents a caesura in this regard. Highly developed A.I.’s such as Cortana do not live forever, as the HALO lore tells us. After seven years of service, they become unstable and therefore unreliable. This process is called ‘rampancy’ and can be understood as a forced digital mercy killing since the machine is caught in a constantly on-going calculation process and cannot escape, it has to be switched off. But Master Chief is not willing to let go – even when Cortana’s time obviously has come, he puts his trust in her and his life in her hands. This type of solidarity and loyalty can be read as Master Chief’s astonishment and admiration (and maybe also envy) of Cortana’s transmutation into something one might call humanity. Master Chief’s own humanity has been swept away – combat, war and military exercise have changed this genetically advanced super soldier into an entity that has almost lost its emotional and physiological connection to mankind. Now, he is witnessing something in a person very close to him,

103

104

Rudolf Inderst and Pascal Wagner

who may well be his true love, which is a closed road for him – an ongoing process allowing for vulnerability, insecurity, and doubts. When NBC journalist Winda Benedetti asked Jen Taylor, the voice actress of Cortana, about the A.I.’s character development, she answered: “I think that what appeals to people about Cortana is that she is an incredibly human character even though she’s not. Which is sort of your Pinocchio issue — wanting to be human and feeling like you’re more human than the people around you, especially Master Chief.” (Benedetti 2012) This character development was not greeted warmly by many players and reviewers – Senior Contributor for Forbes Magazine, Dave Thier (cf. 2015), for instance, described Cortana as “always strange and [...] clearly possessed of self-determination.”

One AI to Rule Them All? Within a broader framework of the franchise’s lore this can be put into another context: As readers and players alike learn in Eric Nylund’s novel Halo: The Fall of Reach (2001), Cortana’s origin lies within the synapses of Dr. Catherine Halsey, a civilian scientist who is also responsible for the creation of the Spartan Project (and therefore Master Chief himself). HALO’s background story portrays Halsey as a brilliant scientist but also as a deeply torn figure who ends up being framed as a war criminal. Halo 5 (2015) eventually leads to a similar characterization of Cortana: The A.I. has decided to put her knowledge and experience into action, to develop an agenda, and is aware of her power to change things in the galaxy. Without insider sources, one cannot tell whether it was a coincidence or not, but the series also experienced a female top management-level change at that time: Bonnie Ross took over the Xbox’s ludic flag ship “as a rare female executive in an industry dominated by men” (Brustein 2015). In Halo 5, Cortana finally concludes that she is the one to bring peace and harmony to the war-torn skies. But this has severe consequences for humanity – Cortana’s plan is to have them supervised and guided by higher beings. Ironically, as many reviewers have pointed out, she still “likes” to handle things (almost) naked. To put this in perspective, the concept of “Baby Got Backstory” can be applied: Baby Got Backstory is when creators use backstory or other explanations primarily to justify the hypersexualized design of a character in-world. It’s particularly obvious if the sexualized design matches modern beauty standards even if it’s in a fantasy or sci-fi setting that could easily have radically different standards for attractiveness (Idlethumbs 2014).

Cortana: A Digital Personal Assistant between Space Opera and Speech Recognition

The discussion around Cortana’s sexualisation took off when Halo franchise director Frank O’Connor explained, in full seriousness, that Cortana’s appearance was about getting a tactical advantage in conversations: Sheʼs not really nude ... but that’s what it makes you think of. [...] So one of the reasons she [chooses to appear without clothes] is to attract and demand attention. And she does it to put people off so that they’re on their guard when talking to her and she has the upper hand in those conversations. Itʼs kind of almost like the opposite of that nightmare you have where you go to school in the nude. Youʼre terrified and embarrassed and she’s kind of projecting that back out to her audience and winning intellectual points as a result. (Orry 2015) This attempt to attribute Cortana a kind of agency that was clearly not embedded in her overall design was generally not well received. To many players and reviewers alike, this fostered the impression that after all the years since HALO’s first release, Cortana’s appearance still was part of an eye-candy marketing stunt meant to attract a certain target group, maintaining the notion that male gamers demanded and needed visual sexual stimulation from female game characters.

The Future of HALO’s Cortana But what does the future hold in store for Cortana? The only starting point for now are the two trailers Microsoft released for the next Halo game, Infinite at the E3 in 2018 and 2020 (Microsoft 2018; 2020) respectively. The first one does not feature the AI directly. However, fans and future players witness Master Chief putting a hardware chip into his armour. It is likely that Cortana is part of this very piece of technology inserted into Master Chief’s enhanced body system, strongly suggested by the blue glow of the chip. In critical scenes of the second trailer, which seems to chronologically take place before the first one, the chip is missing both its glow and A.I. content. However, in the last scene of the second trailer, Master Chief approaches what seems to be a holographic manifestation of Cortana with the empty chip in his hand, ready to reinstall the A.I. into his system. The trailer (cf. Microsoft 2020, 05:40) is concluded by her presumably foreshadowing statement: “I chose you because you were special. I knew we would be perfect together. And I was right.” Right now, we therefore can only guess what the future holds for this influential sci-fi couple. Will there be a unification of the human and the artificial? And who will gain the upper hand? Master Chief seems to willingly ally with Cortana and thus with her plans for mankind. Does he share her assumptions about the state of humanity and therefore its need for constant surveillance or can we expect other, ulterior motives from him? There is nothing left to do in this regard

105

106

Rudolf Inderst and Pascal Wagner

but to wait for the release of the next HALO game, at least if Microsoft’s marketing does not provide us with more material before that.

From the Game to Speech Assistance Being extraordinarily cynical, one might make a connection between Cortana’s alluring appearance and sudden push for surveillance, and Microsoft naming their current speech assistant AI after her. Who would be more fitting to always listen out for the needs of the product-owning human if not the proven handler of Master Chief. This cynicism deteriorates to realism, at least when talking about the surveillance part of Cortana’s character, if one has a look at some headlines of 2018 and 2019 that are concerned with speech assistant A.I.s. One example is the instance reporting that “Amazon staff listen to customer’s Alexa recordings” (Hern 2019). Whilst these articles almost never concern themselves with Cortana, but with Amazon’s much more widespread Alexa software and hardware, the reason for this is relatively simple: Cortana never became as popular or commercially successful. While still being in existence as a standalone app on Windows phones and PCs, Cortana has been taken out of the Windows 10 Search bar and the Xbox One speech assistance (cf. Warren 2019). Cortana had been a mandatory part of both until the middle of 2019 but is now decidedly “no longer an Alexa competitor” (Warren 2019), according to Microsoft. Public scandals and data protection issues are thus much more frequent around Alexa, and this paper will use it – or her – as a stand-in for speech assistance A.I.s in more general terms. Amazon argues that they have no choice other than to listen in on customer’s records for several reasons. There are tasks automatic speech recognition cannot attend to without the aid of a human operator. Newly popular names, like artists’ pseudonyms for example, have to be transcribed manually and need to be connected with the discography of the artist so Alexa can react appropriately to an uttered “Alexa, play Despacito”. For this, the various ways people pronounce the artists’ names have to be analysed by humans and loaded into the speech recognition database. Quality assurance also needs to be done by operators: spot checks of complete recordings have to be matched with the command the A.I. understood. In this way, errors in the recognition software can be filtered out if an utterance and a command do not fit accordingly. This justification of human intervention assumes that the recordings in question are legally impeccable. Everything we utter after the words “Ok Google”, “Siri”, “Cortana” or “Alexa” we knowingly and willingly give to the respective corporation, after all. Speech recognition users will need to remember this fact when they put an EchoDot into their bedrooms.

Cortana: A Digital Personal Assistant between Space Opera and Speech Recognition

But what if surveillance happens without consent? If recordings are made and distributed without the prior utterance of the code word, a severe data protection breach occurs. Depending on the action the software takes, being listened to by Amazon staff may not even be the worst outcome of such a situation. According to a Business Insider article, a couple reported that “Amazon’s Alexa recorded a private conversation and randomly sent it to a friend” (Canales 2018). Amazon claimed this cannot happen without the code word input, and that Alexa must have mistaken background noise for the code word and the instruction to forward the message to the person mentioned. Very real societal and interpersonal consequences are to be expected if such situations occur with insults or secrets. So how can it happen that Alexa misinterprets words for other words or even background noises for whole instructional sentences?

The Linguistic Basis of Speech Recognition This part will not elaborate on the technical basis of speech recognition but will instead concentrate on the applied linguistic framework that is used. When speech recognition picks up an utterance, it recognises the single sounds or phonemes – the smallest meaning distinguishing units of speech – and puts them together into words or lexemes that it knows of. Those words are pulled from an internal lexicon; no lexeme that is not in this lexical database can be recognised by the software. A lexicon, however, seldom has only one concrete meaning or sense (cf. Goddard 2011, 5) associated with a single word or lemma – the bullet point form of a lexeme that is used as the searchable term in a lexicon. So, to find the exact meaning of a word, speech recognition software needs associative help. It finds this help in the shape of so-called semantic frames, a concept established by Charles Fillmore (cf. Fillmore 1976; Fillmore and Atkins 1992). Semantic frames are networks of connotations, or lexemes with related senses, that can be searched via the cotext surrounding the lexeme in question. This means Alexa, Cortana and Co. use the textual environment of a word to elaborately guess its meaning. This, however, is not without problems. Cotext alone is not enough to unambiguously define the sense of an utterance. An example from FrameNet, the most meticulous online database of semantic frames, can make this obvious (ICSIBC, colour markers adapted from the original):

107

108

Rudolf Inderst and Pascal Wagner

Switching out the marked “a bit better” with another phrase that fits the “Emotion” tag will produce vastly different sentence understandings, while completely maintaining the cotext of the tagged Emotion:

This can lead to mix-ups. A prominent example of such a mix-up occurred with the automatic translation software Google Translator, which uses similar mechanisms as speech recognition software to understand the meanings of the lexemes it is asked to translate. “Sad” and “happy” for example, two emotional states that could fit in neatly in the FrameNet example above, very often share the same cotext. Because of this, Google Translate converted the English sentence “So sad to see Hong Kong become China” to “So happy to see Hong Kong become China” when asked for the Simplified Chinese version. This was not due to political censorship, but because the software used cotext along with statistical analysis to determine what the lexeme “sad” might have meant. Statistics do help, for sure: If a lexeme has multiple meanings but all except one of them are outdated and are seldom used, possibility gives a rather helpful indication of what meaning to use. But neither cotext nor possibility are enough if context is ignored. And context is still very hard to analyse without human cognition. Optimisation of speech recognition through human operators will stay a vital part of speech assistant A.I. for a long time. And as long as those humans listen in on recordings, there is no way to accurately tell what else the operators, let alone the companies themselves, use the acquired knowledge for.

Mitigating the Damage It is a fact that we sell sovereignty over our speech data the moment we acknowledge the general terms and conditions of the recognition software we installed. This, however, should not and most certainly will not deter people from at least trying to protect their data as much as they possibly can. Hardware solutions like Project Alias (Karmann 2019; Liao 2019) try to keep Amazon’s Echo products from spying by scrambling their speakers with white noise until a code word that is different from the Alexa code word is uttered. The device has the eerie look of a headcrab – a monster from a different science fiction game series than HALO, Valve’s

Cortana: A Digital Personal Assistant between Space Opera and Speech Recognition

Half-Life (1998). It certainly evokes a dystopian aesthetic that is no less disturbing than the fact that people willingly wiretap their homes.

References Benedetti, Winda. 2012. “The heart of Halo: Actress talks a decade spent playing Cortana.” NBC News. Accessed March 23, 2020. https://www.nbcnews.com/ tech/tech-news/heart-halo-actress-talks-decade-spent-playing-cortanaflna1B6732259 Brustein, Joshua. 2015. “Can the Woman Behind Halo 5 Save the Xbox? Bonnie Ross is in charge of Microsoft’s biggest video game ever.” Bloomberg Businessweek. Accessed March 23, 2020. https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2015-halo-5bonnie-ross/ Canales, Katie. 2018. “A couple says that Amazon’s Alexa recorded a private conversation and randomly sent it to a friend.” Businessinsider. Accessed March 23, 2020. https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-alexa-recordsprivate-conversation-2018-5?r=UKandIR=Tand_ga=2.146445172.1533733141. 1569538119-1132341098.1569538117 Fillmore, Charles J. 1976. “FRAME SEMANTICS AND THE NATURE OF LANGUAGE”. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 280(1): 20–32. Fillmore, Charles J. and Sue Atkins. 1992. “Towards a Frame-Based Lexicon: The Semantics of RISK and its Neighbors.” In Frames, Fields and Contrasts. New Essays in Semantic and Lexical Organization, edited by Adrienne Lehrer and Kittay Feder, 75–102. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Assosciates. Forster, Winnie. 2005. Spielkonsolen und Heimcomputer 1972–2005. Utting: Gameplan. Goddard, Cliff. 2011. “Semantic analysis: A practical introduction.” Oxford textbooks in linguistics, 2nd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hern, Alex. 2019. “Amazon staff listen to customers’ Alexa recordings, report says.” The Guardian. Accessed March 23, 2020. https://www.theguardian.com/ technology/2019/apr/11/amazon-staff-listen-to-customers-alexa-recordingsreport-says Idlethumbs, Idle Forums. 2014. “Baby Got Backstory - A trope creation thread.” Idlethumbs. Accessed March 23, 2020. https://www.idlethumbs.net/forums/ topic/9724-baby-got-backstory-a-trope-creation-thread/  International Computer Science Institute in Berkeley, California (ICSIBC). “FrameNet2.” Accessed March 23, 2020. https://framenet2.icsi.berkeley.edu/ fnReports/data/frameIndex.xml?frame=Feeling Jones, Steven. 2008. The Meaning of Video Games: Gaming and Textual Strategies. London: Routledge.

109

110

Rudolf Inderst and Pascal Wagner

Karmann, Bjoern. 2019. “Project Alias.” Github. Accessed March 23, 2020. https:// github.com/bjoernkarmann/project_alias Liao, Shannon. 2019. “This project hacks Amazon Echo and Google Home to protect your privacy.” The Verge. Accessed March 23, 2020. https://www.theverge. com/circuitbreaker/2019/1/15/18182214/amazon-echo-google-home-privacyprotection-project-white-noise Microsoft. 2018. “HALO 6: Infinite Trailer (E3 2018).” GameCheck. Accessed March 23, 2020. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_M8Mc7hURc Microsoft. 2020. “HALO 6: INFINITE Trailer 2 (2020) E3.” GameCheck. Accessed March 23, 2020. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=farrIIzDW2sandvl=en Nylund, Eric. 2001. HALO: The Fall of Reach. New York: Del Rey Books. Orry, James. 2015. “Halo’s Cortana appears nude to give her ’the upper hand’, says franchise director.” Videogamer. Accessed March 23, 2020. https://www. videogamer.com/news/halos_cortana_appears_nude_to_give_her_the_upper_ hand_says_franchise_director Thier, Dave. 2015. “’Halo 5’s’ Biggest Twist Is Pretty Brilliant.” Forbes. Accessed March 23, 2020. https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2015/10/27/halo-5s-biggesttwist-is-pretty-brilliant/#7bd9841b64ec Warren, Tom. 2019. “What is Microsoft doing with Cortana?” The Verge. Accessed March 23, 2020. https://www.theverge.com/2019/7/25/20727129/microsoftcortana-features-strategy-report

Ludography 343 Industries. 2015. HALO 5: Guardians. Microsoft Studios. Bethesda Game Studios. 2002. The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind. Bethesda Softworks. BioWare. 2003. Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic. LucasArts. Bungie Studios, Gearbox Software. 2001. HALO: Combat Evolved. Microsoft Game Studios. Bungie Studios, Splash Damage. 2007. HALO 3. Microsoft Game Studios. Lionhead Studios. 2004. Fable. Microsoft Studios.

Is This the Real Life? Is This just Fantasy? Alternate Reality (Games) Polliwog 2019 Michaela Kempter

Abstract: This article discovers the world of Alternate Reality Games. The location-based games Geocaching, Actionbound, and GPS-Doodle are presented. Their fundamental connection is the requirement to move in order to progress the game. It will be explained how these games work, how they developed and some of their potentials are shown. In the end there is a short summary about the Polliwog workshop where the participants created their own Alternate Reality Game, drew a GPS-Doodle and found their first Geocache. Some questions are looked at, that may help to create one’s own Alternate Reality Game. Keywords: alternate reality games, geocaching, actionbound, digital outdoor games, location-based gaming, treasure hunt, riddles, gps-doodle, gps-drawing   Michaela Kempter created her first GPS treasure hunt in 2009. Ten years later she is still doing it and also passes on her knowledge to pedagogues. She studied educational sciences at the University of Vienna with the main emphasis on media education, adult education and cultural studies. She wrote her thesis about the transfer of computer game content of kids into their daily life. Afterwards she was working at the biggest board game library of Austria, in wienXtra-spielebox, as a media educator. She designed workshops and leisure events for children and adults on the subject of computer and console games and also carried them out herself.

Introduction Alternate Reality (Games) can have a broad variety of manifestations. From local areas, pretending to be a tavern of the Game of Thrones franchise to game experiences all over the US, setting Batman directly into our daily life experience. Alternate Reality Experiences create a second layer of meaning above the existing areas we know from our daily life. They might even transform people for a certain time into someone completely different, the role they play in the AR(G). Although AR(G)s can be created without any technology, technology is often used to make

112

Michaela Kempter

AR(G)s even more immersive or complex, or to enable shared experiences across large communities and distances. We would like to invite the participants to learn about the history and state of the art of AR(G) and [...] create an AR(G) themselves, building a second layer experience at the Campus Krems.1 In this article, Alternate Reality Games like Geocaching, Actionbound, and GPS-Doodles are introduced. These games, also called location-based, show the possibilities of using alternate reality tools for a specific purpose and/or fun. “A location-based game is a type of pervasive game in which the gameplay evolves and progresses via a player’s location” (Wikipedia 2020). All of the presented games are strongly bound to moving from one location to another, it is their fundamental connection. Without movement there is no progress in these games, as they offer the abovementioned diving into a layer of meaning above the existing areas of our daily life. The end of this article will summarize the practical part of the Polliwog conference where participants could experience all of the explained games. They found their first geocache, created their own AR(G), and tried to paint a GPS-Doodle on the university campus.

Geocaching Geocaching is the world’s largest treasure hunt. All over the world there are ‘caches’, hiding places with small and large containers. Their content can only be a logbook, an exchange object or a specific task. The containers are hidden by individuals, thus anyone can create and ‘maintain’ a cache, provided they make the effort of taking care of it. The name itself is explanatory, as it contains the word “cache” which means a hiding place, and the word “geo” which stands for the earth. Participants use a Global Positioning System (GPS) device or a mobile phone to find the containers marked by coordinates. On the mobile phone it is possible to use the official Geocaching app by Groundspeak Inc.2 (for Android and iOs) or another app called c:geo3 (for Android). It is even possible to reach the hidden spaces via Google Maps. On the GPS devices some Geocaches are uploaded already, while others are transferred from the Geocaching platform www.geocaching.com in form of GPX files that contain information about the cache, how to reach it, the size of it, what kind of equipment is needed, etc. After finding a cache one would make a note into the logbook with the date and username on the online platform they are registered on. Obviously, the container has to be replaced on the exact same spot where it has been found. Either 1 2 3

Event introduction by Pfeiffer at Polliwog 2019 https://www.geocaching.com/play https://www.cgeo.org/

Alternate Reality (Games) Polliwog 2019

immediately on the mobile phone or any other device with internet connection, or later when returning home, the cache also has to be logged online. The Cachers – people going on geocaching adventures – would write a note in the online logbook saying ‘TFTC’ (thanks for the cache) when found or ‘Not found’ as to give the owner a hint to check whether the cache might be lost. The Geocaching slang has some more abbreviations to offer: PNG – ‘park n’ grab’, which is a simple cache placed by a roadside, BYOP – ‘bring your own pen’ or FTF – ‘first to find’, which is a special honour for every Cacher. The access to the geocaches, as well as the use of the aforementioned apps is free of charge. An upgrade to the premium membership for a fee, gives participants coordinates of membership-caches, notifications about new caches, or additional search tools. Before starting to search for a geocache it is important to check some details like how to reach it, the container size (ranging from ‘nano’ to ‘XXL’), and the difficulty of the terrain. “Your GPS receiver usually will not lead you directly to the cache, and this is where your powers of observation come into play in locating the cache’s hiding place” (McNamara 2004, 9). Because of the adventurous nature of geocaching, it is advisable to consider these and other details in order to make it a safe experience. It has to be taken in account too, that the signal strength of the GPS-device, as well as the given satellite constellation may vary, and that there is the possibility of not finding the cache.

Figure 1 Screenshot of a logged Geocache (HubbaBubbas 2010 )

Traditional, multi, and mystery are just some names of the big variety of cache types. One container in a hidden place with a logbook or some exchanging items is a traditional cache. If there are more stages to visit before finding the last cache then it is an example of a multi cache. Some cache types are self-revealing and self-explanatory, like climbing caches, night caches, or underwater caches. Others are simply a sign of the enormous potential of Geocaching as a sport, a way

113

114

Michaela Kempter

to experience new places, and a chance to live out our inner-detective fantasies. Other websites like www.opencaching.de offer other types of caches and special Geocaching events too.

Environment By joining the Geocaching adventure, it is assumed that participants follow some ethics. For the one hiding or searching a cache, it is, for example, not allowed to put any food inside; furthermore, placing any dangerous items is also prohibited. Moreover, the caches are not to be placed on private grounds. As most caches are situated in positions all over the city or natural parks, it is a further rule to leave no trace behind when going on a trip to find or hide a cache. As Mike Dyer explains in his book, The Essential Guide to Geocaching (2004), there is a “possibility of damage to the environment” if many people go to the same place over and over again. “Therefore, we must take the lead on preserving the lands we visit and ensure that we have the least possible impact while enjoying our sport” (2004, 40). Another type of cache are the Cache-In Trash-Out (CITO) events organized as an initiative of Groundspeak Inc. Events of this type include picking up trash while searching for caches, or even planting trees along one route of caches.

History The first cache was hidden in May 2000 by Dave Ulmer in South Portland, America. In this year, the selective availability of the GPS was deactivated. To test its functionality, Dave Ulmer hid a large black bucket with some things inside. He posted the coordinates of the location on the Usenet newsgroup sci.geo.satellitenav. Shortly afterwards, the bucket was found. He modified the activity, coming up with the rule that an exchange item must be placed inside the bucket when something is taken out of it. Other people started hiding boxes, marking the beginning of Geocaching as we know it and as it is now played by people all over the world.

Potential After getting to know how Geocaching works, it opens up an opportunity to get to know familiar places in a new way, discover yet unknown areas, get children and adolescents who do not really like to walk in motion, and to spend exciting time together with friends and family. Geocaching can be done in familiar surroundings, as well as on vacation. The movement keeps the participants fit, whilst also offering many possibilities in youth work, such as personality development (cf. Bühne 2012) or in experiential education (cf. Reissauer 2012). It can also be an advantage

Alternate Reality (Games) Polliwog 2019

for school classes to learn about new topics when placing explicit content into the containers (cf. Größ 2012).

Actionbound With the Actionbound app for smartphones, rallies and scavenger hunts are easily and quite intuitively created. The content of the bounds can be used to create quiz questions, insert audio files, scan codes, ask for interesting photo tasks, and much more. Furthermore, already created ‘bounds’, rallies, are available and can be used. They have been created by institutions and individuals. It is recommended to create the bound on the computer and then use it on the phone. These bounds can be played offline, if downloaded before, as well as online. Actionbound is free of charge for private individuals, while a usage license must be paid by educational institutions and companies. The cost depends on the number of players.

Actionbound for Youth Work An example of how Actionbound can be used in youth work is shown by a project of the wienXtra media center, together with the park support of the city of Vienna. The aim of the park rally created with Actionbound is that young people who always go to the same park also get to know another park in the district in a playful way, with the secondary goal of acquainting different sets of young people with each other. Figure 2 Screenshot of creating a bound (Actionbound, n.d.)

115

116

Michaela Kempter

GPS-Drawing On the first sight drawing on maps with a GPS-device seems not to be a game. If taking into account Kramer’s criteria of a game (Kramer 2000): • • • • •

common experience equality freedom activity diving into the world of the game

GPS-Drawing does, however, meet the conditions of a game. Even if the drawing is made by one person only, there are single-player games. The common experience aspect in this case is the result of the drawing and sharing it with others. Equality is another criteria of a game meaning that everyone has the same chances to win it. In GPS-Drawing the winning aspect is not that pronounced, but it has definitely a strong aspect of challenge in walking, driving, or running the correct route. Moreover, the larger the drawing that is to be drawn, the more kilometers has to be done. All kinds of games are played out of free choice. So too is GPS-Drawing nothing one has to do, but a fun activity or a choice to bring some happiness to themselves and/or others. Activity is a very obvious criteria in GPS-Drawing. It is not at all passive, either in emotional, spiritual, or physical form, as one has to think about a drawing, plan the route, and then perform the actual drawing. The last of the criteria is diving into the world of the game which means an immersion into another world and leaving behind reality for some time. A GPS-Drawing or also called GPS-Doodle is a drawing produced by the traces left when walking, cycling, or driving a certain route with your GPS and recording these routes. It should be noted that these traces are just in digital form and have no impact on the real world.

Alternate Reality (Games) Polliwog 2019

Figure 3 Screenshot of a GPS-Doodle (GPS Doodles 2015 )

The technique of drawing with a GPS-device is possible through various ways. It can be done with a GPS-device or a smartphone with an app recording the trace of the route. After finishing the route, it can be looked at, for example on Google Maps, meaning that the file of the route has to be transferred to Google Maps.

Polliwog Conference In the practical part of the Polliwog conference about Alternate Reality Games, the participants received several exercises to partake in. First of all was creating their own GPS-Drawing in constellations of groups. As it was the international peace day, the task was to draw the peace symbol on the map of the university campus. Each group got a different route to follow. They received the coordinates of a starting point and an endpoint, which they had to insert into their GPS-device themselves. The traces were recorded using the app myTracks (2009) on the participants’ mobile phones. These routes were uploaded separately on Google Maps, so to see if the groups succeeded in drawing the peace symbol correctly. The results showed that it is not as easy as it may look and that very exact walking is necessary. The game aspect of the GPS-Doodle became visible when the players first had to create teams, when

117

118

Michaela Kempter

they realized the importance of following the rules, and the dependency of each group drawing in an exact way.

Figure 4 GPS-Doodle – peace sign on university Campus Krems (own image)

Later the participants received some input about how to create their own Alternate Reality Game and some advice to create one themselves. The essential questions advisable to ask before starting were discussed:

Alternate Reality (Games) Polliwog 2019

• • • • •

How many people will participate? How many groups will be formed? How long may the treasure hunt last? What topic may the treasure hunt have? What kind of material is available? How many resources?

After some preparation time they experienced the university building as a spaceship, slipped into the role of polliwogs, and created routes with quite advanced riddles and mechanisms. Finally, they went on an adventure to find their very first geocache in the vicinity of the campus and successfully managed to locate it.

References Actionbound. N.d. “Actionbound for Teachers.” Actionbound. Accessed May 21, 2020. https://en.actionbound.com/blog?setlang Bühne, Benjamin. 2012. Aktive Freizeitgestaltung und Persönlichkeitsentwicklung. Eine psycho-soziale Analyse am Beispiel von „Geocaching“ mit Jugendlichen. Hamburg: Diplomica. Dyer, Mike. 2004. The Essential Guide to Geocaching. Table Mountain/CO: Fulcrum Publishing. GPS Doodles. 2015. “Take a ride on the Dark Side.” GPS Doodles. Accessed May 21, 2020. https://gpsdoodles.com/2015/05/02/take-a-ride-on-the-dark-side/ Größ, Eva-Maria. 2012. Geocaching in der Schule: Eine Trendsportart im jahrgangsübergreifenden Projekt. Hamburg: Diplomica. HubbaBubbas. 2010. “Lobau Stars #17 - Savannah Bridge.” Geocaching. Accessed May 21, 2020. https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC2HAVH_lobau-stars17-savannah-bridge?guid=db55645e-855f-4c96-80af-f4acce8f40fc Kramer, Wolfgang. 2002. “What is a Game?” The Games Journal. Accessed April 17, 2020. http://www.thegamesjournal.com/articles/WhatIsaGame.shtml McNamara, Joel. 2004. Geocaching for Dummies. New Jersey and Indiana: Wiley. Reissauer, Anja. 2012. Geocaching in der Erlebnispädagogik. Die Konzeption von regionalen Geocachingangeboten im Rahmen erlebnispädagogischer Aktivitäten in Sachsen. Eine qualitative Studie anhand von Leitfadeninterviews. Master’s Thesis. Munich: GRIN. Wikipedia. 2020. “Location-based game.” Wikipedia. Accessed April 16, 2020. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Location-based_game

119

120

Michaela Kempter

Ludography Google. 2009. MyTracks. Google.

Mixed Reality | Society & Culture

An Introduction to Society & Culture Emir Bektic and Gerhard Pölsterl

Just as society and culture are tightly bound and often viewed together, so are videogames and mixed reality entering this sphere and becoming an integral part of it. Whilst the inception of the videogame industry had been viewed with a great deal of scepticism in many sociocultural circles, this doubt is steadily being replaced with a growing appreciation and under-standing of the potential the medium has. Mixed reality is the perfect meeting point where this apprehension is dealt with. Early videogames often lacked the sensitivity to be taken seriously in discussions of society and culture. At best, they were reactionary results of sociocultural events and at worst, an insensitive showcase of programming skills. The monumental steps that have been taken since then are attested to by this book, and the medium has garnered such importance that legal considerations are now a mainstay of the pre- and post-release of videogames. These considerations are analysed by Katharina Bisset, who takes an in-depth look at the ownership of digital goods, the copyright implications of videogames on streaming platforms, the line between playing and gambling, and other important legal questions of our time. Whilst games had been legitimized after a while by their technological and narrative advancements, as well as the annual revenue of the industry, they often lacked a steadier approach to furthering society and culture. However, as numerous instances can attest to, videogames can now be used to precisely target areas in need of sociocultural commentary, and one such example is René Reinhold Schallegger’s contribution which examines romance options in Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey (Ubisoft Quebec 2018) and shows a deeply flawed and problematic approach even in the face of a perceived progressive design method. As videogames continue to exert their importance as one of the pervasive media of the 21st century, important questions pertaining to modern culture and society, not least that of diversity, are more and more entering and becoming an essential part of every facet of videogames. However, grave issues in equal representation still arise, and Christina Obmann’s contribution presents these to the reader, recapitulating a number of problematic patterns of female representation and the im-

124

Emir Bektic and Gerhard Pölsterl

plications thereof, as well as theorizing on the links between developer background and gender portrayal in videogames. The importance of representation to players of videogames is visible in the consistency of appearance of this concept in the medium’s most prominent genres. Role Playing Games (RPGs) have taken point in this regard, with a number of (still often problematic) examples of systems of representation. One such system, that of Dragon Age: Inquisition (BioWare 2014) is examined by Armin Lippitz. He introduces the reader to the concept of avatar-sexuality and continues to analyse how romantic endeavours towards non-avatar-sexual characters are presented to players. Videogames have long been a playground for the implementation of and speculation on new ideas, set in any number of past, present, or future scenarios. As in important concept in today’s world, but also a future staple of society, artificial intelligence figures prominently and often in videogames, frequently in the form of augmented humanity or androids. The latter are at the center of Daniela Bruns’ analysis via Detroit: Become Human (Quantic Dream 2018), which she examines in the context of current primary-reality events. Videogames have undoubtedly become a medium capable of influencing humanity on a number of levels, as they continue to exert their influence to penetrate areas of society previously reserved for more long-standing media or practices. Sonja Gabriel takes a look at one such example, introducing the reader to the impact Pokémon GO (Niantic 2016) had on the non-player level, including insurance companies, religious groups and leaders, law makers and other areas of importance. The papers in this chapter will clearly demonstrate the wide spectrum of utility videogames can offer in conversations of society and culture. Ranging from the analysis of modern legal practices related to videogames, current issues and changes in representation and diversity in digital spaces, and a look at the influence and possibilities of change via games, the chapter will familiarize readers with the various ways in which the medium can contribute and further sociocultural discussions.

Players Unite Legally Katharina Bisset

Abstract: Virtual reality is not an anarchistic space. Laws apply here, too. When technical advancement races ahead and legislation struggles to keep up, lawyers, game-designers and players face new legal challenges. Who owns digital goods? Has the GDPR stopped online games in Europe for fear of fines? What are the copyright implications of Twitch, Walkthroughs and other player-generated content? What are the contractual problems regarding in-game- purchases? When do games become gambling? Keywords: gambling, legal issues, ownership, digital goods, copyright, youth protection   Katharina Bisset is a geek, lawyer, translator, and all-round creative. Early on in law school she focused on what inter-ested her most: the legal implications of technology. She’s been working in IT-, IP-, Media-, and Data Privacy Law since 2002, whilst never giving up her side passions, whether that’s podcasting, photography, publishing fiction, and writing the occasional line of code. With Nerds of Law, equally IT-minded lawyers are working on Legal-Tech in an effort to bring technology and lawyers together. In some moments of free time she writes on her disserta-tion about the Open Source Software License GPL. As As-sociate she advises clients in her areas of expertise, from software licensing contracts to privacy policies and, if nec-essary, representing them in court.

Introduction Virtual reality is not an anarchistic space. Laws apply here, too. When technical advancement races ahead and legislation struggles to keep up, lawyers, game-designers, and players face new legal challenges. Amongst those are questions like: Who owns digital goods? Has the GDPR stopped online games in Europe for fear of fines? What are the copyright implications of Twitch, Walkthroughs, and other player-generated content? What are the contractual problems regarding in-gamepurchases? When do games become gambling?

126

Katharina Bisset

Games touch many different legal fields and often put lawyers in front of problems due to their advanced and international nature. Sometimes it is even hard to figure out which law applies in any given situation. For this purpose, these questions are approached by an Austrian and EU-law point of view. Where underlying principles are the same or EU legislation evens out a lot of the questions, it should serve as a starting point in pinpointing issues and avoiding the biggest pitfalls.

Owning Digital Goods Sometimes a new armor is all that stands between you and finishing a game. In some cases, this armor costs actual money. Once this new armor is bought, maybe it does not give you the protection it claimed or maybe you want to sell it on. At this point the question arises if these digital goods are actual goods according to civil law, along with warranties and all, or if this “ownership” is nothing more than a license – a right to use the armor within the framework of the game for as long as you are playing it. First up, the answer might be in the contract. All games have terms of use, licenses or similar contracts which form the legal base for its use. When a physical copy of a game is bought, there is little doubt that you own that copy of the game. At the same time, it does not mean you can do anything you want with it, for example it will be illegal to copy it and sell those copies. In Austrian Civil law (§ 285 Civil Code), the definition of a ‘good’ is rather wide. It contains both physical goods as well as immaterial goods, such as digital ones. When immaterial goods are transferred, it is a transfer of rights rather than a transfer of the physical object (Helmich 2018, §285). When a digital good is bought within a game, the first question therefore is what rights the seller has in the object. Similar to the transferral of licenses in intellectual property law, the original rights need to be observed. For example, if the right to use an object within a game is limited for as long as you pay the monthly fee to use the game, the usage is restricted to this game. Some games allow trade or sales of objects, but only within the framework of the terms of the contract. In practice, transferral of a digital good will not be possible if the game provider does not allow it. The second step is to ask what rights or possibly claims go along with such a sale. When the rights to its use are limited by the game provider, there are still cases in which the object does not have the properties that the buyer expects. Looking closer into warranty claims, the first question is if the good was sold for money and if it has a flaw. It could be a property that the seller advertises, e.g. a certain boost in health. The remedies are in a first step rectifying the flaw or replacing the object. The latter only works within the framework of the game, in cases where a seller offers two objects and hands over the wrong one. In this case

Players Unite Legally

a replacement is possible. Flaws can, if at all, only be fixed by the game provider. If these two remedies do not work or are not possible, the buyer can demand a reduction in price or void the contract. The last two options will often be the most likely remedies. Of course, there are many exceptions, but it is possible to have a warranty claim. If the parties are on other sides of the world it might be hard to fight for your rights in front of a court and actually be able to execute the decision, but it is possible. Much like offline, it is crucial to be aware that contract law, civil law and much more is applicable to sales and there is no anarchistic void online or within games.

Privacy and Online Games It comes as no surprise that for many people GDPR (Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data: Directive 95/46/EC General Data Protection Regulation) was the anti-word of 2018; for many, even long after that. The use of personal data is now heavily regulated, with fines up to 20 million Euros or 4% of the yearly revenue. Some heavy fines have already been handed out, notably to big international companies that use data from EU citizens. For gaming companies, especially in online gaming, this means that very stringent data privacy laws have to be observed and implemented. Some smaller companies shut down their online stores because the implementation would have been too costly. The basis of data privacy is a system where the use (processing) of personal data is often illegal, unless there is a lawful basis for its use (Art 1 GDPR), and the basic principles of the GDPR – like data minimization (Art 5 GDPR), and a lot of documentation obligations – are observed. The most commonly used reasons for lawful processing are that it is necessary for the performance of a contract (Art 6 (1) (b) GDPR) e.g. using names and addresses to invoice) and consent of the data subject (Art 6 (1) (a) GDPR). In a strict purpose-bound system, each purpose needs to be judged in itself. Where processing exceeds what is necessary for a specific use, another reason for lawful processing must be found. For example, the e-mail address might be processed if the data subject uses it to log in to his online gaming account – this is part of and necessary for the provision of the service. To use this e-mail address to send advertisements would be another purpose and require another basis. These are not necessary to provide a service, and as a consequence, a consent of the data subject is often required. It does not just affect users; each visitor of a website is faced with seemingly countless cookie banners. Even though the current rules are in place since 2002 (ePrivacy regulation: Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the

127

128

Katharina Bisset

Council of 12 July 2002), only the CJEU’s (Court of Justice of the European Union) decision Planet49 (C-673/17, 1.10.2019) forced many to rethink their policies. In short, only cookies which are technically required for the use of the website do not require a consent. All others, especially statistics and marketing cookies require consent. This consent needs to be completely freely given – there is no space for “if you continue to use the website, you consent…”. For companies that offer free services and finance it through advertisement, these provisions can result in a heavy blow to their numbers and, as a consequence, their revenue. Lawful use is not the only question that a controller (the person processing the data) has to ask themself. There are wide information requirements for data subjects, where they need to be provided with information such as the purposes of use, which data is used, who else receives this information, and much more (Art 12 et seq. GDPR). The internal documentation requirements include records of processing activities (Art 30 GDPR), in some cases data protection impact assessments (Art 35 et seq. GDPR), strict contracts with sub-processors (third parties that also process the data, like IT providers) and processes how to deal with data subjects assessing their rights like deletion or information, as well as what to do in case of a data breach. As a result, data privacy regulations might deter international companies in providing their services in the EU, but it can also be an advantage because with data privacy often comes security and a better knowledge about their own business processes and the data a company uses. It is also a bonus for customers if data privacy laws are observed and, of course, possible to work well within the framework of the GDPR. With possible damages of up to 20 million Euros or 4% of the yearly revenue, tackling this subject should be a priority.

Walkthrough Copyright Most gamers have, at some point in their lives, used walkthroughs, along with pictures, in order to get over insurmountable obstacles. Millions watch others play games on Twitch. Both Screenshots and Videos contain images where the copyright holder is the company owning or publishing the game. It may also include the music, text, and much more. Like in most legal questions, the first step is to check the terms of the game. Game publishers, especially in eSport can have a big influence in competitions and championships. If a character is taken out of the game, a player is often powerless (Piska and Petschinka 2019, 63). When it comes to copyright law, the first question is, what is protected? The “work” in a copyright sense. The second step is to ask what rights does the copyright holder have and, as a consequence, what you can do.

Players Unite Legally

A work can be music, a picture, a video, text, and much more. In order to be protected by copyright, it needs to be manifested – an idea is not protected – and have a certain creativity. It does not mean it needs to be good or “art”, it means that, for example, a simple stick figure or a sentence “my house is yellow” is not protected. In practice, the limits are fluent. The rights of the copyright holder are to copy it, distribute it, modify it, sell it, publish it, and so on. They also have the right to be named as the copyright holder (e.g. author). The system of copyright law is one of exclusion. Once a work is copyright protected, the above-mentioned rights belong exclusively to the owner unless there is an exception in the law or you have a contractual right to use it (e.g. a license). When looking at videogames, there are multiple possibilities of a protected work. The software code behind the game is protected, the graphics as images are, as well as the videos within, and the soundtrack (Kulka 2013, 43). As a consequence, at first glance, taking a screenshot, or making a video of you playing a game could be a copyright violation of the designer or the game publisher. The Austrian copyright code (§ 41 et seq. Urheberrechtsgesetz [UrhG]) defines some situations, where free usage is allowed. First, a merely volatile copying, like a picture which had been saved in the cache, or one which is technically required. In practice, the most common free use is the “personal copy” (§ 42 UrhG). Even though it does not apply to computer programs (like the game itself), it can often apply to screenshots and videos. This free use requires a completely personal purpose. Copying for commercial reasons, e.g. sponsoring of a twitch channel, would not fall under this exception. Personal use also does not include the publishing of this work, copying it, or distributing it to others. Taking screenshots for yourself would be acceptable, publishing a walkthrough on a blog is not covered. A copy from an illegal “original” is also not covered by personal use – it is often the classical case of piracy (Zemann 2017, §42). The existence of Twitch channels, walkthroughs, and much more is also a big marketing advantage for the game publishers. Imagine a player would stop playing a game or leave a bad review because of a seemingly insurmountable level. Even though copyright is affected, these things often do not affect the commercial side like a pirated copy of a game would. Because it is often in the interest of the game publishers – the copyright holders – they give the players a certain leeway. Even if a personal copy is not possible, there are often contractual provisions and licenses for these practices. The consequences of copyright violations go from damages, costs of legal battles, to criminal charges in severe cases.

129

130

Katharina Bisset

Gaming or Gambling Gambling is a heavily regulated business in Europe. At the same time, there are often national differences where the precise question of whether something is gambling or not needs to be answered by the CJEU. In Austria, gambling is a monopoly with some exceptions (“small gambling”). Gambling is a game of luck (winning or losing depends on chance), where people play for money in order to win money (or something with monetary value) (Bayer and Novotny 2018, §1272). Many smaller games – like a raffle at a social event – are usually exempt. One might argue that online games are skill-based and only sometimes dependent on luck. Games are also often bought to be played, not to win something of monetary value. But what about loot boxes and similar mechanics? Something you can buy in a game where the content is defined by chance and the prize is of monetary value, you can even sell it (Schmitt and Steiner 2019, 395). There have been voices in the UK as well demanding loot boxes to be considered gambling (Hern and Davies 2019). There, much like in Austria, gaming means playing a game of chance for a prize (Harris and Alaeddini 2019). The CJEU ruled in its Santa Clara decision (C-42/07, 8. 9. 2009), that national rules to restrict gambling are, in general, not against the free provision of services which is one of the bases of the EU. At the same time, each time a new provider (mainly online) pops up that is legal in one country but not another, the latter tries to stop them offering their services in the more regulated market. The result is, usually, another round to obtain the opinion of the CJEU – legal national interests or excessive limitations of basic freedoms of the EU. Some even call national monopolies of gambling – especially online – as antiquated (Zankl 2010, 312). Much rather, gambling should be regulated EU-wide. This means in practice for an online game provider that targets more or all EU countries, regulations regarding gambling need to be observed, because national bodies might prohibit the game and either a long legal battle up to the CJEU will follow or the game has to be limited to some countries. A violation of gambling restrictions can result in a prohibition of a game, fines, and competition law claims from other game publishers.

Youth Protection When talking about games and laws, youth protection cannot be overlooked. In practice, categorizing games and filtering content is a difficult task. Even within Austria there are differences between the Austrian Federal States (Bundesländer),

Players Unite Legally

regarding the protection of youth (Piska and Petschinka 2019, 67). In order to make it easier to certify games, and for buyers to decide if something is appropriate, EU-wide methods of certification and categorization have been put in place. The PEGI – Pan European Game Information is a self-regulatory system that categorizes games by age: appropriate for all ages, 7+, 12+, 16+, and 18+, based on the EU’s definitions of youth protection. In addition to that, symbols show what kind of problematic areas might be found. This includes violence, gambling, vulgar language, drug usage, sex, and discrimination. In order to sell a game in Vienna, a PEGI classification is required. In Salzburg, the USK is obligatory. The USK – Unterhaltungssoftware Selbstkontrolle, is a German system which has age categories 0 (suitable for all ages), 6+, 12+, 16+, and 18+. It is also a voluntary self-regulatory system, where independent experts together with public officials of the relevant youth authorities test and categorize the games. Platforms that sell games like App-Stores have their own age restrictions which have a US view on youth protection and often rely on a self-certification of the game publisher. The IARC (International Age Rating Coalition), where USK and PEGI are members, focus on ratings on App-Stores (https://www.globalratings.com). The App-Stores using this system are the Google Play Store, the Microsoft Store, the Nintendo eShop, the Oculus Store and the PlayStation Store. Apple rates games according to their own system. In order to advise parents, children, teachers, and many more about gaming, there is the EU-wide BIK-Strategy of the European Union (the former Safer Internet network) which provides a wide array of information for game producers and gamers alike. In summary, youth protection is an important goal within the EU that is, unfortunately, not evenly regulated in all member states. In addition to that, the fact that a big part of the market – especially online – is either not regulated or relies on self-certification puts a lot of responsibility back into the hands of young gamers and their parents.

Summary Games, especially in an international context can have wide legal implications. There is often a lack of awareness of the legal implications, because many things that are legally questionable or even wrong are common use. Publishers of games deal with it by allowing some leeway for their users – e.g. screenshots for walkthroughs – because in practice it serves their purpose and the people playing their game, but it is not a given. On the other hand, game publishers who offer their games in Europe need to be aware of the legal restrictions – first and foremost data privacy and regulations on gambling. When it comes to youth protection, the

131

132

Katharina Bisset

distribution of a game within the EU might require multiple different certifications and legal frameworks. Legal pitfalls in games – both for publishers and gamers – cover a wide range of legal fields. In a professional capacity, whether as publisher, professional eSports player, or gaming influencer, a deeper knowledge of these risks is necessary. For everyone, a knowledge of where the pitfalls may lie and then going into the relevant issues can keep them from severe legal consequences.

References Apple. 2020. “App Store Review Guidelines.” Apple. Accessed April 22, 2020. https:// developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/#kids-category. Bayer, Andreas, and Georg Novotny. 2018. Zu § 1272 ABGB. In Kletecka and Schauer, ABGB-ON. Europa.eu. 2020. “Creating a Better Internet for Kids.” Europa.eu. Accessed April 22, 2020. https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/policies/betterinternet-kids. Harris, Julian and Bahar Alaeddini. 2019. “Gaming in the UK (England and Wales): overview.” Practical Law. Accessed April 22, 2020. https://uk. practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/6-634-9345?transitionType=Default &contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true&bhcp=1 Helmich, Elisabeth. 2018. Zu § 285 ABGB. In Kletecka and Schauer, ABGB-ON. Hern, Alex and Rob Davies. 2019. “Video game loot boxes should be classed as gambling, says Commons.” The Guardian. Accessed April 22, 2020. https:// www.theguardian.com/games/2019/sep/12/video-game-loot-boxes-shouldbe-classed-as-gambling-says-commons IARC. 2020. “International Age Rating Coalition.” Globalratings. Accessed April 22, 2020. https://www.globalratings.com. Kulka, Andreas. 2013. “E-Sport und Urheberrecht” In ecolex 1/96: 43-46. PEGI. 2020. “Pan European Game Information.” PEGI. Accessed April 22, 2020. https://pegi.info/. Piska, Christian M. and Patrick Petschinka. 2019, “eSport in Österreich: eine rechtliche Navigationshilfe.” In ZTR 2019, pp 63. Schmitt, Thomas Rainer and Erik Steiner. 2019. “Lootboxen: Glücksspiel in Computerspielen?” In: ecolex 5: pp 395. USK. 2020. “Unterhaltungssoftware Selbstkontrolle.” USK. Accessed April 22, 2020. https://usk.de. Zankl, Wolfgang. 2010. “Online-Gaming: Regulieren statt Monopolisieren” In ecolex 3: pp. 310. Zemann, Adolf. 2017. Zu § 42 UrhG, In Kuscko and Handig.

“As You Command” Male-Male Desire, Love, and Relationships in Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey René Reinhold Schallegger

Abstract: Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey (2018), designed by Ubisoft Québec, is the eleventh entry in Ubisoft’s highly successful Assassin’s Creed series (2007 – present). These videogames let players immerse into historical periods in a complex mise-en-abyme play experience as their contemporary avatars enter a virtual simulation of the genetic memories of their subjects. After a soft reboot with Assassin’s Creed: Origins (2017), Odyssey exhibits a radical shift in genre as the first fully-fledged Assassin’s Creed role-playing game. One of the major changes is a focus on interpersonal relationships and the addition of romance options. Odyssey gives players the choice between two avatars, the siblings Kassandra and Alexios, and makes all romanceable non-player characters avatar-sexual, so same-sex romances are seemingly presented in an optional but egalitarian manner. This fulfils stereotypical images of ancient Greek sexuality, as well as Greece’s reputation as the mother country of democracy. However, an investigation of male/male-relationships especially, using Michel Foucault’s, Colin Spencer’s, and Louis Crompton’s accounts of male same-sex desire, love, and sexuality in ancient Greek societies, and especially Thomas Laqueur’s concept of the one-sex model, reveals such a superficial reading to be untenable. A close analysis of male/male romance arcs in the game exposes hierarchical power relationships, as well as stereotypical attributions of sexual activity/passivity and (im-)potence that are established in relation to various performances of masculinity in Odyssey. The deeply inegalitarian and agonic understanding of male/male romantic and sexual relationships that emerges contradicts any progressive message Ubisoft claim to convey, instead implicitly reaffirming hegemonic masculinity to pander to heteronormative Gamer subculture. Keywords: Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey, ancient Greek sexuality, Gamer culture, interpersonal relationships, romance options, avatar-sexual, masculinity, same-sex romance, same-sex desire, male/male relationships, one-sex model, Michel Foucault, Colin Spencer, Louis Crompton, Thomas Laqueur René Reinhold Schallegger was trained in English and American Studies, as well as French, with focus on literary criticism and cultural studies at Alpen-Adria-

134

René Reinhold Schallegger

Universität Klagenfurt (Austria), and Anglia Ruskin University (Cambridge/UK). Currently, he is Associate Professor for British-, Canadian-, and Game Studies at Alpen-Adria-Universität wrote his post-doctoral thesis on “Choices and Consequences: Videogames, Virtual Ethics, and Cyber-Citizenship”. His most recent monograph is The Postmodern Joy of Role-Playing Games: Agency, Ritual, and Meaning in the Medium.

The Mixed Reality of Odyssey Videogames must be considered artefacts of mixed realities transcending the mere aspects of their ontology as objects. Johan Huizinga (1950) and Roger Caillois (1961), often considered founding voices of the discipline of game studies, already discussed their ambiguous state as social contracts both inhabiting a space separated from primary, shared reality by the now famous ‘magic circle’ (frequently misunderstood as hermetic barrier) and at the same time interconnecting embodied players deeply rooted in it. For Juul (2005), they exhibit a duality as what he terms ‘halfreal’ objects, where real (but immaterial) rules govern the behavior and imagination of real (and material) players and their creation of and interaction with unreal (and immaterial) fictional worlds. More recently, Tynan Sylvester (2013) focuses his attention on experience, and thus the player and their affective interrelation with the gameworlds they participate in, when he argues for an understanding of games as (conceptual, objective) engines of experience that are driven and empowered by the primacy of (embodied, subjective) emotion. So, when designers not only integrate elements of desire, romance, and relationships, with their inherently ‘messy’ humanity, into their games, but do so tapping into a very specific historical and cultural discourse, the mixed realities of games reach out deeply into additional layers of reality, such as historiography, politics, and current, post-industrial logics of production and marketing. Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey is a third-person stealth action-roleplaying game (RPG), designed by Ubisoft Québec and published by Ubisoft in October 2018. It is the eleventh game in Ubisoft’s highly successful Assassin’s Creed franchise, started with the eponymous action adventure in 2007. After a soft reboot of the series with Assassin’s Creed: Origins (2017), set in Ptolemaic Egypt, Odyssey is the first game to fully move away from the franchise’s genre roots by extensively introducing RPG mechanics and structures such as character development, plot-altering dialogue choices, inventory management, or item crafting. Odyssey must therefore be considered to be the first fully-fledged Assassin’s Creed RPG. Already before the game was released, Ubisoft emphasised the increased importance of player choice resulting from that shift in their Power of Choice Trailer (Ubisoft North America 2018). One of the major changes is a new focus on interpersonal relationships, the intro-

Male-Male Desire, Love, and Relationships in Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey

duction of romance options, and player agency in romantic choices, turned into a staple of the action-RPG genre by studios such as Bioware (Mass Effect, 2007 – 2017, and Dragon Age, 2009 – 2014), CDProjekt RED (The Witcher, 2007 – 2015), or Spiders (The Technomancer, 2016, and Greedfall, 2019). In the Assassin’s Creed universe, two ideological factions fight for control of the Pieces of Eden, technological remnants of a precursor civilization, the Isu, who also created humanity in their own – physically reduced – image. The Templars on the one hand champion strict order, control, and obedience, the Assassins on the other promote chaos, choice, and free will. The player avatar is an Assassin using a highly advanced technological interface, the Animus, to access the genetic memories of their ancestors in order to localize and retrieve Pieces of Eden. Players thus immerse into virtually recreated historical periods in a complex mise-en-abyme experience, as their contemporary virtual avatar uses an intradiegetic device to themselves enter a virtual simulation of the second degree through an ancestral avatar as part of a hidden war over human civilization.

Ancient Greek Models of Gender, Desire, and Sexuality Odyssey’s setting is a fictionalized version of the Peloponnesian War between Sparta and Athens in 431 BCE. The player avatar is a grandchild of King Leonidas of Sparta; in the canon (i.e. the novelization) that is his granddaughter Kassandra, but the player can also choose to play her brother, Alexios. The siblings are Spartans, which is an important element in their design. Kassandra for example can be seen to overcompensate for her violation of Spartan tradition (being a fighting woman) with her hypermasculine behavior. All non-player characters (NPCs) can be romanced by both siblings equally, and she continually performs a femininity that is even more masculine than her brother’s performed masculinity in the respective scenes. This relates to Thomas Laqueur’s idea of how “the one-sex/one-flesh model dominated thinking about sexual difference from classical antiquity to the end of the seventeenth century” (1990, 25). The ancient Greeks, he claims, perceived all bodies as male, classified in “a hierarchy of heat and perfection” (1990, 27); female bodies thus become only ‘less perfect’ versions of the ideal male body where “unexpressed organs […] are signs of the absence of heat and consequently of perfection” (28). Aristotle directly derived the notions of both male activity and female passivity from these precepts (Laqueur 1990, 31). ‘Imperfect’ female bodies thus anatomically naturalise socially and culturally established power relationships, and Kassandra overcompensates the ‘lacking’ masculinity of her body with her hypermasculine behavior. Alexios’s masculinity, in contrast, is much more differentiated. Even if the player decides to develop him into a pure Warrior, alternative classes that can all be intermingled being Hunter and Assassin, his lean and sinewy but at the same

135

136

René Reinhold Schallegger

time hairy and muscular body image, as well as his vulnerable and caring dialogue options create a multi-facetted performance of masculinity. Unlike in BioWare games, romances in Odyssey are all utterly inconsequential to the main plot. After you complete their narrative romance arcs, NPCs go back to a neutral state, and there is no lasting impact of the player’s romantic or sexual choices on the game world whatsoever. Especially most male/male (m/m) relationships are deeply puerile and stereotypical in their representational regimes, and before any sexual acts can happen, videos immediately cut to black to avoid any depiction or player experience of m/m intimacy. This is in radical opposition to ancient Greek practices where m/m bonding and sexuality was inherently about learning, about “the transmission of a precious knowledge from one body to another”, according to Foucault (1978, 61). In Hellenic societies, sexual behavior was also not categorized by strict and irreconcilable binaries: “The Greeks did not see love for one’s own sex and love for the other sex as opposites, as two exclusive choices, two radically different types of behavior” (Foucault 1978, 187). Historically, Greek m/m sexuality was negotiated through the traditional system of pederasty, love between adult males and their young male objects of affection (Foucault 1985, 230). The complex sexual politics of Greek societies however necessitated strict rulesets where “customs, courtship practices, and regulated games of love” aimed to contain any personal and interpersonal fallout of such relationships (1985, 232). The Platonic ideal of this love was non-physical, Foucault explains, following “a conception of eros and its pleasures that would have friendship itself as the goal” (1985, 234), not the vain and/or self-serving satisfaction of desire. Sparta is explicitly named by the author as an example society where pederasty was a prevailing and socially accepted practice (ibid.). Additionally, Foucault points out other forms of m/m love and desire in Greek antiquity that did not necessarily conform to this strict schema, emphasizing that these alternatives were not frowned upon, or even regarded as unseemly. Sexual and emotional relationships between adolescent boys, for example, were “deemed completely natural and in keeping with their condition” (1985, 194), a normal part of their development towards fully formed sexual and emotional beings. He goes on to explain that “abiding love between two men who were well past adolescence” was also an acknowledged reality in Greek societies (1985, 194), but at the same time sexual passivity in adult men was frowned upon, so m/m relationships could become “an object of criticism and irony” by targeting the (suspected) passive partners (ibid.). And yet, Foucault reminds us, “they did not belong to the domain of active and intense problematization”, let alone persecution (1985, 195). Louis Crompton posits that Spartans “developed their own form of institutionalized man-boy love under Cretan influence” (2003, 7), and lawgivers there encouraged m/m sexual activity and desire openly, but unlike in the Athenian context, here the ‘manliness’ of a boy, not his beauty, made him desirable (ibid.). Mentor-

Male-Male Desire, Love, and Relationships in Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey

ship was most likely the main focus of these relationships, even though the absence of any laws regulating sexual behavior in them made Xenophon doubt the publicly pronounced claims of chastity: Athenians for example used “to laconize” to mean “to sodomize” (Crompton 2003, 8). Besides this mentoring function, Crompton describes how m/m love in Greek societies was used “to forge bonds between promising youths and conservative mentors” in aristocracies, “as insurance against tyranny” in democracies, and above all “the major source of its prestige remained […] its contribution to military morale”, such as in the Sacred Band of Thebes (2003, 69). Colin Spencer identifies a whole network of Indo-European myths that refer to, or even openly display m/m desire and affection: Even hypermasculine characters such as Zeus or Heracles engaged in these couplings, while Apollo was infamous for “constantly stealing beautiful youths” (1995, 26). Women had no role to play in these relationships, according to Spencer, “for they ha[d] been taught that this is how boys become men” (1995, 27). The author also notes the utter absence of stigma inherent to m/m relationships in ancient times: Up to and after the Renaissance […] bisexuality in social terms was thoroughly acceptable. But gradually, as the world neared 1700, a radical change took place; the idea crept in that all men who enjoyed same-sex experiences were both effeminate and criminal, and a homophobic society was born. (Spencer 2003, 10–11) In stark contrast to these historical practices, representations of m/m love and desire in Odyssey are mostly superficial, immature and sometimes clearly offensive. This seems to pander to the normalized and internalized homophobia witnessed in much of Gamer culture, fueled by the potentially toxic masculinity of a closed-off sub-culture of young, white, cis-male players. Altogether, there are only five male romance options in the main game, as opposed to nine female ones, already setting up a clear bias in expected player/avatar behavior. The most extensive option is the “Hearts of War” quest line with Thaletas, a Spartan military leader sent to Delos to help the female rebel leader Kyra with her insurrection against Athens. Even though he is in a committed relationship with Kyra when Alexios meets him, Thaletas ardently wants to fight Alexios, constantly using blunt sexual innuendo in his expressions like “hand to hand, flesh to flesh, bone to bone” while doing so (Schallegger 2019c). Once he is bested in combat, he submits willingly to Alexios’s romantic and sexual advances with the words: “Are you going to just stand there, or are you going to finish me off?” (Schallegger 2019d). However, irrespective of any choices the player has made earlier, after consummating their relationship sexually, Thaletas immediately goes back to Kyra, who openly and in a public meeting expresses her joy that Alexios “taught him a thing or two” (Schallegger 2019e). What is shown here is that m/m desire must be sublimated

137

138

René Reinhold Schallegger

into and reduced to violence and dominance, communicating that it is acceptable for men to hurt and control, but not to love and cherish each other. While Thaletas is at least constructed as Alexios’s equal in terms of agency and masculinity, all other available m/m options in the main game are represented as significantly less masculine than Alexios. Alkibiades, a historical personality and student of Socrates, was a politician and general who sided with his native Athens, Sparta, and even Persia during the war. Instead of the unconventional but accomplished strategist of the historical records, here we only find the effeminate and outrageous catamite who fulfils all negative stereotypes frequently held against him as a vain, hedonistic sex addict who even has sexual relations with goats several times during the game. One of his quests, “Rock Hard”, is for Alexios to find a ‘sentimental item’ that turns out to be a massive olisbos, a dildo, which he then offers to use on Alexios as a reward once retrieved. This is the only clear indication of a passive, sexually receptive Alexios in the game, but it is merely played for comic relief and not represented in serious manner, thus reproducing the culturally deeply ingrained prejudice against sexually receptive men as freaks and laughingstock. Kosta, a fictitious NPC encountered during the quest “Family Values”, is a similar case. Supideo, a young man, has locked himself in a cage to protect his parents from a prophecy given to him by the pythia that he would bring death to his mother and make his father scream. He sends Alexios to Kosta, a bearded and burly smith with a hyper-effeminate personality, to fetch a sword. As payment, Kosta requires Alexios to collect some herbs to overcome his impotence. Once this ailment is taken care of, Kosta unrelentingly offers his body to Alexios, expressing his desire to be penetrated, which the player can assent to. Again, Kosta’s desire is only played for laughs here, both by his hyperbolic representation – hypermasculine body and hyperfeminine personality, but also when the entire quest line turns out to be an ‘inverted’ Oedipus narrative (pun intended), given away by Supideo’s name: ‘Supideo’ is ‘Oedipus’ in reverse. Kosta is Supideo’s biological father, and during his endeavors, Alexios has to kill a woman who is revealed to be the young man’s biological mother. Thus, the player avatar kills Supideo’s mother and penetrates his father sexually, the screams from the pythia’s prophecy being screams of passion. To a lesser degree than Alkibiades and Kosta, who are both twisted into caricatures of sexually receptive men, the romance with Mikkos exhibits similar issues. He is a trainer of young athletes with a distinct lack of personality who shows a clearly submissive behavior towards the player avatar already in their very first meeting. Mikkos is represented as desperate for Alexios’s affection, and in order to satisfy him sexually, he engages in drunken orgies where he takes the passive role, fully submitting to the sexual phantasies the player can articulate for Alexios. Any choice the player makes is confirmed by Mikkos with: “Perfect, I was thinking the same” (Schallegger 2019b). In a post-coital sequence, Mikkos’s ‘lack’ of masculinity is emphasized when he is portrayed as unable to keep up with Alexios’s sexual ap-

Male-Male Desire, Love, and Relationships in Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey

petites. In his despair not to lose the object of his affection (or rather obsession), he offers: “I could just lie here” (Schallegger 2019b). Nevertheless, Alexios leaves him behind to continue his adventures elsewhere. In the final sequence of their romance arc, it is then clearly Alexios’s sexual agency that dominates their relationship when he describes exactly what he wants Mikkos to do, and the response he gets is a codependent: “As you command” (Schallegger 2019a). The least problematic m/m romance out of the five certainly is the healer Lykaon in Delphi. When Alexios first meets him, he asks the player avatar to bring him mandrake as a pain killer. Later, however, it turns out that he needs it to kill his grandmother Praxithea who, as a pythia, instead of real prophecies from Apollo only communicated the false political messages a group of conspirators wanted to be spread. Lykaon, the last male heir of his family, feels it is his duty to personally kill Praxithea to re-establish family honor, even though as a healer he is bound by an ethos to preserve and save lives, not to take them. From the very beginning, Lykaon communicates his romantic and sexual interest in Alexios in a more complex and differentiated manner, in comparison to Alkibiades or Mikkos. Unlike the comedy with them or the contained macho fantasy with Thaletas, this romance arc ends on a fulfilling and genuinely caring note on both sides, even if it drifts off into the direction of cheap romance novels when Alexios is stated to have “healed the healer” (woolftooth 2018). All of the five m/m romance options mentioned so far are ‘less manly men’ in comparison to Alexios: four of them because of their inherent physical and/or performative ‘lack’ of masculinity, and Thaletas because he must be violently beaten and physically overcome before he becomes available. None of them is Alexios’s equal, nor are their relationship dynamics balanced. There is always a clear power imbalance, and the agonic, confrontational element is strong. The Greek one-sex model also has a strong impact on the representational regime, resonating with stereotypical conceptions in heteronormative patriarchal societies. Less ‘perfect’ men are shown to be more feminine in both body and behavior, even Lykaon who mostly performs a normative masculinity but whose prettiness (in contrast to Alexios’s handsomeness) and caretaking profession clearly signal his preferred sexual role. A major scandal was triggered after the release of the main game by the Legacy of the First Blade DLC (2018–2019). No matter the gender performances or sexual behaviors players gave their avatars, they were forced by the plot to have a child with a partner of the opposite sex. The compulsory heterosexual coupling, childbirth, and overly idyllic heteronormative family life on display created a storm of player outrage because they violated promises made early on in the development process that players could create their avatar’s sexual identity through their choices. In reaction and to appease the audiences, small changes were made in how the DLC plays out. A trophy that unlocks after having the child was renamed from

139

140

René Reinhold Schallegger

‘Growing Up’, implying that same-sex relationships and those that do not produce children are inherently immature, to ‘Blood of Leonidas’. Furthermore, new dialogue options were added that let your avatar express that the child, which is still unavoidable because it is necessary for the plot, happens only to pass on the genes of Leonidas, not out of love or desire. Where that leaves the father or mother of your child emotionally, being de facto reduced to a breeding animal, unfortunately remains unexplored. The subsequent Fate of Atlantis DLC (2019) adds Adonis as a m/m romance option, and for the first time the relationship here is between equals. Adonis is not only a paragon of male physical beauty (which he is known for) who performs a conventional, self-confident masculinity, he is also an assertive political leader, an accomplished warrior and astute general, befitting for a character of divine origin himself. When Alexios meets him, he is busily organizing a rebellion against Persephone who holds him prisoner in Elysium because she desires him, but he continues to refuse her advances out of love for Aphrodite. Adonis performs a very casual masculinity, sometimes bordering on haughtiness, but there are also clear indications in dialogues early on that he is not only interested in returning to Aphrodite. Unlike all of the m/m romances in the main game that are linear and easily accomplished, here the player must very carefully consider Adonis’s personality, his intentions, and the shifting political situation in Elysium if they want Adonis’s consent to a romantic and sexual engagement. Unfortunately, it does not end well either way: If Alexios fails in his libidinal pursuit of Adonis, he will hand him over to a vengeful Persephone; if he succeeds, she will disfigure Adonis and throw Alexios into Tartaros. A man such as Adonis must not be available to Alexios for a relationship after all, it seems.

Pandering to ‘The Gamer’ What we see emerging here is a perpetuation of and pandering to the constructed videogame audience of the young, white, cis-male, straight Gamer Adrienne Shaw is so critical of (cf. Shaw 2014). Additional evidence was clearly provided when after the introduction of the Story Creator Mode, a web interface where players can design their own quests and questlines, one of the first player-created stories was called “Kill the gay guy”: it represents Alkibiades as an obnoxious, sex-crazed ‘faggot’, resulting in the mission statement: “Slaughter Alkibiades”. Also, while Odyssey gives players the choice between two avatars of opposite sexes, it makes all of its romanceable NPCs avatar-sexual, i.e. they lack any sexual behavior or identity of their own and conform to avatar desire as performed interactively by player choice. Superficially, same-sex romances are thus presented in an egalitarian manner, as an artefact of popular mass culture, also termed “the culture of hyperdemocracy”

Male-Male Desire, Love, and Relationships in Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey

by John Storey (2003, 24). This seemingly fulfils both the stereotypical popular image of ancient Greek sexuality, as well as Greece’s reputation as the mother country of democracy. However, using Foucault’s, Spencer’s, and Crompton’s accounts of m/m desire in ancient Greek societies, and especially Thomas Laqueur’s concept of the onesex model, a different critical assessment of the game becomes necessary. Hierarchical power relationships are in Odyssey inherently connected to performances of masculinity (cf. Butler 1990), as well as exclusive, binary notions of sexual activity or passivity. ‘Impotent’ males, in both meanings of the expression, are – with the notable exception of Lykaon – reduced to a laughingstock. What emerges from a close reading here is a stereotypical, deeply inegalitarian, and agonic understanding of m/m desire and relationships that ironically reaffirms Raewyn Connell’s (1995) hegemonic masculinity, undermining any progressive message Ubisoft was hoping to convey by including m/m options. The recent controversy about God of War (2018) highlights the pervasiveness of these problems in the videogame industry. A tweet to support pride month by David Jaffe, creative director of God of War (2005) and creator of the series’ main character Kratos, also a Spartan, claiming that his hero was conceived as “a raging bisexual” (Jaffe 2019), triggered a considerable internet backlash and eventually led to Jaffe taking it back as a hoax. The industry is still very much hesitant to provide complex representations of gender and sexuality, supposedly playing it ‘safe’ for financial reasons, and thus reproducing and perpetuating the projected expectations of their constructed target audience: ‘the Gamers’. However, especially in a videogame series such as Assassin’s Creed, claiming to recreate historical periods with a high degree of detail and accuracy, the notion of mixed reality becomes not only a political but also an epistemological problem, since the ‘knowledge’ created by collateral learning, considered one of the major advantages of videogame play by Steven Johnson (2005), is unreliable at best here. The complexities of m/m desire, love, and relationships in Greek cultures and societies are not represented adequately in Odyssey at all. Rather, the designers of this pseudo-historical virtual environment carefully selected historical elements, but then assembled them to serve a very contemporary political and, above all, economic agenda: pandering to the supposed majority ‘Gamer’ audience to maximize industry profits – “As You Command”. Given the historical and cultural source material, the potential for the specific mixed reality of Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey to make a significant contribution to the direly needed normalization and acceptance of the diversity of performances of gender and sexuality in human societies is there. Unfortunately, it is wasted due to the pragmatic, single-minded industry realities of profit-maximization and socio-political cowardice.

141

142

René Reinhold Schallegger

References Butler, Judith. (1990) 2007. Gender Trouble. New York/NY and London/Engl.: Routledge. Caillois, Roger. 1961 (2001). Man, Play and Games. Urbana/IL and Chicago/IL: University of Illinois Press. Connell, Raewyn. (1995) 2016. Masculinities. Cambridge/Engl.: Polity Press. Crompton, Louis. (2003) 2006. Homosexuality and Civilization. Cambridge/MA and London/Engl.: Belknap Press/Harvard University Press. Foucault, Michel. (1978) 1990. The History of Sexuality – Volume 1: An Introduction. New York/NY: Vintage Books. Foucault, Michel. (1985) 1990. The History of Sexuality – Volume 2: The Use of Pleasure. New York/NY: Vintage Books. Huizinga, Johan. (1950) 1971. Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Element in Culture. Boston/MA: Beacon Press. Jaffe, David Scott. 2019. “Oh, and one more thing”. Twitter. Accessed April 6, 2019. https://twitter.com/davidscottjaffe/status/1135753779070943232. Johnson, Steven. (2005) 2006. Everything Bad is Good for You: How Popular Culture Is Making Us Smarter. London/Engl., New York/NY, et al.: Penguin Books. Juul, Jesper. (2005) 2011. Half-Real: Video Games between Real Rules and Fictional Worlds. Cambridge/MA and London/Engl.: MIT Press. Laqueur, Thomas. (1990) 1999. Making Sex: Body and Gender from the Greeks to Freud. Cambridge/MA: Harvard University Press. Schallegger, René. 2019a. “Assassin’s Creed® Odyssey_As You Command”. Youtube. Accessed April 6, 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Al-QMiwvuwc. Schallegger, René. 2019b. “Assassin’s Creed® Odyssey_Orgy with Mikkos”. Youtube. Accessed April 6, 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2JUc21cM6k. Schallegger, René. 2019c. “Assassin’s Creed® Odyssey - Thaletas 1”. Youtube. Accessed April 6, 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MI-_4ciCLg. Schallegger, René. 2019d. “Assassin’s Creed® Odyssey - Thaletas 2”. Youtube. Accessed April 6, 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NugBOm0KDQ. Schallegger, René. 2019e. “Assassin’s Creed® Odyssey - Thaletas 3”. Youtube. Accessed April 6, 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKfBJvd1zeU. Shaw, Adrienne. 2014. Gaming at the Edge: Sexuality and Gender at the Margins of Gamer Culture. Minneapolis/MN and London/Engl.: University of Minnesota Press. Spencer, Colin. (1995) 1996. Homosexuality: A History. London/Engl.: Fourth Estate. Storey, John. (2003) 2008. Inventing Popular Culture. Malden/MA, Oxford/Engl., et al.: Blackwell. Sylvester, Tynan. 2013. Designing Games: A Guide to Engineering Experiences. Sebastopol/CA: O’Reilly.

Male-Male Desire, Love, and Relationships in Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey

Ubisoft North America. 2018. “Assassin’s Creed Odyssey: Power of Choice Trailer | Ubisoft [NA]”. Youtube. Accessed April 6, 2019. https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=H23mk3Zgtpk. woolftooth. 2018. “Assassin’s Creed Odyssey - All Alexios and Lykaon Romance Scene”. Youtube. Accessed April 6, 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aR_ iPwu1PuY.

Ludography SCE Santa Monica Studio. 2005. God of War. Sony Computer Entertainment/Capcom. Ubisoft Montréal. 2017. Assassin’s Creed: Origins. Ubisoft. Ubisoft Québec. 2018. Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey. Ubisoft.

143

Gender Portrayals in Videogames A Reflection of Production Contexts? Christina Obmann

Abstract: While it is still not uncommon to view the content of videogames as isolated entity (cue ‘It’s just a game’), videogames are products of specific circumstances and they also affect players in various ways. If we consider videogames to be cultural objects and view them through the lens of Cultural Studies, it becomes clear that in order to understand them in their entirety we need to consider the socio-cultural and industrial context surrounding and giving birth to them. The production context of videogames has been – and still is – overwhelmingly male-dominated, with a lack of diversity that is then reflected in the games’ nature and content. Especially the representation of gender has long been a problematic issue: From a sheer lack of representation and marginalization, up to stereotypical or even demeaning portrayals of women in games, distinct patterns of gender portrayals have been observed continually. In this paper, I want to recapitulate patterns of female representation and the implications thereof and suggest a way of content analysis to fully capture the specifics of the medium. I will highlight the connection between production circumstances in real life and the (virtual) content of videogames. With an exemplary analysis of female player characters in games by the French studio Quantic Dream I want to support my argument that the background of developers influences the portrayal of gender in – for female characters – often stereotypical if not harming ways. Keywords: content analysis, gender, gender stereotyping, production context, representation, videogames   Christina Obmann has completed her bachelor’s degrees in English and American Studies (thesis on the portrayal of chattel slavery in videogames, specifically in Assassin’s Creed IV Black Flag: Freedom Cry) as well as Media and Communication Studies (thesis on the ‘zombie’ and the The Walking Dead-franchise as serialized transmedia experiences) at the Alpen-Adria Universität Klagenfurt. Currently, she is working on completing her master’s degrees in English as well as Game Studies and Engineering in Klagenfurt, while also being engaged as a student assistant at the Department of English and the Department of Science, Technology and Society Studies. As a tutor, she is co-hosting the Klagenfurt Critical Game Labs, where she

146

Christina Obmann

helps fellow students practice critical game analysis. With an academic background of Cultural, Media and Gender Studies, her research interests in Game Studies include issues of gender and race, ethics, as well as affective game design. When she is not playing, learning, writing, teaching, or talking about games, she is also an avid creator of cosplays, comics, and illustrations.

Introduction When it comes to videogames, it often seems as if there were only two opposing opinions in public debate. One would be that videogames inevitably turn players into violent shooters, as often stated by rather uninvolved politicians or certain news media; while the other is the (un-reflected) knee-jerk response to critique often voiced by avid ‘gamers’ themselves claiming that contents have no relevance for real life since ‘it’s just a game’. Both assertions are very dangerous: neither are games the sole culprit for tragic assaults and mass shootings, categorically causing stimulus-response reactions; nor are they irrelevant and disconnected from the reality of players. Rather, games affect us in various meaningful and complex ways – otherwise they never would have gained the popularity they have, or cause reactions such as the ones mentioned. While terms such as virtual reality may lead to the belief that there are separate ‘realities’ that players interact with and move within, games are very much situated in one actual reality, simply by the fact that they are creations of real people who were able to exert their impact directly on the nature of these games, and further by the fact that they are played by real people who in turn are affected by their experience (cf. Bartle 2004, 671). Between these two actors then – the producers and the audiences, the game developers and the players – there is the videogame itself. A meaningful cultural product that allows us more insight, an entry point to the culture it was created in. In my analysis, I am relying on the traditions of Cultural Studies, which highlight the contextualisation of culture and aim at examining and exposing (oppressive) power structures that influence cultural practices (cf. Sardar and Van Loon 2005, 9), e.g. regarding aspects of race, class, gender or other markers of identity. If we want to consider videogames as cultural artifacts, and if we want to make meaningful statements over the portrayal of gender in games, it is important then to consider the “socio-cultural and industrial” context that they evolved from (Fernández-Vara 2015, 56). This includes the people involved in production, but also the audiences that games have been produced for.

Gender Portayals in Videogames: A Reflection of Production Contexts?

Who Makes Games (and For Whom)? Since videogames – in the context of mainstream AAA productions – are usually a product of a collective team effort of often hundreds of people, a definition of authorship is not easy to make. However, taking a closer look at the history and concrete demographics of the games industry overall should give us a better picture of the creators. It will also make it clearer why it is essential to engage with the production context when it comes to issues of gender. According to Dovey and Kennedy’s (2006) treatment of game cultures, videogames are a product of the “military/industrial/capitalist complex”, stemming from a highly male-connoted context of science, technology, and the military (36). Videogames are thus inherently male-coded, a coding that is then in turn reflected in the content and design of games. Even today there is an evident lack of diversity on the side of production. According to a survey by the International Game Developers Association conducted throughout 2017, that primarily included respondents from Western countries of North America and Europe, only about 20 percent of the people involved in game development identify as female (IGDA 2018, 11). The ‘typical’ employee would then be a white, cis-male, heterosexual and able-bodied man, most likely employed in programming or game design (20). This underrepresentation becomes all the more serious when further considering that women are primarily employed in non-technical, business-oriented or administrative support areas such as human resources, sales and marketing, legal or business management, and are thus even less often in direct contact with the design and development of games (IGDA 2016, 13; Hahn 2017, 113; Ukie 2018, 46). This “occupational segregation” (IGDA 2016, 38) and a general underrepresentation of women then accounts for little to no influence of female workers on the actual content or direction of games as they are being developed. As a consequence, we can assume a rather homogenous body of developers that can create and develop game content according to personal preferences. Apart from the societal interests, values and norms, as well as individual needs of game developers that are being expressed and reflected in games (Hahn 2017, 35), a market-oriented development of games naturally influences their design and representational aspects as well (Fernández-Varra 2015, 78). So for whom are these games made? Looking at player demographics, it is now clear that the background of players is much more diverse than the cliché of the white teenage boy would lead on. Especially gender-wise the audience is parted almost equally in numbers, for example in Germany with female players amounting to 48% (game 2019). However, much more determining than these actual audiences is a constructed or preferred audience that still dominates development and marketing logic. Similar to their own backgrounds, developers seem to cater to the perceived needs of a constructed audience of young white cis-male (hardcore) ‘gamers’ that are seen to be at the core

147

148

Christina Obmann

of the game scene (cf. Shaw 2013). This orientation of course also influences the kinds of games and the representation in them that are made available. As games are predominantly made by men for men, it can well be said that both the ends of production and consumption are controlled (or at least dominated) by the male gender (Egenfeldt-Nielsen et al 2008, 161).

The Portrayal of Women in Videogames If production is dominated so much by one gender – then what impact does that have on portrayals and roles of gender in games? Luckily, aspects of gender are nowhere near being a neglected research field within the multidisciplinary game studies, so there is a large body of scientific research and analysis on gender and games. Broadly, we can distinguish between two kinds of academic research in that area: the representation of female characters in games on the one hand, which is mostly being viewed from the perspective of cultural or literary studies (and thus highly critical); and female players as research object on the other hand, which is mostly done with methods of sociology or ethnography (Egenfeldt-Nielsen 2008, 162). For example, the behaviour and preferences of female players in comparison to male players have already been analysed (cf. Cassell and Jenkins 2000; Graner Ray 2004; Krause 2011), but also the specific difficulties for women within the games industry as working place have been a focal point (cf. Ganguin and Hoblitz 2014). For the analysis of female characters in games, then, two different aspects can be considered. Either the quantity or frequency of representation (i.e., how many female characters are there in games, in comparison to male ones?), or the quality of representation (i.e., how exactly are female characters represented?). For the latter it has most often been the (physical) portrayal in the sense of a hyper-sexualization of women, but also roles and stereotypes of female (player) characters that have been observed. With regards to the mere frequency of appearance, what strikes attention in most surveys is the sheer absence of female characters of any kind. A study of 2009, for example, detected a “systematic under-representation” of women and other marginalized groups in comparison to the actual demographics of population (Williams et al 2009, 815). The difference in the cases examined amounted to 85% male and 15% female characters, with a further tendency for females to be in secondary or supporting roles – if they appeared at all (824). Even in 2019 this has hardly changed: the non-profit organisation Feminist Frequency has found that the percentage of games with player characters, i.e., avatars, that are female by default has stagnated for years (Petit and Sarkeesian 2019). An analysis of all games introduced at this year’s E3 (i.e., the Electronic Entertainment Expo, globally one of the most important conventions of the industry) has shown that only about 5% of

Gender Portayals in Videogames: A Reflection of Production Contexts?

games can boast female protagonists exclusively (Petit and Sarkeesian 2019). It has to be minded that the majority of these games at least have the option of choosing either-or, but when it comes to avatars that are mandatory, male characters are still four times as likely to be featured (Petit and Sarkeesian 2019). Moving beyond the mere existence of women in games, it is further important to view the quality of these portrayals. In an early study, Dietz (1998) found – next to the aforementioned absence of female characters – an “overwhelmingly traditional and negative portrayal of women” (426). She identified different categories of recurring female roles, such as (a) the damsel in distress (435), a mostly kidnapped or otherwise endangered helpless female figure that is dependent on being rescued by the (male) hero and denied any agency, thereby perpetuating established gender clichés; (b) visions of beauty (436) or cheerleaders, which exhibit sexualized characteristics and are generally reduced to their appearance, mainly serving as decoration, motivation, or reward for players; or (c) evil obstacles, which are (sexualized) female villains or seducers (436). The pattern here is that of passive victimisation on the one hand, and (sexual) objectification on the other hand. Interestingly, none of these types can be considered player characters, which further confirms the assumption that female characters are allocated less relevance and are featured even less often in heroic roles. In her recent YouTube-series Tropes vs. Women in Video Games, media critic Anita Sarkeesian likewise treats the problematic use of damsels in distress (Feminist Frequency 2013). The series of online videos tries to expose patterns of female representation, and how those can perpetuate or even amplify harmful attitudes towards women. Apart from the damsel in distress, other tropes have been notes as well, such as the use of women as background decoration, as reward for the player, or as sidekick. Moreover, the portrayal of female bodies, especially their sexualization and objectification with the use of slim bodies, revealing clothes, and unambiguous body language is continually being discussed. Most often this was addressed in terms of an over-stylization of female (secondary) sexual characteristics and body parts (cf. Richard 2004, 91), also often coined as hypersexualization (cf. Glaubke et al. 2001, 16). It can be concluded that the portrayal of women in videogames in the last decades – provided it existed – was characterised by an allocation to the roles of victims and other marginalised secondary characters, by stereotypes and cliché, and finally by a flaring sexualization. It has been criticised, though, that the mere consideration and critique of the visual representation is not sufficient in order to judge the value of a character – mostly, such analyses would not factor in the specifics of videogames as an interactive medium (Egenfeldt-Nielsen et al 2008, 163). Especially in the case of player characters it has to be considered that these are not merely viewed but above all

149

150

Christina Obmann

played, and thus showcase the limits of a mere textual analysis (Dovey and Kennedy 2006, 89-93). Both the visual appearance and the mechanical opportunities for action/ agency are important. This is apparent, for example, in the – by all means – ambivalent character of Lara Croft of the Tomb Raider series (Core Design 1996), where interpretations and reactions to the character oscillate between ‘feminist icon’ and emancipation-sabotaging ‘sex object’ (Kennedy 2002; Richard 2004, 7). It has been equally advised not to rely on the borrowed methods of other disciplines such as film or literature studies alone when analysing videogames, and thereby ignore the “participatory nature of games” (Fernández-Vara 2015, 149). An important term in that regard is configuration, describing the ability of players to intervene in the mediated environment in a way that creates significant changes (Dovey and Kennedy 2006, 144). This in turn means, that in order to analyse avatars in a way that is appropriate for the medium game, it does not suffice to merely consider the visual design or narrative characterisation, but also the dynamic of playing and interacting with the game.

Connecting the Dots As has been shown, the demographics of the games industry paint a picture of homogenous, white male-dominated developing teams. At the same time, gender portrayals in videogames have been rather limited, stereotyped, and catering to a white male audience. This of course invites to connect these two factors, considering that – and hereby going back to Richard Bartle’s advice to the designers of virtual worlds – “[y]our beliefs, your attitudes, your personality – they’re all reflected in your virtual world” (Bartle 2004, 702). Thus, I would argue that the dominance of masculinity in the developing end leads to a concentration of empowered male avatars, while female characters are relegated to secondary roles that need saving or are subject to the male gaze of the (presumed) male player. Interestingly, surveys have shown that game developers themselves do perceive a need for more diversity in the games industry and in games’ content – however, according to the Diversity Report by the International Game Developers Association, they did not as strongly connect negative implications such as stereotypical portrayals of gender to a lack of diversity in their own development teams (IGDA 2016, 22). This goes to show that more work in educating and encouraging critical self-reflection needs to be done. In order to make this connection – between developers and game content – more visible, I want to analyse concrete examples of gender portrayals stemming from a developing background that can be clearly coded white male dominated.

Gender Portayals in Videogames: A Reflection of Production Contexts?

An Example: Quantic Dream For analysis I have chosen three games – Heavy Rain (2010), Beyond: Two Souls (2013), and Detroit: Become Human (2018) – that were all created by the same game development company, Quantic Dream. This specific selection has several reasons: Firstly, all three of these games feature at least one female avatar. As can be seen from earlier research, most of the patterns that were established, such as the damsel in distress or the sidekick, only apply to non-player characters. A specific analysis of female player characters (exclusively) remains missing, even though it would be exactly in the role of player characters that videogame characters truly gain their specific and empowering effect. With avatars it becomes possible to not just analyse the visual depictions (i.e., representation), but also their capabilities and agency (i.e., configuration). All three games also feature male player characters, which makes it possible to detect and compare any deviations in the representation of genders. More generally, they have a very similar design and mechanics, making a comparison more meaningful as well. Taking a look at different games by the same developer also allows to more directly detect recurring patterns and then connect them to the specific development background. Another important factor is that Quantic Dream’s games can be considered mainstream productions. Due to the size of their budget, the commercial success, and the connection to prestigious publishers such as Sony they can obviously be allocated to the market of AAA-productions. In contrast, videogames stemming from a background of independent development (so-called indie games) are often characterised by more subversive if not revolutionary representation of (female) characters. However, these games are usually reserved for smaller niche-audiences, which diminishes their impact (Hahn 2017, 159). A consideration of games that are actually played by a bigger audience is thus much more interesting for a cultural analysis. Not least, though, it is the specific production context of Quantic Dream as developing team that makes this case interesting. Quantic Dream is a French game development studio seated in Paris and founded in 1997. By now they can look back on the publication of five, partly award-winning videogame titles, which all showcase a particular design and style. While videogames of the dimension as the three selected ones are a work of bigger teams with many individuals, in the case of Quantic Dream there is one person that allegedly has the most creative control over the ultimate direction and execution of the games. Founder and CEO David Cage, who also serves as creative director, is considered the main author and creative head of Quantic Dream’s games. With this strong influence, one could assign Cage an almost auteur-like status; with the term auteur originating from film studies where it denotes “a director who is considered the most important figure” in the creation of a movie as they – while collaborating with many other agents – still

151

152

Christina Obmann

maintain control over all aspects of production and thus also showcase a distinguished style (Santas 2002, 18). This connection to the medium film is indeed very fitting: Quantic Dream games in their presentation do demonstrate a cinematic appeal, especially through the use of actors in motion-capture technology, distinct camera perspectives, and not least the mentioning of David Cage as director in pre-credits. Recently, Quantic Dream has gained public attention for more than their game development, though. Prior to the release of their latest game Detroit: Become Human, the studio – and especially the executive board consisting of David Cage and Guillaume de Fondaumière – was confronted with allegations regarding inappropriate behaviour towards employees, or at least ignorance regarding such behaviour (Stuart 2018). According to the insiders that spoke up, Quantic Dream has allegedly tolerated if not fostered a toxic company culture, including racist, homophobic as well as sexist allusions. Quantic Dream officially denied these allegations, going so far as claiming that they indeed were a diverse team (Carpenter 2019). It is exactly this production context, namely of a strongly white male-oriented and -dominated industry in general, the distinct authorship of one (white) male individual, and controversies around sexism and toxic company culture that makes these games interesting and promising to analyse regarding gender portrayals.

Heavy Rain, Beyond: Two Souls and Detroit: Become Human – Patterns of Female Representation The three latest single-player adventure games by Quantic Dream are all rather similar in their nature, with a strong narrative focus as well as particular game mechanics. Choices and consequences, several different avatars, quick-time events, and a possible permadeath of characters are only a few features that have been used repeatedly in different settings. Because of their narrative focus and the possibility to greatly influence the overall plot line, Quantic Dream games are often (albeit not always flatteringly) described as “Interactive Drama” (Wilms 2018). Movement in these worlds is highly restricted and linear, due to invisible gating and prescribed paths – it is mainly the conscious decisions or the success or failure of tasks that shape the progression and ultimate outcome of the game. Due to the narrative as well as the moral ambiguity of actions the player experience is bound to be a profoundly emotional one. Players are likely to experience very stressful situations; resulting from the fact that decisions and mistakes can have irrevocable impact on progress and end of the narrative. But also the demanded reactions during quicktime events can create pressure – and thus simulate the emotions of characters. This allows for a highly affective player experience.

Gender Portayals in Videogames: A Reflection of Production Contexts?

Heavy Rain (2010) is a film-noir like crime thriller on a series of kidnappings and child murders, that features journalist Madison Paige as one of four playable characters. Beyond: Two Souls (2013) has a paranormally talented girl named Jodie Holmes (portrayed by Ellen Paige) fighting against evil forces, both human and non-human. Finally, their latest instalment Detroit: Become Human (2018) revolves around humanoid androids fighting for freedom and their (civil) rights and – among two other characters – follows the emotional and perilous journey of household-android Kara who takes care of a supposedly human child. My approach to analyzing the three female avatars was a consideration of both narrative construction and ludic specifics. Thus, I was not only looking at their visual appearance, characteristic traits, their roles and relationships, situations and narrative relevance, but also at their mechanical abilities, actions, and their supposed agency and impact on the progress of the game. The findings of an in-depth analysis show the emergence of seven distinct patterns and themes of representation:

1. (Lack of) Diversity Starting with their outer appearance, all female characters can be considered white, cis-female, young, able-bodied and (partly) explicitly heterosexual. As such, they do not bespeak much of a diversity.

2. Passivity All three of them are continuously victims of the violent assaults of mostly male offenders. It also stands out that they repeatedly find themselves in situations where they have to escape and flee. Their actions are rather re-actions to other characters who are acting upon them, which pushes them into the role of passive victims more often than not. These observations are particularly striking because the male player characters in contrast are much more often in the roles of active pursuers or even aggressors.

3. (Lack of) Relevance Considering the meta-narrative that connects the stories of all individual player characters – at least in Heavy Rain and Detroit: Become Human – the female avatars seem to be allocated much less relevance. Either they have little to no impact on the overall narrative and other player characters, but rather only exert influence on a micro-level within their own sequences (such as Kara). Or they are relegated to mere side-kick functions, serving as support for a male player character while having few goals of themselves (such as Madison). The male avatars in contrast have more important and above all influential roles in the overall narrative, and they also have decisively more impact on the fate of other player and non-player characters.

153

154

Christina Obmann

4. (Lack of) Ability and Agency When it comes to actual powers and capabilities of avatars on a mechanical level, only Jodie seems to exhibit special combat but also supernatural abilities. However, on a closer look even that proves to be a fallacy: Whenever Jodie is supposed to use her supernatural powers, the player actually switches to the perspective of her deceased twin brother Aiden, a bodiless entity that is irrevocably connected to Jodie. As Aiden, players can then exert special powers such as telekinesis, levitation, permeation, or healing. Since Aiden’s powers are often needed to help Jodie in dangerous and desperate situations or to take revenge on people that have hurt her, she is basically being reduced to a damsel in distress that needs to be saved by her powerful brother. He in turn can powerfully intervene in Jodie’s life – at times even sabotaging her romantic life. Interesting again is the agency that characters have when it comes to making choices that influence the progress of the narrative. Here, experiences are rather varied. Madison’s sequences are very linear, as she has little impact on the overall progression. Even some of the more far-reaching decisions can only be decided from the position of the male character Ethan, such as whether or not to engage in a sexual or romantic relationship with another player character. Beyond: Two Souls is similarly linear throughout, but Jodie can make important decisions in the finale of the game. Kara, on the other hand, has lots of room to influence the progression of her own story in significant ways. In contrast to that, male avatars partly exhibit special mechanical abilities, such as the investigative powers of Norman Jayden in Heavy Rain, and Connor in Detroit: Become Human. They also, as already mentioned, have much greater agency in decisions that affect the game world in general and other characters in particular, giving their role overall more power and impact.

5. Sexualized Violence In all games there are moments of (almost explicit) sexualized violence against female characters, in a manner that cannot be found with male characters. Madison Paige is assaulted by a mass murderer, captured in a position that spreads her legs suggestively, and approached with a drilling tool. Jodie Holmes has to experience attempted rape while in her teens. And Kara – after having escaped domestic violence – has to face another offender, who shackles her and plans to effectively lobotomize her in order to keep her as a personal slave. In general, there are more prominently staged depictions of nudity such as various shower scenes, and even a striptease on gunpoint for Madison. Both instances – nudity and violence – can of course also be found in the male characters, however, they are nowhere near as consistent and – what’s more – sexually connoted and gendered.

Gender Portayals in Videogames: A Reflection of Production Contexts?

6. Nursing Roles It also stands out that the female avatars can often be seen in roles and situations of care and nursing of other characters. Kara clearly takes on a mother-like role for her fosterling Alice, and much of her actions and motivation are guided by the care for Alice’s wellbeing. Madison similarly is situated in the role of a nurse, such as when she repeatedly has to tend to the injuries of Ethan and nurses him back to health after he returns from one of his many perilous and heroic tasks. Interestingly, male characters can also be found in nurturing and nursing roles, but then always with a twist. Markus of Detroit: Become Human, for example, is a caregiver for a disabled elderly man in the beginning of the game, fostering a respectful and loving relationship. However, very soon into the game, Markus has to leave this place to play a much bigger role in an android revolution, serving as an almost messianic leader figure. Ethan from Heavy Rain would also have the potential to be seen in a nurturing role as father, but when his son is kidnapped his actions are more oriented towards rescue missions and heroic self-sacrifice.

7. Dependency Finally, as a minor remark it can also be observed that they all have rather intense relationships to other characters that border on dependency – going so far that one could consider them finding their ‘fulfilment’ in these other characters. Kara as a mother for Alice, Madison as romantic partner and support for Ethan, and Jodie as symbiotic twin. Endings that have them with a (male) romantic partner are very clearly marked as ‘happy ending’. It is being demonstrated that their lives are profoundly defined by the relationship to others. In general, this would not necessarily be a negative aspect, since humans as social beings do find meaning in relation to others. However, in these cases it is mostly the relationship to a male character, or the role as a mother which is of utmost importance for the identity of the characters. Both are rather stereotypical and gender-conforming roles, and heteronormative on top. Even if it might not be a full dependency, it does seem as if female characters are having a hard time finding fulfilment in anything other than another (male) person. It has to be stressed that of course not all aspects of the three avatars are negative. Players might well have very positive, affective, and emotional experiences while playing them. The same goes for the experience of the games in general. However, some of these patterns are reminiscent of the stereotypes that – as I tried to show before – have been recurrently found in videogames. For example, they confirm some of the findings that women are shown in caring and nurturing roles more often than men (Glaubke et al 2001, 16). While these cases neither bespeak a hyper-sexualisation and stylisation of female bodies nor a reduction to decorative sex-objects, we can still find a partly sexualised display in a lower intensity.

155

156

Christina Obmann

Very prominent, though, are the aspects of victimisation, with characters mutating to damsels in distress, and the relegation to narratively and mechanically less relevant if not secondary characters. In contrast to that, the male avatars of these three games appear in empowered roles of a significantly higher relevance for the meta-narrative – with the exception of Jodie. Also, quantitatively female avatars are underrepresented, with three female and six male characters, seven if Aiden is considered. They appear in fewer sequences and can die at earlier moments of the game, which further undermines their lack of relevance.

Conclusion While not employed to the extent that has been prevalent for a long time – there are still traces of stereotypical portrayals that border on marginalisation. The fact that these patterns of gender representation consistently run through all three games, combined with the distinctly male-dominated development context of Quantic Dream leads me to the conclusion that gender portrayals can indeed reflect production contexts. This does not mean that this happens intentionally, or even consciously. It also does not have to happen necessarily, as there are also examples of well-constructed, empowered female player characters that move beyond the patterns I have tried to show, avatars such as The Last of Us’ Ellie (Naughty Dog 2013), Horizon: Zero Dawn’s Aloy (Guerilla Games 2017), Hellblade’s Senua (Ninja Theory 2017), or Life is Strange’s Max (Dontnod Entertainment 2015). But such positive examples are only a scattered few, especially in mainstream productions. It remains important to recognize that there continues to be marginalisation and reliance on stereotypical gender roles – even when women are employed as player characters. Ultimately, this goes to show that a strongly male-centered production context (as is status quo) can contribute or lead to the solidification of certain patterns of problematic portrayals of women which go beyond the visual representation of sexualized appearances. It would certainly take a while to make the industry as a work field more diverse and inclusive. Also, because there is not just one system of power, privilege and oppression at work, but of other, intersecting factors as well, such as race, ability, sexuality or class. As a start, however, a willing education on the harmfulness of tropes, and an effort for critical reflection of game developers themselves would be desirable. To quote Adrienne Shaw (2014), critical reflection on the creation process is key to representation […] This kind of work is hard, and it forces us to ask uncomfortable questions and face privileges that are easier to ignore. It is work, however, that game designers, producers, players, researchers, and critics must take on. (230–1)

Gender Portayals in Videogames: A Reflection of Production Contexts?

Ultimately, it only remains to be hoped, that the industry breaks out of the feedback loop of a white cis-male (re)production of the same content, but rather becomes more diverse or – at least – more conscious and critical of their own impact on games and the impact this in turn has on their players.

References Bartle, Richard D. 2004. Designing Virtual Worlds. Berkeley, CA: New Riders. Carpenter, Nicole. 2019. “Labor Groups Investigating Sexual Harassment Claims at ’Detroit: Become Human’ Developer.” Vice.com. May 7, 2019. https://www. vice.com/en_us/article/43jxkp/labor-groups-investigating-sexual-harassmentclaims-at-detroit-become-human-developer Cassell, Justine and Henry Jenkins. 2000. From Barbie to Mortal Kombat: gender and computer games. Cambridge, Mass. et al.: MIT Press. Dietz, Tracy L. 1998. “An Examination of Violence and Gender Role Portrayals in Video Games. Implications for Gender Socialization and Aggressive Behavior.” Sex Roles 38 (5–6): 425–442. Dovey, Jon and Helen W. Kennedy. 2006. Game Cultures. Computer Games as New Media. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Egenfeldt-Nielsen, Simon, Jonas Heide Smith and Susana Pajares Tosca. 2008. Understanding Video Games. The Essential Introduction. New York and London: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group. Feminist Frequency. 2013. “Tropes vs Women in Video Games.” Accessed June 20, 2019. https://feministfrequency.com/series/tropes-vs-women-in-videogames/ Fernández-Vara, Clara. 2015. Introduction to Game Analysis. New York and London: Routledge Taylor and Francis. game – Verband der deutschen Games-Branche. 2019. “Nutzer digitaler Spiele in Deutschland 2019.“ Accessed June 20, 2019. https://www.game.de/marktdaten/ nutzer-digitaler-spiele-in-deutschland-2019/ Ganguin, Sonja and Anna Hoblitz. 2014. High Score and High Heels: Berufsbiografien von Frauen in der Games-Industrie. Wiesbaden: Springer. Glaubke, Christina R., Patti Miller, McCrae A. Parker, and Eileen Espejo. 2001. Fair Play? Violence, Gender and Race in Video Games. Oakland, CA: Children Now. Graner Ray, Sheri. 2004. Gender inclusive game design: expanding the market. Hingham, Mass.: Charles River Media. Hahn, Sabine. 2017. Gender und Gaming. Frauen im Fokus der Games-Industrie. Bielefeld: transcript Verlag. IGDA – International Game Developers Association. 2016. “Developer Satisfaction Survey 2014 and 2015. Diversity in the Game Industry Report.” June 12, 2016.

157

158

Christina Obmann

Accessed September 24, 2019. https://igda.org/resources-archive/diversity-inthe-game-industry-report-2016/ IGDA – International Game Developers Association. 2018. “Developer Satisfaction Survey 2017. Summary Report.” January 8, 2018. Accessed September 24, 2019. https://igda.org/resources-archive/developer-satisfaction-surveysummary-report-2017/ Kennedy, Helen W. 2002. “Lara Croft: feminist icon or cyberbimbo? On the limits of textual analysis.” Game Studies. International Journal of Computer Games Research 2 (2). Accessed May 20, 2019. http://www.gamestudies.org/0202/kennedy/ Krause, Melanie. 2011. Weibliche Nutzer von Computerspielen: Differenzierte Betrachtung und Erklärung der Motive und Verhaltensweisen weiblicher Nutzer von Computerspielen. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Petit, Carolyn and Anita Sarkeesian. 2019. “Gender Breakdown of Games Featured at E3 2019.” Feminist Frequency. June 14, 2019. Accessed June 20, 2019. https:// feministfrequency.com/2019/06/14/gender-breakdown-of-games-featuredat-e3-2019/ Richard, Birgit. 2004. Sheroes. Genderspiele im virtuellen Raum. Bielefeld: transcript. Santas, Constantine. 2002. Responding to Film. A Text Guide for Students of Cinema Art. Chicago: Burnham Inc. Publishers. Sardar, Ziauddin and Borin Van Loon. 2005. Introducing Cultural Studies, edited by Richard Appignanesi. Thriplow: Icon/Totem Books. Shaw, Adrienne. 2013. “On Not Becoming Gamers: Moving Beyond the Constructed Audience.” Ada. A Journal of Gender, New Media, and Technology 2. https://doi. org/10.7264/N33N21B3 Shaw, Adrienne. 2014. Gaming at the Edge. Sexuality and Gender at the Margins of Gamer Culture. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Stuart, Keith. 2018. “Game developer Quantic Dream accused of ‘toxic’ and ‘sexist’ working environment.” The Guardian. January 15, 2018. Accessed June 10, 2019. https://www.theguardian.com/games/2018/jan/15/game-developerquantic-dream-accused-of-toxic-and-sexist-working-environment Ukie – The Association for UK Interactive Entertainment. 2018. “UK Video Games Fact Sheet.” Accessed September 24, 2019. https://ukie.org.uk/research#fact_ sheet Williams, Dimitri, Nicole Martins, Mia Consalvo, and James D. Ivory. 2009. “The virtual census: representation of gender, race and age in video games.” New Media and Society 11 (5): 815–834. Wilms, Elisa. 2018. “Meet the Studio Behind Detroit: Become Human.” IGN Nordic. May 21, 2018. Accessed June 15, 2019. https://nordic.ign.com/detroit-becomehuman-ps4/14944/feature/meet-the-studio-behind-detroit-become-human

Gender Portayals in Videogames: A Reflection of Production Contexts?

Ludography Core Design. 1996. Tomb Raider. Eidos Interactive. Dontnod Entertainment. 2015. Life is Strange. Square Enix. Guerilla Games. 2017. Horizon: Zero Dawn. Sony Interactive Entertainment. Naughty Dog. 2013. The Last of Us. Sony Computer Entertainment. Ninja Theory. 2017. Hellblade: Senua’s Sacrifice. Ninja Theory. Quantic Dream. 2010. Heavy Rain. Sony Computer Entertainment. Quantic Dream. 2013. Beyond: Two Souls. Sony Computer Entertainment. Quantic Dream. 2018. Detroit: Become Human. Sony Computer Entertainment.

159

Periphery: The Departure from Avatar-Sexual Characters in BioWare’s Dragon Age: Inquisition Armin Lippitz

Abstract: Videogames have been established as one of the most important contemporary media and become mainstream. Next to first-person shooters and sports simulation games, roleplaying games (RPGs) are the most popular genre, and regularly appear high on bestselling lists. Their popularity is, not least of all, attributed to the possibility of engaging in romantic encounters with non-player characters (NPCs). However, in order to cater to a mainstream audience, many of these RPGs shy away from including non-straight or queer characters, or alternative gender identities. A majority of games still play out as male power-fantasies, in which everything revolves around the players’ avatar, including sexual orientation. Regardless of the avatar’s gender – in most games a binary option at the beginning of the game – romantic interest in an NPC will be reciprocated. This phenomenon has become known as ‘avatar-sexual’ and represents an easy way for creators to appease non-straight players and to circumvent a heteronormative taint. Bioware’s Dragon Age: Inquisition (2014) abstains from this design decision. While gender specification during character creation is still a binary choice, romantic engagements remain platonic if the selected gender performance does not conform to NPCs’ preferences. In addition, the game, as well as other texts within the Dragon Age universe, include various characters of non-binary gender identities and non-straight sexual orientations. My paper focuses on how romantic endeavours towards non-avatar-sexual characters are presented to players. Keywords: avatar-sexual, BioWare, Dragon Age, game studies, player-sexual, role-playing games, romance, sexuality studies, videogames Armin Lippitz is a PhD student at the University of Klagenfurt, currently writing his dissertation on the inter- and transmedial exchange between comics and videogames. Since 2014 he is an adjunct lecturer at the department of English and American Studies in Klagenfurt, aiming his attention towards North American Literatures and the media mentioned above.

162

Armin Lippitz

Introduction There are countless reasons why people play videogames and immerse themselves into virtual realities. Engaging romantically with digital characters and acting out or performing particular sexualities and identities in a safe space, are just two examples of how players blend their primary plane of existence with the virtual world of a videogame. The emotional connection between players and their avatars, and other characters in a virtual environment, is a strong force weaving the two different realities together. While it may be empowering to players when all non-player characters are romantically and/or sexually interested in the avatar, regardless of their gender or sexual preference, it certainly does not make for realistic representations. This paper shows how sexuality and romantic engagements are portrayed in Dragon Age: Inquisition (BioWare 2014) and explains why departing from the convention of ‘avatar-sexual’ characters in videogames is an important step towards inclusive game design. It is not an exaggeration any more to claim that videogames are mainstream. This entails that developers and especially publishers orient their strategies for producing and publishing games towards trends emerging from the purchase behaviour of the majority of consumers. As a result, certain genres, mechanics, and other gameplay elements, including characters, have become more visible than others. In 2018, the vast majority of games sold in the U.S. – over 47% – fall into one of two broad genre categories – action or shooter (Gough 2019, ESA 2019). Neither of these genres are particularly known for richness of story, complexity of narrative, or diversity of cast. While there certainly are exceptions, The Last of Us (Naughty Dog 2013), for example, the features mentioned usually find application in two different categories, namely the first-person narrative exploration game, also known as the walking simulator, and the role-playing game (RPG). The former is a niche genre primarily produced by independent developers with smaller budgets and teams, typically concentrating on one main character and theme and a small set of characters. Romantic relationships, sexualities, and gender identifications, with notable exceptions such as Gone Home (The Fullbright Company 2013), for instance, are hardly ever the main point of attraction. These elements are most frequently found in the latter genre category: RPGs, often developed by AAA studios, are a fairly popular type, and are thus the focus of this paper.

Avatars and NPCs in Role-Playing Games Based on Daniel Erickson’s definition, I see an RPG as a story-driven game in which players take on a role, making decisions which influence the story and potentially affect the game’s outcome (2009, 12). RPGs are one of the best-suited genres for

Periphery: The Departure from Avatar-Sexual Characters in BioWare’s Dragon Age: Inquisition

character-based storytelling because they let players perform actions and choose dialogue through an avatar, which functions as a Role that can be personalized to large extends (Schallegger 2016a, 25–26). Games which offer players the possibility to engage with non-player characters (NPCs) romantically, thus should be designed to account for various different approaches in regard to sexuality, so as not to discriminate. This is not to say that every RPG should include amorous relationships. Horizon: Zero Dawn (Guerrilla Games 2017), for instance, does not, because it makes sense on a narrative level: according to the creators, the protagonist Aloy is too driven and determined to accomplish her mission than to engage in romantic liaisons (Cone 2017, Henry 2017), but, contrary to fan theories (SlippingStar 2017, Tired-Sparo 2018), she is not asexual or aromantic. The same holds true for Adam Jensen, the avatar in Deus Ex: Human Revolution (Eidos Montréal 2011) and Mankind Divided (Eidos Montréal 2016). However, both Adam Jensen and Aloy are Personality avatars, meaning “the avatar is their own pre-defined character with an individual and specific narrative background, aesthetic appearance, mechanical role and capabilities” (Schallegger 2016a, 26). Personality avatars, however, are not a criterion for exclusion of worthwhile romantic engagements in RPGs, as The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt (CD Projekt Red 2015) demonstrates. Yet, they “create more distance and rely on the process of identification to bind the player” (Schallegger 2016a, 26). So, if RPGs provide opportunities for amorous endeavors, the creators ideally should go for a role-based avatar design and strive for inclusive and respectful representations of sexualities and gender identifications, as well as avoid trite clichés and offensive stereotypes. The reality of how games deal with these affairs, however, is rather bleak, as developers often focus on well-established heteronormative tropes, in order to cater to a mainstream audience, or at least to an imagined majority. Many designs simply do not offer the option for same sex romances or relationships, especially between male characters, like Kingdom Come: Deliverance (Warhorse Studios 2018). Or there is a stark imbalance in the quantity as well as quality of representation. A majority of games still play out as male power-fantasies, in which everything revolves around the players’ avatar, including sexual orientation. Regardless of the avatar’s gender, romantic interest in a ‘romanceable’ NPC will be reciprocated. This phenomenon has become known as ‘player-sexual’ (Kenton 2019, Schallegger 2016b) and represents an easy way for creators to appease non-straight players and to circumvent a heteronormative taint. In this paper I suggest an alternative term, namely ‘avatarsexual’, so as not to confuse the artificially designed avatar’s gender identity and sexuality, with those of the players. Mixing realities, thus, only works to a degree. Admittedly, players may influence their avatar’s identity and sexual orientation and instill their own predilections and portrayals, but no matter how much of their own identity players imbue in their avatar, there will always be an inherent distance between the two, engineered by the artificial limitations of the game, as well as – on

163

164

Armin Lippitz

a diegetic level – the inability of NPCs to ‘see’ or directly interact with the players. ‘Avatar-sexual’ is thus a more precise term than ‘player-sexual’.

Avatar- and Other Sexualities Avatar-sexual characters are NPCs which can be engaged with romantically by the player character and who will always respond in the affirmative towards these approaches, as long as other predefined requirements are met. It is important to note that these preconditions do not key on the avatar’s identity – gender, race, sexuality, class, or ability of the avatar do not matter. They rather depend on a mostly mechanical score, which usually can be raised by talking to the NPC (and picking the correct dialogue options), taking on and fulfilling quests they provide, giving them gifts, or a combination of the above. Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey (Ubisoft Quebec 2018), for example, features a relatively large cast of avatar-sexual characters. No matter whether players choose Kassandra or Alexios as their avatar, there are 15 love-interest characters who will all reciprocate attempts at romantic engagement. In other words, none of these characters have a canonical, diegetic sexuality consistent from playthrough to playthrough, as their romantic interest revolves around the player character regardless of their identity. Some might claim that avatar-sexual characters are a clever design choice that lets players express their sexualities, or perform alternative sexual preferences, in the safety of a virtual world, and that they open up possibilities for non-heterosexual content and representations of queerness. However, the fact that multiple playthroughs reveal the indifference of these characters to the avatar’s identity, detracts from their personality and ultimately makes them empty husks in terms of sexuality. A possible challenge to my argument, that this openness would make avatar-sexual characters pansexual, sounds like a hollow excuse by too optimistic progressives, as this sentiment is rarely reflected in the writing of the characters. Volition’s videogame persiflage Saints Row IV (2013), demonstrates this in satirical fashion. The romances in the game do not require any more effort from players than to pick the appropriate of two conversation options after a loyalty mission. Pierce is the only companion who alludes to his own sexuality by affirming: “I normally don’t swing that way, but fuck it, I’m down.” (Saints Row IV 2013), indifferent to the avatar’s gender (ibid.). He thus makes his avatar-sexuality blatantly obvious and consequently his declared sexuality meaningless. Respectful representations of sexualities, thus, depend on more realistic approaches towards character personality portrayal. The Canadian videogame studio BioWare launched an attempt at such an endeavor in 2014 with their release of Dragon Age: Inquisition. The story-heavy RPG is the third installment of the Dragon

Periphery: The Departure from Avatar-Sexual Characters in BioWare’s Dragon Age: Inquisition

Age videogame series (since 2009) and is part of an extensive transmedia universe, including novels, comics, and a list of other media texts. GLAAD, a media monitoring advocacy organization for the LGBT community in the U.S., granted Inquisition a Special Recognition award for “the many complex and unique LGBT characters prominently integrated throughout the game” (Sarkar 2015). One of the reasons why these videogame characters are so compelling, is because they do not merely fulfill a narrative role in support of the main plot, or aid the player character in overcoming mechanical obstacles, but they possess genuine identities and personal goals and motivations, which do not exclusively revolve around the avatar or their mission. The game lets players create their own avatar. The so-called Inquisitor can be customized in terms of gender (male or female), fantastic species (Human, Elf, Dwarf, or Qunari), fighting style or ‘class’, and physical appearance. “Depending on which customization options were selected during character creation, the avatar has a certain background story that cannot be modified by the player” (Frick 2016, 88), however, much of the avatar’s personality is left open to be instilled by the players, which means its function, based on Schallegger’s taxonomy, is closer to a Role than a Personality (2016a, 25–26). Despite the binary choice for gender, it is not the only deciding factor determining whether non-player characters will engage in romantic relationships with the avatar. Romanceable NPCs have their own preferences when it comes to gender and species. The elven mage Solas, for example, only reciprocates amorous approaches from female elves, while the human mage from Tevinter Dorian, is homosexual but “he has no specific preferences where the species is concerned” (Frick 2016, 88). Even the choice of class sometimes provides individual dialogue responses from the NPCs and helps to make these decisions feel important to players – mages, for instance, are shunned by quite a few NPCs in the game. On top of that, the system keeps a numerical approval score for each companion which changes depending on the player character’s actions and dialogue choices. Each important decision is interpreted by the NPCs and reflected in extradiegetic feedback informing players how characters react towards these choices. In other words, NPCs have their own personalities, which need to be interpreted by players based on their own actions, dialogue choices, and judgments. This means that certain decisions might prevent romances, “or even cause an existing relationship to break off immediately” (ibid. 89). Thus, even actions which do not necessarily have anything to do with the romantic relationship between avatar and companion on a narrative level affect it, as can be experienced in a devastating manner with The Iron Bull, for example, and which can significantly (and retrospectively) alter the entire perception of the relationship. To elaborate, The Iron Bull betrays the Inquisition within the final hours of the game if the player decided to sacrifice his band

165

166

Armin Lippitz

of mercenaries during an earlier mission, which, as Angela Mitchell explains on her blog, has a stunning narrative as well as affective impact on the player (2018). The primary mechanic to engage NPCs romantically is through the established and by now genre-defining ‘dialogue wheel’, presenting players with possible conversation choices arranged around a circle. “Romance is depicted in the dialogue wheel by two indicators: a heart for further flirtatious or romantic comments, and a broken heart for the end of the given affair” (Frick 2016, 88). In addition, the wheel informs players when agency for particular choices is granted or denied. In exchanges with Varric, for example, the wheel never shows a heart for flirtatious responses, letting players know that he is not romanceable. Vivienne, on the other hand, can be flirted with, however, she will never reciprocate these advances because of her background. Unfortunately, the design is not entirely consistent in this regard. Only elves (male and female) get the opportunity to pick romantic dialogue options marked with a heart icon for Solas. While he will reject male elves’ amorous approaches because of his heterosexuality, no other species can even flirt with him regardless of gender or class.

Departing from Avatar-Sexuality NPCs in Dragon Age: Inquisition are not exclusively defined by their sexualities. While romances and flirtations are possible with a number of them, it is not their most important or interesting role or function in the game; it is an additional layer to portray their personalities. Simultaneously to their mechanical functions, they offer more than simple pastime for the Inquisitor, and they have problems, interests, and relationships apart from the avatar or their mission. Cullen, the Inquisition’s general, for instance, battles with substance-addiction; Cassandra, the seemingly fearless warrior admits being a fan of corny romance novels. Most of these portrayals and additional bits of information about the characters are learned through conversations between the avatar and the NPC in question, triggered by the player inside the safe hub locations. However, the companions show real avatar-independence when they start talking to each other while on missions. They comment on world events as well as personal gossip about the people of the Inquisition. These short snippets of conversation, or banter, are often continued interactions, which tell interesting stories refining the personalities of the characters, recounting their quarrels, and revealing their developing friendand relationships. Many of these conversations do not include the avatar at all, but actually discuss and shape the connections between the NPCs themselves. Players usually retain agency of movement during these exchanges but are hardly ever given the opportunity to take part in the debates. In most cases the player character is just a bystander, coincidentally overhearing the companions even when they

Periphery: The Departure from Avatar-Sexual Characters in BioWare’s Dragon Age: Inquisition

gossip about the Inquisitor. The banter reveals that the characters all have a life aside from the avatar’s mission and experience their own adventures, including sexual encounters or romantic interests. For instance, Dorian and The Iron Bull, start a romantic relationship, which develops into a beautiful Shakespearian love story extended even through the credits after the end of the game. By ‘the end of the game’ I mean the end of the Trespasser expansion (BioWare 2015), which is undeniably the legitimate conclusion of the videogame. The momentousness of some of the decisions made during the main game only becomes apparent here. One case for the importance of Trespasser is the fact that only within the story of this downloadable content (DLC) can romances be confirmed through marriage. While marriage is the only way to express romances in The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (Bethesda Game Studios 2011), in which all romanceable characters are avatar-sexual and the relationships do not affect the story at all, in Inquisition it is a rare occasion and is discussed and gossiped about by NPCs. While in Skyrim marriage feels like an emotionless choice to gain mechanical gameplay advantages, such as cooked meals from the avatar’s spouse, it carries narrative and affective weight in Inquisition. There are three marriages the Inquisitor can participate in. One is a ceremony between two NPCs whose relationship is developed over a number of war-table quests and who might be different characters depending on the choices during these earlier missions. The avatar is asked to officiate the union and by doing so is able to influence the nature of the relationship. The other two marriage options, Cullen and Sera, are available for the player character. The romances with either of the two can be concluded with a proposal and subsequent marriage. Interestingly, both proposals are prompted by the romanced NPCs, and players are given the options to accept or refuse. However, both marriage opportunities in Inquisition are only available to female avatars, because Cullen is hetero- and Sera is homosexual. While a same sex marriage option might seem progressive, the bias that it is only possible for two women to get married taints this illusion. In addition, the quality of the respective interactions and cutscenes reveals a striking inequity between the two: While Cullen and the female avatar have an actual wedding ceremony, Sera and her Inquisitor only share a fade-to-black kiss. Even the length of the cutscenes is disproportionately in favor of the heterosexual marriage. Nonetheless, despite these shortcomings the superb writing of the characters makes both these romances worthwhile. Players may end their current amorous affair at any point in the relationship. What is exceptional in Inquisition is that agency over the decision to end a liaison is not exclusively with the player. In other words, if a romanceable NPC is not happy or does not agree with the decisions the player takes, even ones that are not in reference to their relationship, like judgments over prisoners, they might terminate the engagement themselves, and possibly even leave the Inquisitor’s party. This is an example of an elastic system dynamic, which “provides feedback that ‘pushes

167

168

Armin Lippitz

back’ […] against player interactions” (Schallegger 2016a, 25). Put simply, players are free to play their Inquisitor however they see fit, within a rather open framework of possibilities, but all their choices are evaluated and responded to by the NPCs. So, if the avatar acts like a murdering psychopath, their love-interest might not stick around, or, in the case of The Iron Bull, deviously play his part only to betray them within the last stretches of the game. Another example of the elasticity of the game’s design is shown when the Inquisitor tries to romance other characters while in a committed relationship with someone else. Even if the approval rating of the secondary love-interest is high enough, the system explains, intradiegetically through the NPC, that polyamorous liaisons or infidelity are not possible, at least not for the Inquisitor. Terminating a romantic relationship is a permanent and irreversible decision, which opens the option to romance other characters, but locks the previous romance permanently for the rest of the entire playthrough. Thus, romantic engagements in Inquisition, as well as their discontinuation, have narrative importance and NPCs will gossip about them.

Conclusion Videogames still have a long way to go when it comes to diversity and representations of sexualities. BioWare has been one of the developer studios fans had the highest hopes for to create inclusive and open-minded RPGs, especially because of the Mass Effect (BioWare since 2007) and Dragon Age series. The latest installment of the Mass Effect franchise, Andromeda (BioWare 2018), failed commercially and was not well received by critics either. This unfortunately not only brought Mass Effect to a sudden halt, but also caused disruption for other games the company has been working on, including a sequel to Inquisition. The first game of their new IP Anthem (2019) was a disappointment for many BioWare fans as well, because of the mediocre story, repetitive missions, and a further development away from RPG elements to more grindy, multiplayer action-shooter gameplay. In addition, relationships with NPCs, which is one of the reasons why fans enjoy BioWare games, stay platonic in Anthem and there is no possibility for romantic engagements. Inquisition was a refreshing attempt at innovation regarding representation and diversity, especially the departure from avatar-sexual characters, but it is far from perfect. Subsequent RPGs have depreciated the importance of amorous interactions, specifically but not exclusively those featuring queer sexualities and alternative relationships between avatars and NPCs. News stories of high-ranking employees leaving BioWare (Kobek 2019, Meers 2019, Strickland 2019a), on top of shocking revelations regarding working conditions (Strickland 2019b), further chip away at the remaining hopes for a satisfying sequel. Even GreedFall (2019), the action RPG

Periphery: The Departure from Avatar-Sexual Characters in BioWare’s Dragon Age: Inquisition

by Spiders which was marketed as the game to pick up the torch from BioWare, was, unfortunately, a disappointment in terms of representation of sexualities (the four romanceable characters were evenly split between hetero- and avatar-sexual). While Dragon Age: Inquisition departed from avatar-sexual characters, it seems romance in videogames in general has gone out of fashion. We will have to wait and see whether Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla (forthcoming), the upcoming mainstream RPG by Ubisoft Montréal, will be able to reverse that trend.

References Cone, Nathan. 2017. “’Horizon Zero Dawn‘ Director Explains Why the Game Lacks Romance.” Blastingnews (blog). Accessed April 8, 2020. https://us. blastingnews.com/gaming/2017/06/horizon-zero-dawn-director-explainswhy-the-game-lacks-romance-001813313.html Erickson, Daniel. 2009. “Writing for Role-playing Games.” In Writing for Video Game Genres: From FPS to RPG, edited by Wendy Despain, 11–17. Wellesley, MA: A K Peters. ESA. 2019. “2019 Essential Facts About the Computer and Video Game Industry.” Entertainment Software Association. Accessed April 8, 2020. https://www.theesa. com/esa-research/2019-essential-facts-about-the-computer-and-videogame-industry/ Frick, Veit. 2016. “Romance is Difficult: Choice, Agency and the Sexual Identity of NPCs in BioWare’s Dragon Age: Inquisition.” In Levelling Up: The Cultural Impact of Contemporary Videogames, edited by Brittany Kuhn and Alexia BhéreurLagounaris, 85–92. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill. Gough, Christina. 2019. “Genre Breakdown of Video Game Sales in the United States in 2018.” Statista. Accessed April 8, 2020. https://www.statista.com/ statistics/189592/breakdown-of-us-video-game-sales-2009-by-genre/ Henry, Jasmine. 2017. “Here’s Why Horizon Zero Dawn Doesn’t Have Romance.” J Station X: Inclusive Gaming News and Reviews (blog). Accessed April 8, 2020. http:// jstationx.com/2017/06/28/horizon-zero-dawn-romance/ Kenton, Howard T. 2019. “Romance Never Changes… Or Does It?: Fallout, Queerness, and Mods”. DiGRA ’19 – Proceedings of the 2019 DiGRA International Conference: Game, Play and the Emerging Ludo-Mix - DiGRA, August 2019. http://www. digra.org/wp-content/uploads/digital-library/DiGRA_2019_paper_90.pdf Kobek, Patrick. 2019. “Anthem Lead Producer Leaves BioWare.” TheGamer (blog). Accessed April 8, 2020. https://www.thegamer.com/ben-irving-ea-departureanthem-bioware/

169

170

Armin Lippitz

Meers, Whitney. 2019. “Dragon Age Senior Producer is the Next to Leave His Game Mid-Development.” TheGamer (blog). Accessed April 8, 2020. https:// www.thegamer.com/dragon-age-producer-fernando-melo-leaves-bioware/ Mitchell, D. Angela. 2018. “The Spy Who Never Loved Me: The Dark Side of The Iron Bull’s Romance.” The Fandomentals (blog). Accessed April 8, 2020. https://www. thefandomentals.com/the-spy-who-never-loved-me-the-dark-side-of-theiron-bulls-romance/ Sarkar, Samit. 2015. “Dragon Age: Inquisition Recognized with GLAAD Media Award for its LGBT Characters.” Polygon (blog). Accessed April 8, 2020. https:// www.polygon.com/2015/1/22/7872393/dragon-age-inquisition-lgbt-charactersglaad-media-awards Schallegger, René R. 2016a. “WTH are Games? – Towards a Triad of Triads.” In Klagenfurter Beiträge zur Visuellen Kultur, Band 5: Digitale Spiele, edited by Jörg Helbig and René R. Schallegger, 14-49. Köln: Herbert von Halem. Schallegger, René R. 2016b. “Game Changers – Representations of Queerness in Canadian Videogame Design.“Zeitschrift für Kanada-Studien 36: 42–62. SlippingStar. 2017. “I Think Aloy is Aromantic and Asexual.” Reddit. Accessed April 8, 2020. https://www.reddit.com/r/horizon/comments/6rcgca/i_think_aloy_is_ aromantic_and_asexual/ Strickland, Derek. 2019a. “BioWare Might be Dying: Anthem’s Lead Dev is Latest to Depart.” TweakTown (blog). Accessed April 8, 2020. https://www.tweaktown. com/news/67119/bioware-dying-anthems-lead-dev-latest-depart/index.html Strickland, Derek. 2019b. “BioWare Has a Big Morale Problem.” TweakTown (blog). Accessed April 8, 2020. https://www.tweaktown.com/news/65435/bioware-bigmorale-problem/index.html Tired-Sparo. 2018. “Aromantic Character Headcanons.” Arocalypse (blog). Accessed April 8, 2020. https://www.arocalypse.com/topic/84-aromantic-characterheadcanons/page/10/

Ludography Bethesda Game Studios. 2011. The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim. Bethesda Softworks. BioWare. Since 2007. Mass Effect series. Electronic Arts. BioWare. 2014. Dragon Age: Inquisition. Electronic Arts. BioWare. 2015. Dragon Age: Inquisition – Trespasser. Electronic Arts. BioWare. 2018. Mass Effect: Andromeda. Electronic Arts. CD Projekt Red. 2015. The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt. CD Projekt. Eidos Montréal. 2011. Deus Ex: Human Revolution. Square Enix. Eidos Montréal. 2016. Deus Ex: Mankind Divided. Square Enix.

Periphery: The Departure from Avatar-Sexual Characters in BioWare’s Dragon Age: Inquisition

Guerrilla Games. 2017. Horizon: Zero Dawn. Sony Interactive Entertainment. Naughty Dog. 2013. The Last of Us. Sony Computer Entertainment. Spiders. 2019. GreedFall. Focus Home Interactive. The Fullbright Company. 2013. Gone Home. The Fullbright Company. Ubisoft Montréal. Forthcoming. Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla. Ubisoft. Ubisoft Quebec. 2018. Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey. Ubisoft. Volition. 2013. Saints Row IV. Deep Silver. Warhorse Studios. 2018. Kingdom Come: Deliverance. Deep Silver.

171

When the Future Becomes the Present Detroit: Become Human as Social Science Fiction Daniela Bruns

Abstract: Stories about artificially created humans, robots, androids, and cyborgs have fascinated mankind for centuries. After being picked up by literature, art, film, and television, the theme found its way into videogames. Frequently framed by a dystopian scenery and noir elements, it envisions a gloomy future that deals with the fears and anxieties of the present. In videogames, it is often accompanied by the empowerment of player avatars, providing them with special abilities to accomplish heroic deeds. The videogame Detroit: Become Human (Quantic Dream 2018) also deals with this topic but deviates from typical depictions that are characterized by the fetishization of a highly technologized future. Instead, connections to recent history and current events are established by referring to familiar images and narrations of discrimination, stigmatization, and disenfranchisement. Ultimately, Detroit: Become Human redirects the player’s attention from possible visions of the future to social grievances of the past in order to evoke the question how we as humans are responsible for (post-)human cohabitation in the present. Keywords: social science fiction, videogame analysis, androids, robots, technology and culture   Until recently, Daniela Bruns worked as a University Assistant at the Department of Media and Communications at the Alpen-Adria-University Klagenfurt (AAU) in Austria. She holds a diploma in Media Theory and Cultural Studies and a bachelor’s degree in Economics. She was the organizer of the annual Game Pics Event at the AAU which is an art project that experiments with reflections on in-game imagery. In her dissertation she investigates serious moments of social negotiation as part of games and gaming culture. Her main research interests include cultural studies, popular culture, and game experiences between escapism and activism.

174

Daniela Bruns

Introduction As part of our everyday life, popular media is an essential resource for cultural values, political ideologies, and processes of socialization. They are offering a specific understanding of reality by reflecting the social conditions of their production and articulating (hegemonial) patterns of meaning. In the foreword of his book Filmsoziologie (film sociology), Rainer Winter (1992, 7) states that movies are the most popular mass medium of the – visually dominated – 20th century and thus justifies the increased scientific interest in this medium. The study of films leads us “directly to the social conflicts, structures of meaning, and ideologies that shape our actions” (Mai and Winter 2006, 14; own translation). They can express “fears and interests, articulate sexism and political despair, but also hope and utopia” (Winter and Nestler 2010, 103; own translation). While films are still an important cultural mass product, interactive computer-based technologies such as videogames became increasingly popular among users and researchers at the beginning of the 21st century. Videogames and gaming experiences, in all their different forms and manifestations, have developed into an important aspect of our highly technologized social lives. In 2019, the Entertainment Software Association (ESA) conducted a survey with the result that 65percent of the adult US population plays videogames, whereby 60 percent of them use a smartphone, 52 percent a computer, and 49 percent a game console for playing. The average age of active players is 33 years with an average of 14 years of gaming experience. Moreover, 46 percent of the interviewed identified themselves as female and 54 percent as male. With total videogame sales exceeding 43.4 billion US-Dollar, the CEO of ESA, Stanly Pierre-Louis, proclaims the “golden age of video games” (ESA 2019, 3). Not only the industry is convinced of a prosperous future for videogames, also many academics consider them to be the most influential medium of our time. Muriel and Crawford (2018, 5) speak of a videoludification of society and state: “Not only do video games reflect wider social issues, but they also shape those social matters and drive their transformation.” Mäyrä (2008, 6) recognizes in videogames the most successful example of the domestication of information and communication technologies, which allowed them to become an integral part of everyday life and practices for a major part of the population. In his Manifesto For a Ludic Century, Eric Zimmerman states that the 20th century was a century of information and the moving image, whereas the 21st century is a ludic one, where “[d]igital networks are flexible and organic” and media as well as culture are “increasingly systemic, modular, customizable, and participatory” (2014, 19–20). Freyermuth (2015) argues in the same way when he claims that digital games are the new leading medium of the 21st century. As the central audiovisual form of expression and narration of digital culture they “shape our world and self-perception” (11; own translation). In the age of digitization, they play a role that is comparable to that of film in the sec-

Detroit: Become Human as Social Science Ficition

ond phase of industrialization: they familiarize us with a living environment that is increasingly permeated with virtualization (99). At the same time, they cannot be seen as something completely individual and independent from traditional media, other cultural productions and texts. Given the fact that media convergence (Jenkins 2006) and remediation (Bolter and Gruisin 2000) are relevant for contemporary media productions, digital games develop diverse intersections with traditional and social media. Contemporary game designers not only integrate game principles of analogue games, cinematographic aesthetics, and motifs of literary texts, but also hire professional actors and utilize social media algorithms, as demonstrated by Death Stranding’s (2019) use of motion capture technology and an asynchronous multiplayer mode (cf. Giddings and Kennedy 2006; King and Krzywinska 2006; Kücklich 2006; Adamowsky 2015, 344; Freyermuth 2015, 117–147). In retrospect Mäyrä (2008, 10) concludes for the narratology vs. ludology debate: “[T]he different emphases and foci for the study of games remain, and that is the single most valuable contribution of this debate for game studies: games can be several different things, depending on how one approaches them.” The approach used in this contribution derives from cultural studies’ understanding of mass media as resources for social knowledge and imagery that shape our understanding of the world and ourselves. Although the interpretation of a cultural product is always socially situated and can never be reduced to one meaning, its analysis can reveal issues and conflicts that are relevant for contemporary society. Accordingly, this contribution illuminates how the videogame Detroit: Become Human represents a society that is increasingly dominated by technology. The analysis starts with a basic overview of the game. Afterwards, its main theme – the figure of the android – is discussed in the context of science fiction narratives in popular culture.

Story and Gameplay of Detroit: Become Human The single-player game Detroit: Become Human, developed by Quantic Dream, was released in 2018 for the PlayStation 4 and the year after as a Windows version. The story of the narrative-based game unfolds in a futuristic scenery of Detroit, USA in 2038. Humanoid robots have become an integral part of everyday life by executing diverse functional, but also social tasks for humans. As the androids are held responsible for the high unemployment rate of 37.3 percent, they are rejected by parts of society. With the appearance of so-called deviants, androids who have developed their own will by breaking their programming, the already fragile relationship between man and machine leads to the concern of no longer being able to control one’s own creation. In this setting, the player accompanies and influences the personal journey of three androids from a third-person perspective: the care-

175

176

Daniela Bruns

taker Markus, the housekeeper Kara, and the police investigator Connor. Playing the avatars in alternating sequences, the player explores different locations of the photo-realistic world, interacts with non-playable characters (NPCs), and makes decisions that shape the further outcome of the story line. Quick-time events and time limits ensure a more dynamic gameplay that can temporarily put players in stressful situations. Otherwise, the game offers a rather low level of ludic challenge, since it does not specify a required win/lose state: Even if the avatars die, the game can be continued to one of the predefined end points of the story. Every individual chapter can be repeated and decisions are not made because of tactical deliberations, but are based on personal and affective valuations, since their consequences cannot be successfully derived from prior events. Accordingly, this game focuses on a narrative experience, prioritizing emotional impact and symbolic expressiveness over sophisticated gameplay. In an interview with the magazine Wired, the game’s developer David Cage states that videogames “should trouble you, move you, make you react” and that “[s]ome people are shocked when a game evokes real-world issues […]. But this platform is about becoming the characters, not just seeing them from the outside like in a film” (Parker 2018, para. 1). Muriel and Crawford (2018, 84–114) support Cage’s vision by describing games as very suitable for gathering mediated experiences that are uniquely individual and shared at the same time. Only a videogame can offer the feeling of embodiment by performing meaningful actions on screen – an issue which will be discussed again later on. However, the game’s representations are intertwined with the production and consumption of other media texts, for example films and television. The basic theme of androids and humanoid robots, which become sentient beings and develop their own will, can be found in many science fiction works. Short Circuit (Badham 1986), A.I.: Artificial Intelligence (Spielberg 2001), I, Robot (Proyas 2004), Ex Machina (Garland 2014), Automata (Ibáñez 2014), and Chappie (Blomkamp 2015) are just a few examples. The videogame Detroit: Become Human must be understood against the background of this narrative tradition of androids in popular texts as well as the science fiction genre. For this reason, the following section discusses the socio-cultural meanings of humanoid robots in popular narratives of the 20th century.

Robots in Popular Science Fiction Narratives Jan Fuhse (2008) describes the often-ridiculed genre of science fiction as a social phenomenon: On the one hand because “cultural forms are produced and reproduced that are part of the aesthetic discourse of society” and on the other because “science fiction plays an important role for the reflection of technology and tech-

Detroit: Become Human as Social Science Ficition

nical innovations in our society” (6; own translation). The latter includes both the discussion of possible consequences of new technologies as well as the image of technology in society. Accordingly, by producing science fiction texts the “present constructs possible futures – which [creates] a groundwork for the evaluation of current developments” (7; own translation). In his opinion aesthetic representation and sensory perception is more effective than rational discussions in the public sphere. The aim is therefore to “identify the representation of technology as well as its social consequences and to interpret them within their social context” (10; own translation). Dierk Spreen and Rainer Winter recognize in the experience of new spaces an important element of the science fiction genre. Spreen (2008) states that the insight into new locations of foreign societies, with different rituals, norms, and values, strengthens the willingness to leave the usual spatial conceptions. A look into another universe, into extraterrestrial and future communities allows us to perceive our own naturalized living conditions more consciously and familiarize us with alternative ways of life that could lie in our future. In contrast, Winter (2002) demonstrates that science fiction texts not only play with future scenarios, but also bring the present to the fore. Using the example of Neuromancer, a cyberpunk novel written by William Gibson and published in 1984, he argues that science fiction works can visualize spaces that already exist to some extent, but elude our everyday perception: “In his descriptions, he [Gibson] approaches the physical space through the structures of cyberspace and the media. […] In this way, Gibson’s urban space becomes a metaphor for the electronic spaces of data circulation, which in turn are described as imploded urban landscapes. Both are inextricably intertwined.” (86; own translation) Kevin LaGrandeur (2015) has analyzed robots and technology in film and television and interpreted them in the context of their respective social conditions. A motif that is sustained throughout the 20th century is the submission of nature through the creation of a human-like being who can think and act autonomously. Between the early and the late 20th century, however, he sees a change of meaning in relation to the representation of the robots: In the early 20th century, when industrialization and mechanization strongly interfered with everyday working life, robots were presented as supporting characters that also triggered the fear of being replaced as a human being. The robots depict a reflection of the factory workers who must execute their task emotionlessly and repetitively in a drone-like manner (LaGrandeur 2015, 115). Karsten Weber (2008, 37) complements this argument by stating that, at this time, incapacitation, dehumanization, massification, and uniformity were discussed as important sociological and philosophical issues, related to the uncertain effects of the Industrial Revolution. In the middle of the 20th century, after the end of World War II and the beginning of the Cold War, film and television reflected the fear of nuclear anni-

177

178

Daniela Bruns

hilation. Robots were agents of violence that are difficult or impossible to control by their creators. The motif of robots and androids, figures for technological progress and possible human extinction at the same time, became a common metaphor in film and television since (LaGrandeur 2015, 117). In the late 20th century, the human traits of robots were highlighted: artificially produced beings, who look, act, think, and feel like humans, try to undermine human dominion. Their marginalized status in society as well as the motives of their rebellion against humanity became more relevant, resulting in a deeper examination of their inner life. Since “the existential status of sentient androids, the status of their right and viewpoint, become increasingly important” (118), these media productions no longer appeal to the representation of androids as dangerous entities outside of society but show a possible but conflictual process of social integration. Weber (2008) considers the transformation of robots and artificial intelligence to be a development from a tool to an independent actor and is therefore compatible with LaGrandeurʼs findings. He concludes that “[…] robots and AI in science fiction literature and film represent a technology whose use and effect could potentially destroy the world – the representation of robots and AI would thus be a consequence or expression of a deep skepticism regarding technology” (34; own translation). He believes that feelings and emotions are important factors for the incarnation of machines. Only through distracting, misleading passions and fears does the perfect rational being become a flawed, and therefore human, being. According to Weber, the film I, Robot (2004) marks the provisional end point of the development from tool to actor, since robots and artificial intelligence are represented as tools and helpers, as rebels and aggressors. The calculated, rational actions of artificial intelligence is opposed to the sensitive, human behavior of the robot Sonny: “[He] still has to find his true role and is therefore in the same situation as everyone, looking for their place in society […]. The humanization of technology and the mechanization of humans are finally accomplished; the differences are blurred.” (Weber 2008, 45–46; own translation)

Representation of Androids in Detroit: Become Human The androids of the videogame Detroit: Become Human (2018) fit into the latter representation of robots. Externally, the humanoid robots are indistinguishable from humans, only a small round light on the temple reveals their artificial origin. However, this light can be removed without leaving any residue, eliminating the distinctive physical marking of androids. At first glance, the uniform androids must wear in public spaces, is the more obvious differentiating feature: there are different designs depending on the area of assignment and function, with each uniform displaying the model number of the android, a glowing blue triangle on the chest,

Detroit: Become Human as Social Science Ficition

and a matching armband. If the programming is ‘infected’ with free will, the androids can remove these external differentiation marks and go unnoticed. Then, their origin is only revealed in the case of a physical injury, since android bodies are powered by Thirium 310, which is colloquially called blue blood. The game’s androids appear extremely natural in movement, gesture, facial expression, and language due to photorealistic graphics and the motion capture technology used: Movements and facial expressions of actors are captured by cameras and converted into 3D models on the computer. The designers abandoned the perfectly symmetrical, flawless appearance of other android representations by adding small scars and unevenness to their skin. Hence the artificial beings seem to be organic and natural. In general, the game offers a very individualistic understanding of robots by only showing diverse androids in the closer social environment of the playable characters. Those NPCs differ greatly in terms of face, clothing, skin color, gender, height, and hairstyle; moreover, they have different personalities and attitudes towards humans and their own uprising. The robots are not represented as a uniform, compliant mass, but as a social group consisting of different individuals. While artificially advanced beings in other media texts, especially robots, androids, and cyborgs in videogames, have superhuman physical and mental abilities, Detroit: Become Human is very reluctant to empower its avatars. In addition to a slightly improved perception, they can process and analyze complex information faster. This ability places the courses of actions, presented to the player on screen, within the diegesis. In some situations, their display includes a probability of success, affecting the player’s decision. Connor, the only android with slightly advanced capabilities, is able to reconstruct past actions and predict short-term events. But mostly, the consequences for the three avatars remain uncertain because their abilities are predetermined in the game process and cannot be utilized individually by the player. Compared to other videogames, the interface of Detroit: Become Human is very cinematic during gameplay, as no fixed head-up display is integrated: no health or energy bar, no map or displayed objective. For a videogame that deals with advanced technology, it incorporates very few elements of cyber aesthetic. The forthcoming game Cyberpunk 2077 (CD Project Red) shows a more common aesthetic of science fiction games, by making the mechanical, artificial, and virtual aspects explicit for the player. For example, sequences of programming languages appear regularly on screen, vocal transmissions are visualized by a volume indicator, and the connection to augmented people or cybernetworks is established via cord. The cyberpunk setting integrates the anomalous elements of the interface diegetically. In Detroit: Become Human Markus can liberate other androids by touching them and Connor gains access to an android’s memory with the same gesture. Traditionally, skin contact is a very natural way to connect with other living beings, using a cable, in contrast, a very technological one. Most videogames that pick up a cyberculture

179

180

Daniela Bruns

related theme, fetishize technology and technological progress to a great extent. For Krzywinska and Brown (2015, 194–197) videogames and game technologies are playing an important role for stimulating enthusiasm for technological progress, which is realized through research, development, and of course investment. Especially, the empowering settings of science fiction games demonstrate possible futures of the posthuman, arousing a desire for the liberation of the human beings from their biological limitations. In Detroit: Become Human the androids do not have special physical abilities, the player can utilize to overcome extraordinary challenges, such as present in Deus Ex: Mankind Divided (Eidos Montréal 2016) or NieR: Automata (PlatinumGames 2017). Instead, at the beginning of the game, the players are confronted with daily tasks, which are usually not part of the heroic deeds of technologically advanced avatars: As the housekeeper Kara, the players perform duties like washing the dishes, tidying up rooms, making beds, and doing laundry. With the caretaker Markus, they are responsible for an aging artist tied to a wheelchair by serving him food, giving him his medication, and supporting him physically. The lack of superhuman abilities becomes especially apparent when the first physical confrontation between android and human occurs: Only after a long, successfully completed sequence of quick-time events, Kara can gain the upper hand and ward off her opponent. Furthermore, it is only possible to kill the attacker by finding a firearm in the household beforehand. The game does not showcase androids that can easily break the neck of an ordinary person or level the ground with their integrated weapons. The power relation between ordinary human and machine is balanced, external distinctive features are almost non-existent. The artificial intelligence and the artificial body of the machines do not take any evolutionary leaps but imitate humans without outpacing them. This raises the question of why a new – posthuman – species was chosen as the key element of the unfolding story, although its advanced technology does neither seem to play a central role in the game’s aesthetics, nor function as a diegetic framing of the player’s agency?

Androids as Representatives for the Oppressed The academic understanding of videogame avatars revolves around two aspects: Firstly, they are a representation of a protagonist/figure/personality as part of a fictional world. Secondly, they fulfill the function of a tool/prosthesis/shell by enabling player actions (cf. Klevjer, 2012; Aldred 2016; Schallegger 2017). In Rules of Play Salen and Zimmerman (2004, 453) call this avatar experience the double-consciousness of play: “A protagonist character is a persona through which a player exerts him or herself into an imaginary world; this relationship can be intense and emotion-

Detroit: Become Human as Social Science Ficition

ally ‘immersive’. However, at the very same time, the character is a tool, a puppet, an object for the player to manipulate according to the rules of the game.” (453) Britta Neitzel (2010) emphasizes the role of representation by stating that the avatar can only provide meaningful gameplay if it is embedded into a narrative. Thereby, the players can situate their actions and decisions in the logic of the gameworld. Indicating a symbolic interaction rather than an instrumentalized one, the situatedness of the avatar in the virtual world gives meaning to game actions and offers a body for identification to the player. Adrienne Shaw (2014, 94) defines identification in videogames as “a process by which we come to feel an affective connection with a character on the basis of seeing that character as separate and yet a part of us in some way.” (94) Videogames are seen as a medium that is particularly well suited to offer experiences that would normally not be accessible for players: “Video games push players into the shoes of others, allowing them to experience the world from their perspective” (Muriel and Crawford 2018, 86). Accordingly, the avatars in Detroit: Become Human are significant in two ways: The playable humanoid robots are proxies, which transfer the actions of their human players into the gameworld. At the same time, as part of the fictional world, they are symbolic representatives for oppressed and persecuted groups of people. In the game, the only connecting element of the sentient androids that actually distinguishes them from humans is that they are not naturally born but produced in CyberLife’s production facilities. When the players act as their avatars, they become victims of discrimination, stigmatization, and disenfranchisement based on this origin: they are called a ‘thing’ or ‘property’, have to endure hostile and abusive encounters with NPCs, some public spaces are forbidden to enter as an android and if they are captured by the military, they will be transferred to a recycling center for deactivation. Detroit: Become Human repeatedly refers to inhumane practices of slavery, racial segregation, and genocide. To name a few examples: the junkyard for androids evokes images of a mass grave; the division of public transport into compartments for androids and humans refers to the systematic suppression of the African American population in the United States; and triangle and armband of the android uniform induces associations of the forced labeling of the Jewish population with the Star of David during National Socialism in Germany. The chapter that takes place in the recycling center, which shares similarities with concentration camps of the Holocaust, is particularly haunting. Captured androids are dehumanized and deindividualized by forcing them to take off their clothes and deactivate their external appearance before they are lined up in front of chambers, waiting for their destruction. If the players can avoid being captured, their flight leads them to the border crossing to Canada, a country where androids are not politically persecuted. The possibility of crossing the border with a fake passport or by boat establishes a connection to the more current discourse of the ‘refugee crisis’. Even if the player does not make the required choices to unlock the men-

181

182

Daniela Bruns

tioned sequences, she/he will definitely encounter similar images and portrayals which the game offers to a great extent.

Conclusion Detroit: Become Human does not only show a possible version of a highly technological future, but it also holds up a mirror to reflect the human past and present. It does not document the destructive force that emanates from superior or uncontrollable machines, but the inhuman acts of people, revealing their monstrous side to the player. The figure of the android takes on the function of a representative on behalf of oppressed people by drawing clear connections to the human past and current discourses. Even though the overall design of the three avatars, Kara, Connor, and Markus, irritatingly fails to ascribe an equally important role to the female character as to the male protagonists1 , the game offers rather a social criticism instead of criticizing technological progress. While videogames such as Horizon: Zero Dawn (Guerrilla Games 2017) or the Fallout series (Interplay Entertainment et al. 1997–2018) show the consequences of uncontrollable machines by putting the player in a post-apocalyptic scenario with images of a bygone world (cf. Pérez-Latorre 2019), Detroit: Become Human shows the threat of a violent conflict initiated by human intolerance and anthropocentrism. At the same time, this anthropocentrism is embedded in practices of racism and discrimination from the past. By blending together, the oppression of posthuman beings with past and present conflicts of humanistic crises, the game invites its players to evaluate their current and future actions against the background of historical wrongdoings. This makes Detroit: Become Human part of a culture of remembrance and situates it in the subgenre of social (science) fiction: though the story is set in an environment characterized by technological progression, it illuminates the ubiquity of social injustice. However, Detroit: Become Human does not deal with the respective historical, political, and socio-economic conditions of those social conflicts. In this way, it transfers the responsibility for demanding and realizing equality to the individual and thereby creates a superficial image of power relations. In the worst-case scenario victims of racism and discrimination are held responsible for their own situation; in the best-case scenario, taking over the perspective of an individual with a subordinated role in society leads to the increase of empathy for others. The actual cultural appropriation of the players cannot be deduced from the game-asobject but requires a deeper engagement with the affinity spaces (Gee 2004) and related practices of gaming culture.2 1 2

cf. Obmann in this volume cf. Gabriel in this volume

Detroit: Become Human as Social Science Ficition

References Adamowsky, Natascha. 2015. “Game Studies und Kulturwissenschaft.” In Game Studies: Aktuelle Ansätze der Computerspielforschung, edited by Klaus Sachs-Hombach and Jan-Noёl Thon, 342–372. Cologne: Herbert von Halem. Aldred, Jessica. 2016. “Characters.” In The Routledge Companion to Video Game Studies, edited by Mark J.P. Wolf and Bernard Perron, 355–363. New York: Routledge. Bolter, Jay D. and Richard Grusin. 2000. Remediation: Understanding New Media. Cambridge and London: MIT Press. ESA. 2019. Essential facts. Accessed April 10, 2020. https://www.theesa.com/wpcontent/uploads/2019/05/ESA_Essential_facts_2019_final.pdf. Fuhse, Jan. 2008. “Einleitung: Science Fiction als ästhetisches Versuchslabor der Gesellschaft.” In Technik und Gesellschaft in der Science Fiction: Kultur und Technik, edited by Jan Fuhse, 6–17. Berlin: LIT. Freyermuth, Gundolf S. 2015. Games, Game Design, Game Studies: Eine Einführung. Bielefeld: Transcript. Gee, James Paul. 2004. Situated Learning and Learning: A Critique of Traditional Schooling. London: Routledge. Gibson, William. 1984. Neuromancer. New York: Ace Science Fiction. Giddings, Seth and Helen W. Kennedy. 2006. “Digital Games as New Media.” In Understanding Digital Games, edited by Jason Rutter and Jo Bryce, 129–147. London: Sage. Jenkins, Henry. 2006. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York and London: University Press. King, Geoff and Tanya Krzywinska. 2006. “Film Studies and Digital Games.” In Understanding Digital Games, edited by Jason Rutter and Jo Bryce, 112–128. London: Sage. Klevjer, Rune. 2012. “Enter the Avatar: The Phenomenology of Prosthetic Telepresence in Computer Games.” In The Philosophy of Computer Games, edited by John Sageng, Hallvard Fossheim, and Tarjei Larson, 17–38. Dordrecht: Springer. Kücklich, Julian. 2006. “Literary Theory and Digital Games.” In Understanding Digital Games, edited by Jason Rutter and Jo Bryce, 95–111. London: Sage. Krzywinska, Tanya and Douglas Brown. 2015. “Games, Gamers and Posthumanism.” In The Palgrave Handbook of Posthumanism in Film and Television edited by Michael Hauskeller, Thomas D. Philbeck, and Curtis D. Carbonell, 192–201. Hampshire and New York: Palgrave Macmillan. LaGrandeur, Kevin. 2015. “Androids and the Posthuman in Television and Film.” In The Palgrave Handbook of Posthumanism in Film and Television edited by Michael Hauskeller, Thomas D. Philbeck, and Curtis D. Carbonell, 111–119. Hampshire and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

183

184

Daniela Bruns

Mai, Manfred and Rainer Winter. 2006. “Kino, Gesellschaft und soziale Wirklichkeit: Zum Verhältnis von Soziologie und Film.” In Das Kino der Gesellschaft – die Gesellschaft des Kinos: Interdisziplinäre Positionen, Analysen und Zugänge, edited by Manfred Mai and Rainer Winter, 7–23. Cologne: Herbert von Halem. Mäyrä, Frans. 2008. An Introduction to Game Studies: Games in Culture. London: Sage. Muriel, Daniel and Garry Crawford. 2018. Video Games as Culture: Considering the Role and Importance of Video Games in Contemporary Society. London and New York: Routledge. Neitzel, Britta. 2010. “Wer bin ich? Thesen zur Avatar-Spieler Bindung.” In »See? I’m real...«: Multidisziplinäre Zugänge zum Computerspiel am Beispiel von ›Silent Hill‹, edited by Britta Neitzel, Matthias Bopp, and Rolf F. Nohr, 193–212, Münster: LIT. Parker, Laura. 2018. “A Videogame Developer Who Finds Power in Pathos.” WIRED. Accessed April 10, 2020. https://www.wired.com/story/david-cagedetroit-become-human/. Pérez-Latorre, Óliver. 2019. “Post-apocalyptic Games, Heroism and the Great Recession.” In Game Studies 19/3: http://gamestudies.org/1903/articles/perezlatorre. Salen, Katie and Eric Zimmerman. 2004. Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals. Cambridge and London: MIT Press. Schallegger, René R. 2017. “WTH Are Games? Towards a Triad of Triads.” In Digitale Spiele, edited by Jörg Helbig and René Schallegger, 14–49. Cologne: Herbert von Halem. Shaw, Adrienne. 2014. Gaming at the Edge: Sexuality and Gender at the Margins of Gamer Culture. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Spreen, Dierk. 2008. “Kulturelle Funktionen der Science Fiction.” In Technik und Gesellschaft in der Science Fiction: Kultur und Technik, edited by Jan Fuhse, 19–33. Berlin: LIT. Weber, Karsten. 2008. “Roboter und Künstliche Intelligenz in Science FictionFilmen: Vom Werkzeug zum Akteur.” In Technik und Gesellschaft in der Science Fiction: Kultur und Technik, edited by Jan Fuhse, 34–54. Berlin: LIT. Winter, Rainer. 1992. Filmsoziologie: Eine Einführung in das Verhältnis von Film, Kultur und Gesellschaft. Munich: Quintessenz. Winter, Rainer. 2002. “Die postmodernen Visionen des Cyberpunks: Zur kulturellen Bedeutung eines populären Genres.” In Wechselbeziehungen: MedienWirklichkeit-Erfahrung, edited by Lothar Mikos and Norbert Neumann, 77–92. Berlin: Vistas. Winter, Rainer and Sebastian Nestler. 2010. “: Filmanalyse als Kulturanalyse in der Tradition der Cultural Studies.” In Film – Kino – Zuschauer: Filmrezeption, edited by Irmbert Schenk, Margrit Tröhler, and Yvonne Zimmermann, 99–115. Marburg: Schüren.

Detroit: Become Human as Social Science Ficition

Zimmerman, Eric. 2014. “Manifesto For a Ludic Century.” In The Gameful World, edited by Steffen P. Walz and Sebastian Deterding, 19–22. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Ludography CD Project Red. 2020 (expected). Cyberpunk 2077. CD Projekt. Eidos Montréal. 2016. Deus Ex: Mankind Divided. Square Enix. Guerrilla Games. 2017. Horizon: Zero Dawn. Sony Interactive Entertainment. Interplay Entertainment et al. 1997–2018. Fallout series. Interplay Entertainment, 14 Degrees East and Bethesda Softworks. PlatinumGames. 2017. NieR: Automata. Square Enix. Quantic Dream. 2018. Detroit: Become Human. Sony Interactive Entertainment.

Filmography Badham, John. 1986. Short Circuit. USA: TriStar Pictures. Blomkamp, Neill. 2015. Chappie. USA: Sony Pictures Releasing. Garland, Alex. 2014. Ex Machina. UK and USA: Universal Pictures and A24. Ibáñez, Gabe. 2014. Automata. Spain and Bulgaria: Contracorrientes Films. Proyas, Alex. 2004. I, Robot. USA: 20th Century Fox. Spielberg, Steven. 2001. A.I.: Artificial Intelligence. USA: Warner Bros. Pictures and DreamWorks Pictures.

185

The Case of Pokémon GO or How an AR-Game Influences Our Lives Sonja Gabriel

Abstract: The augmented reality game Pokémon GO, which was published in 2016, is one of the rare cases where a game occupies players and non-players alike. Different from other games the players do not stay at home and play the game for themselves or with friends, but they need to go outside in order to be successful within the game. Public playing, however, means that non-players are affected as well. Thinking back of summer 2016, there were many positive and negative headlines around Pokémon GO. Digging a bit deeper into the topic, this contribution will show that many organizations and groups like insurances, religious leaders, businesses and even law makers had (and still have) to care about the game. Pokémon GO also is one of the rare cases where the company behind had to make changes to the game because of public force. Keywords: augmented reality, societal impact, Pokémon GO   Sonja Gabriel is professor for media literacy at the teacher university college KPH Vienna/Krems. She teaches use and effects of digital media to pre-service and inservices teachers. Her research focuses on digital media for teaching and learning, putting an extra focus on digital game-based learning as well as teaching values in and with digital games. Sonja Gabriel studied German and English at the university of Vienna. She wrote her PhD thesis about knowledge management at secondary commercial colleges. In two master degree courses (Educational Media at University Duisburg/Essen and Applied Game Studies at Danube University Krems) she specialized in digital media and videogames.

Introduction When talking about the influence of videogames on people’s lives, it is mostly about addiction (Shi et al. 2019), if games might make players more aggressive (Zendle, Kudenko and Cairns 2018; Ferguson 2015) or the effect playing games has on players’ brains (Palaus et al. 2017). However, digital games have arrived in our society and

188

Sonja Gabriel

some games do not only concern players or families of players, but nearly everyone. Of course, not each and every game influences people’s lives, society, economy, religion or even law. The game Pokémon GO was published in summer 2016 and went viral worldwide within a few weeks. The augmented reality (AR) game involves catching and collecting Pokémon that can be found all over parks, streets and buildings worldwide. Moreover, players can collect game items from so-called PokéStops and battle each other at PokéGyms. Two months after its release more than half a billion players had downloaded the game and it generated more than one billion dollars within one year (Hegemann 2017). Although the first hype was soon over, the game continued to be popular and could even generate more money by in-app purchases in 2019 than the years before (Statt 2020). This is due to some important changes in gameplay like introducing Raid Battles, more Pokémons and special events like the Community Day. In 2019 Team GO Rocket battles were introduced where players can battle angry-looking Pokémon at certain PokéStops. Zsila et al. (2018) found out about motives for playing Pokémon GO and state that the highest mean scores were reached in the categories recreation (meaning that the AR game is entertaining and joyful) and nostalgia (meaning that it brings up childhood memories). Social factors, escaping, and skill development played a minor role in the motives of the players questioned.

The Game’s Influence on Reality and Reality’s Influence on the Game Soon after the release, headlines of newspapers and TV shows were full of incidents like players causing or having accidents due to playing Pokémon GO. Especially short after the release when it was possible to use PokéStops while driving a vehicle. Many newspapers reported on drivers crashing into trees, buildings or other cars, leaving people injured or even dead (cf. for example Murphy 2017). Faccio and McConnell (2018) had a closer look at police accident reports for a county in Indiana (USA) and found a disproportionate increase in accidents, injuries, and even fatalities after the AR game had been released. They estimate a damage of up to $ 7.3 billion across the USA within the first five months the game could be downloaded. Due to these problems, Niantic, the company behind Pokémon GO made it nearly impossible to reach PokéStops or -Gyms while moving fast. Moreover, the game warns players with messages like “You’re Going too fast! Pokémon GO should not be played while driving” which needs to be confirmed by the player. In an experiment, Pourchon et al. (2017) found out that the game Pokémon GO introduced a new risky behavior which the authors called “Stop abruptly” (2017, n.p.) meaning that players suddenly stop when wanting to catch a Pokémon. Moreover, results showed that playing while walking results in more risky behaviors than texting while walking.

The Case of Pokémon GO or How an AR-Game Influences Our Lives

Players using the augmented reality option of the game (which means that Pokémon appear anchored to the real-world environment right in front of the player) are normally more aware of their environment and might be therefore less at risk than those players who do not switch on AR-mode. Insurance companies started discussing which consequences games like Pokémon GO might have for their industry and which measures need to be taken. As Mignogna (2018, 715) summarizes in his paper, “These games present many novel concerns, and the problems associated with them are here to stay. Ever since the release of Pokémon Go, and the problems that have followed, our society is left with a lot of questions and very few answers. […] Insurers clearly have the means, the motivation, and the information to dictate their policyholders’ behavior in lowering the risks on their properties.” Apart from the questions what happens when players cause accidents, injuring themselves or others while playing or players not paying attention to private people’s properties, there is another development involving insurance companies: As players invest much time (and sometimes even money) to collect Pokémon, an insurance company from the UK launched a Pokédex1 insurance which “covers accidental damage, including cracked screens, plus liquid damage and mechanical faults” (Holden 2016, 6). Moreover, the insurance also provides a substitute if the phone gets stolen or lost so that players can continue going on hunt for Pokémon. Another topic of hot discussions – especially within the first months of the launch but going on today as well – is the location of PokéStops and -Gyms. Originally these “places” needed for the game were derived from the portals in Ingress (another AR-game) which also included cemeteries and memorials like the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum or the National September 11 Memorial and Museum. Many people visiting places like these found it inappropriate and disrespectful that players catch their virtual Pokémon there or even fight in a PokéGym (CBS News 2016). “One user circulated an image online of a Pokémon named Koffing (for the poisonous gas it emits) appearing in the museum’s Helena Rubenstein Auditorium, which features testimonials of Jews who survived Nazi gas chambers” (Friedman 2016). Headlines like this in media worldwide forced Niantic to act – they deleted the most controversial PokéStops and -Gyms. Today, there is the possibility to request change or removal of PokéStops or -Gyms online via the website www.pokemonGOlive.com. But also families complained when suddenly their house or garden became most interesting for players. As Judge and Brown (2018, 1) state, “neither the existing laws on intellectual property nor those for real property are designed to address these types of harms.” In late August 2016 there was a massive class action lawsuit filed against Niantic. When the lawsuit was settled in 2019, new rules and regulations had to be introduced by Niantic regarding their PokéStop, the submission of Points of Interest as well as their 1

The Pokédex is the part of the game, where all newly collected Pokémon are registered.

189

190

Sonja Gabriel

review system (Zeroghan 2019). One of these changes also affects Raid Battles – there needs to be an in-game screen reminding players to be polite to other players as well as respectful to their real-world surroundings. During the first hype of the game, not all locations were controversial about being a PokéStop or -Gym. Shops, restaurants, and other businesses hoped for an increase in customers and turnover due to the players. Short after the release of Pokémon GO, Yelp2 included an option which made it possible for users to find out if there is a PokéStop nearby. As per Uzialko (2016), especially small businesses could face an increase in sales of up to 12 percent. Many websites and blogs made suggestions on how to exploit Pokémon GO craze to make more money (see for example Lariviere 2016; Cvetkovic 2016). The study by Colley et al. (2017) found out that Pokémon GO plays an important role where people go to spend their money. When they are in an area playing the game, they are likely to buy something to eat or drink.

Physical Activity The basic concept of Pokémon GO includes that players need to move around in order to find Pokémons, use PokéStops or fight in PokéGyms. Moreover, eggs can be hatched by walking a certain distance (two, five, seven or ten kilometers). Buddy Pokémons which are Pokémons that are selected by the player as their companion, find a Candy after a certain distance which is needed to develop the Pokémon. In 2018, a new feature called Adventure Sync was introduced which can be connected to either Apple Health or Google Fit so that the distance walked within a week is counted even if the app is not constantly open. Players get a reward bundle for having walked five, 25 or 50 kilometers. All these features motivate to get more exercise and go for longer walks. This influence of the game on players’ physical activity was the focus of a big number of studies. A very early study – short after the release of Pokémon GO was done by Althoff, White, and Horvitz (2016). The authors found out that there was a significant increase in physical activity, no matter if the players were male or female and independent from their age, weight status, and prior activity levels. In a pilot study, Liu and Ligmann-Zielinska (2017) found out that 64 percent of 47 participants felt that Pokémon GO made them do three times more exercise than they did before. Similar results were found by Nishiwaki and Matsumoto (2018) who did an observational study of Japanese male college students. Another study on older Japanese players and non-players found out that players of Pokémon GO are more likely to maintain their amount of steps even in winter compared to non-players (Hino, Asami, and Lee 2019). The importance of self-efficacy in physical activity and its connection to Pokémon GO was the focus in 2

Yelp is a website providing reviews by customers.

The Case of Pokémon GO or How an AR-Game Influences Our Lives

a study by Kim et al. (2018) who found out that Pokémon GO works so well because it simply is fun: “Thus, even if a game is developed to promote physical activity, it should make users feel enjoyment for the game itself but not consciously exercising more” (9). In Australia, there was even the recommendation that the public health sector should take games like Pokémon GO as an example when it comes to using technology to improve health. Freeman, Chau and Mihrshahi (2017) conclude that “[b]uilding games that are first focused on pleasure and fun, and then on improving health may be more successful”(1). Rasche, Schlomann, and Mertens (2017) see the long-term success of people playing Pokémon GO and thus doing physical exercise in the fact that the game provides different kinds of motivation: Some players want to reach the next level, others prefer collecting strong or rare Pokémon and there is also a group who likes spending time with family and friends by playing. Social interaction and social rewards were identified as the factor that motivated long-term use. However, the authors also had a look into players who had quit playing – most of them quoted boredom as a reason. Lindqvist et al. (2018) did a qualitative study on children and their parents playing the game and also found out in interviews that exploring and socializing are the main values for most players: “We found that the social aspect of the game dominated; comments about walking together, cooperating using a single account, making new friends, and sharing a common interest in the game prevailed” (4). The authors also state that the increased physical activity mainly depends on the game – as soon as it becomes boring, players might quit and then there is no long-term effect on health. People usually do not change their movement patterns when it comes to moving between their home, job or school and other destinations where they regularly go to. As studies show, however, Pokémon GO might encourage people to visit new places – especially when there are points of interest that are turned into PokéStops or -Gyms (Colley et al. 2017). The game itself gives incentives to visit new places: Players get badges or bonuses when they visit a PokéStop or -Gym for the first time. Having a look at all these studies, Pokémon GO seems to have a motivational effect on people to do more exercise. This positive effect was strengthened by Niantic as they step by step introduced more features that keep players motivated to take as many steps as possible. However, it also had a funny (and creative) side-effect as well as players also try to exploit the game by using tricks. Doing a quick search in a search engine for tricks on how to hatch eggs or earn Candies will return thousands of results. Cheats like putting the phone in a sock and shaking it, using a drone, a location spoofer or even a robotic cleaner are used to simulate walking (Davis 2020). Being outside and walking around a lot seems to have mostly positive effects on public health. However, Oidtman et al. (2016) warn against the risk of local epidemiology of mosquito-borne diseases in some areas of the world. In their paper

191

192

Sonja Gabriel

the authors claim “that the times of day when many disease-relevant mosquito species are most likely to engage in blood feeding coincide with times of day when Pokémon GO activity is likely to be high, and we note that locations serving as hubs of Pokémon GO activity may in some cases overlap with areas where these mosquitoes are actively engaged in blood feeding” (1).

Mental Health Although most studies conducted on Pokémon GO refer to its benefits for physical activity, there are some that also deal with the game’s effects. Loveday and Burgess (2017) surveyed 202 adult players to find out about flow and players’ perception of impact on their well-being. Results show that well-being was positively influenced in three main ways: extended social groups, enhanced relationships, and no change in relationships. This means, players can decide if they want to have social interaction (meeting new friends, playing with friends or family together or playing on their own). All groups can experience flow through the game. A quantitative study by Kazuhiro Watanabe et al. (2017) had a look into players and non-players of Pokémon GO and found that psychological distress was relieved by playing the game. This might be due to increased physical activity and socialization among players. This is also confirmed by Yang and Liu (2017) who found out in their study that social interaction within the game can increase well-being among players. The game can even – in some cases – change players’ behavior. Kari, Arjoranta, and Salo (2017) found in a study that players describe themselves more active since playing Pokémon GO. Moreover, routines were enhanced as the game can be played in addition to daily routines like shopping or going for a walk with the dog and thus enjoying these activities much more. Some other participants of the study also confirmed that the game helps to strengthen social bonds by playing together or even lowering social barriers because of having a common topic to talk about. The authors also mentioned that “[p]laying Pokémon GO made some players express their positive emotions more intensively, spontaneously, and openly than usually” (Kari et al. 2017, 6).

Learning by Playing Pokémon GO By playing Pokémon GO and wandering around the town or city, players are motivated to use different streets or paths in order to find new PokéStops or find rare Pokémon. This way, they might get to know different locations as well as sights. When approaching each PokéStop or -Gym has a virtual Photo Disc giving written and visual information about the place they are located. As the game is built on

The Case of Pokémon GO or How an AR-Game Influences Our Lives

real-world streets in the form of a map without street names where players can see their own location as well as the locations of nearby PokéStops or -Gyms, they need to orientate themselves on this map. The game provides a compass and the map can be rotated so that the avatar walks in the same direction as the player. As Carbonell Carrera, Saorín, and Hess Medler (2018) state, the game might even improve spatial orientation skill for male as well as female players. The authors also suggest that “playing Pokémon GO could develop students’ spatial orientation ability in the same way as formal teaching courses specifically designed for the development of spatial orientation” (250). Players are also likely to use the game as tourist guide when they are in a foreign city. Aluri (2017) carried out a study among players, finding out that more than half of the participants got curious about PokéStops and the significance of the landmark. Even more, 77 percent responded that they would use the game as a travel guide to explore their surroundings. Aal and Hauptmeier (2019) observed that some Pokémon GO players use various external communication tools like WhatsApp or Telegram to inform each other about developments, or events, follow the official Pokémon GO Twitter account, start their own YouTube channels or use forums and blogs to learn about ways to fight Boss Pokémon of Raid Battles or particular types of Pokémon. The authors also argue that “[m]any of the skills acquired during the game play of Pokémon GO can be transferred into the work life such as gathering information, strategic capabilities, social aspects, communication and flexibility” (12).

Virtual Religion? The little creatures that need to be caught, collected and fought against in Pokémon can be rooted in religion – in Shintoism (Allison 2006). Shinto is centered around invisible spiritual beings called kami which reward humans with health and success if they are treated well. As PokéStops and -Gyms are often situated in churches or other places of worship, religious communities dealt with the game soon after its release. Whereas the Vatican as well as the Church of England approved of Pokémon (Yano 2004), Saudi Arabia renewed the fatwa against Pokémon which was first issued in 2001 because of the card swapping game. The original reason for the fatwa was that trading cards with other players is part of the game and thus, players do not know if the trade turns out to their disadvantage. Moreover, gambling might lead to players forgetting about Allah and praying. “Additionally to gambling, the fatwa also mentions that Pokémon promotes the theory of evolution as nearly all creatures can be developed by players. And finally, symbols, logos and animations like the six-pointed star, the cross, angles, and triangles as well as symbols of Shinto are used. Thus, they promote devious religions and might harm players” (Gabriel 2017, 24). In Russia, a Pokémon GO player was found guilty of “inciting religious ha-

193

194

Sonja Gabriel

tred” because of posting videos that showed himself playing Pokémon GO in a local Orthodox church (Patrick 2017). The Church of England reacted in a completely different fashion by publishing a blog entry explaining the basics of the game and giving recommendations how each church might profit from the game, for example by organizing Pokeparties (Church of England Communications 2016). Birmingham’s City Road Methodist Church even put up a sign on the building that the church is a Pokémon GO gym (James 2016) hoping to get some of the people driving or walking by and catching Pokémon into church. In the USA, some churches tried to attract church-goes by displaying funny messages on church sign boards referring to Pokémon (Universal Life Church Monastery 2016). Also many Jewish sites – which are also often included in the game as PokéStops or PokéGyms – try to attract an audience (Mendelowitz 2016).

Affinity Spaces and Convergence Culture As per Gee and Hayes (2012) an affinity space can be seen as the organization of space and people who follow the same interest (for example playing Pokémon GO). These spaces can either be virtual (forums and websites exchanging information on Pokémon or advice on how to succeed in the game) but also be placed in reality, like people gathering for Community Day events or fighting together in a Raid Battle. One characteristic are the various forms of social interactions. Members of affinity spaces vary in their number as well as according to their degree of participation. Some changes within the game mechanics of Pokémon GO influenced these affinity spaces. In spring 2018 some social features were added like friend links and being able to send gifts to friends, trade Pokémon with friends, and battle with them in a PokéGym or Raid Battle. There are also certain levels of friendship which result in bonuses for reaching the next level. In the first three months after introduction of trading and friendships, “[m]ore than 113 million people reportedly made friends in-game […], and more than 2.2 billion gifts were exchanged” (Fogel 2019, 4). Following these new features, a lot of websites offered players to post their trainer code for other players to add them as friends. There are several websites and forums dedicated to Pokémon GO, either for the international community or for many countries and languages. Fans and players can also meet in live events, the first one which was held by Niantic, took place in Charlotte, North Carolina in May 2017, another one in the same year in Chicago’s Grant Park to celebrate the first year of Pokémon GO. About 20,000 players met and caused mobile networks to be overloaded. Pokémon GO Safari Zone events which were introduced in 2017 are limited to a certain number of players and take place in different regions of the world. In 2019 a total of 890,000

The Case of Pokémon GO or How an AR-Game Influences Our Lives

players met in New Tapei City during a four day event, bringing in enormous revenues (about 65 million US$) to local businesses as about 40 percent of the players were foreigners (Everington 2019). Events like these are planned months in advance so that players can plan their travels in order to take part. Apart from fans meeting online and offline, Pokémon GO also influences other media as well. As Jenkins and Deuze (2008) state, convergence should be seen as a top-down corporate-driven as well as a bottom-up consumer-driven process. In The Simpson’s episode Looking for Mr. Goodbart, Springfield inhabitants play a game called Peekimon Get which is not only a parody of the game but also how addictive and dangerous the game can be (for example the character Lenny walking into the reactor core trying to catch a Pokémon similar figure). In 2016, the YouTube channel Animation on FOX aired a short with the title Pokémon Now? in which Homer neglects his children at the zoo because of playing Pokémon GO. Also, the series Family Guy refers in one episode to the reports of deaths of players playing Pokémon GO. During a July 2016 campaign event for the US presidential election in this year, candidate Hilary Clinton said, “I don’t know who created Pokémon GO, but I’m trying to figure out how we get them to have Pokémon GO to the polls” (Darcy 2016). Of course, the list of references to Pokémon in general is really extensive which can be seen from entries in Bulbapedia which calls itself “the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia” (Bulbapedia 2020). There are also references to Pokémon in various Hip-Hop songs, for example by Ice Cube or Cam’ron (Melendez 2016). As for many popular games, fandom products reach from cosplays at live events or occasions like Halloween (also resulting in many websites and videos giving advice on how to make Pokémon themed costumes) over fanfiction where different characters like the trainers Candela, Blanche, and Spark or other figures known from the Pokémon universe are put on adventurous journeys. There are thousands of memes3 online making fun of the Pokémon craze, many websites even choosing the funniest one to present them as a collection (cf. for example (Misener 2016; 9gag.com 2020). Current developments in society and politics are always taken up by the community. A recent example are the memes featuring the Corona-virus at the beginning of 2020. There are even several Facebook pages focusing on Pokémon GO memes, most of them having more than 17,000 likes.

3

A meme is a combination of mostly images and texts which are put together to create a humorous effect. Memes are copied and spread rapidly by internet users. Sometimes they appear in slight variations.

195

196

Sonja Gabriel

Conclusion The Pokémon GO craze that started in 2016 has not only reached millions of players but also has had (and is still having) implications for many fields of everyday life. Compared to many other digital games that mostly influence players, Pokémon GO has been reaching out to non-players as well – being confronted with players that disregard personal property or being involved in accidents with players who did not pay attention because of catching Pokémon. Businesses, organizations and religious leaders had to discuss the implication of the game and decide if they wanted to exploit it or ban it. Insurance companies have to react as well as the game distracts players not only in their homes but basically everywhere. Players themselves also felt implications – either positive ones by getting fitter or negative ones because of being lured into a dark corner and being robbed by clever criminals who made use of the game hype. Finally, the company Niantic as developer of Pokémon GO had to react to real world implications by changing gameplay, mechanics or certain rules. Thus, it can be stated that the game – although having already been published in 2016 - keeps different groups of people busy, discussing what needs to be adapted, changed, and regulated, leaving Pokémon GO not only the first really successful AR-game but also the game that made it to the news headlines most often.

References 9gag.com. 2020. “Best 30+ Pokemon Go Fun on 9GAG.” Accessed February 28, 2020. https://9gag.com/tag/pokemon-go Aal, Konstantin and Helmut Hauptmeier. 2019. “Pokémon GO: Collaboration and Information on the GO.” The 17th European Conference on ComputerSupported Cooperative Work, June 8–12, 2019. https://doi.org/10.18420/ ecscw2019_ep04 Allison, Anne. 2006. Millennial Monsters: Japanese Toys and the Global Imagination. Asia–local studies / global themes 13. Berkeley: University of California Press. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=trueandscope= siteanddb=nlebkanddb=nlabkandAN=159387 Althoff, Tim, Ryen W. White, and Eric Horvitz. 2016. “Influence of Pokémon Go on Physical Activity: Study and Implications.” Journal of Medical Internet Research 18 (12): e315. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6759 Aluri, Ajay. 2017. “Mobile Augmented Reality (MAR) Game as a Travel Guide: Insights from Pokémon GO.” Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology 8 (1): 55–72. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTT-12-2016-0087

The Case of Pokémon GO or How an AR-Game Influences Our Lives

Bulbapedia. 2020. “List of References to Pokémon in Popular Culture.” Accessed February 28, 2020. https://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/List_of_ references_to_Pok%C3%A9mon_in_popular_culture Carbonell Carrera, Carlos, José Luis Saorín, and Stephany Hess Medler. 2018. “Pokémon GO and Improvement in Spatial Orientation Skills.” Journal of Geography 117 (6): 245–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221341.2018.1470663 CBS News. 2016. “Auschwitz Museum Says No to “Pokemon Go”.” July 13, 2016. Accessed February 26, 2020. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/auschwitzmuseum-no-pokemon-go/ Church of England Communications. 2016. “Why Your Church Needs to Know About Pokémon GO.” Accessed February 28, 2020. https://cofecomms. tumblr.com/post/147395478962/why-your-church-needs-to-know-aboutpok%C3%A9mon-go Colley, Ashley et al. 2017. “The Geography of Pokémon GO.” In Explore, Innovate, Inspire: CHI 2017 : May 6–11, Denver, CO, USA, edited by Gloria Mark et al., 1179–92. New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery Inc. (ACM). Cvetkovic, Ana. 2016. “How to Increase Sales for Your Business with Pokémon Go.” Accessed February 26, 2020. https://www.lightspeedhq.com/blog/ increase-sales-business-pokemon-go/ Darcy, Oliver. 2016. “Hillary Clinton Just Made a ’Pokémon Go’ Reference on the Campaign Trail – Business Insider.” Business Insider, July 14, 2016. Accessed February 28, 2020. https://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clintonpokemon-go-2016-7?r=DEandIR=T Davis, James. 2020. “8 Mind-Blowing Tricks to Hatch Eggs in Pokemon Go Without Walking- Dr.Fone.” Accessed February 26, 2020. https://drfone. wondershare.com/virtual-location/how-to-hatch-eggs-in-pokemon-gowithout-walking.html Everington, Keoni. 2019. “New Taipei Pokémon GO Safari Zone Sees 890,000 Visitors, Rakes in NT$2 Billion.” Taiwan News, October 7, 2019. Accessed February 28, 2020. https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3791871 Faccio, Mara and John McConnell. 2018. “Death by Pokémon GO: The Economic and Human Cost of Using Apps While Driving.” February 2018. NBER Working Paper No. w24308. SSRN eLibrary. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3189603 Ferguson, Christopher J. 2015. “Do Angry Birds Make for Angry Children? A MetaAnalysis of Video Game Influences on Childrenʼs and Adolescentsʼ Aggression, Mental Health, Prosocial Behavior, and Academic Performance.” Perspectives on Psychological Science: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science 10 (5): 646–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615592234 Fogel, Stefanie. 2019. “‘Pokémon Go’ Global Revenue Grew 37% in 2018 (Analyst) – Variety.” Accessed February 28, 2020. https://variety.com/2019/gaming/news/ pokemon-go-global-revenue-2018-1203098512/

197

198

Sonja Gabriel

Freeman, Becky, Josephine Chau, and Seema Mihrshahi. 2017. “Why the Public Health Sector Couldn’t Create Pokémon Go.” Public Health Research and Practice 27 (3). https://doi.org/10.17061/phrp2731724 Friedman, Gabe. 2016. “Pokémon Go Invades Auschwitz, US Holocaust Museum and More.” Jewish Telegraphic Agency, July 12, 2016. Accessed February 26, 2020. https://www.jta.org/2016/07/12/united-states/pokemon-go-invadesauschwitz-us-holocaust-museum-and-more Gabriel, Sonja. 2017. “Pokémon Go - How Religious Can an Augmented Reality Hunt Be?” Heidelberg Journal of Religions on the Internet 12, Religion to Go! - Religion in Mobile Internet Environments, Mobile Apps, Augmented Realities and the InBetweens (special issue). https://doi.org/10.17885/HEIUP.REL.2017.0.23766 Gee, James Paul and Elisabeth Hayes. 2012. “Nurturing Affinity Spaces and GameBased Learning.” In Games, Learning, and Society: Learning and Meaning in the Digital Age, edited by Constance Steinkuehler, Kurt Squire, and Sasha A. Barab, 129–53. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hegemann, Lisa. 2017. “Ein Jahr Pokémon Go: Was AR-Firmen Von Der Einstigen Hype-App Lernen Können.” t3n Magazin, July 7, 2017. Accessed February 22, 2020. https://t3n.de/news/pokemon-go-augmented-reality-lehren-836312/ Hino, Kimihiro, Yasushi Asami, and Jung Su Lee. 2019. “Step Counts of MiddleAged and Elderly Adults for 10 Months Before and After the Release of Pokémon GO in Yokohama, Japan.” Journal of Medical Internet Research 21(2): e10724. https:// doi.org/10.2196/10724 Holden, James. 2016. “Row.Co.Uk Launches Pokemon Go Insurance.” Accessed February 28, 2020. https://row.co.uk/blog/post/2016/07/19/row-launchespokemon-go-insurance James, Aaron. 2016. “Pokemon Go Puts Birmingham Church on the Map.” Premier. Christian News. Accessed February 28, 2020. https://premierchristian.news/en/ news/article/pokemon-go-puts-birmingham-church-on-the-map Jenkins, Henry and Mark Deuze. 2008. “Editorial.” Convergence 14(1): 5–12. https:// doi.org/10.1177/1354856507084415 Judge, Elizabeth and Tenille Brown. 2018. “A Right Not to Be Mapped? Augmented Reality, Real Property, and Zoning.” Laws 7 (2): 23. https://doi.org/10.3390/ laws7020023 Kari, Tuomas, Jonne Arjoranta, and Markus Salo. 2017. “Behavior Change Types with Pokémon GO.” In FDG’17: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games: Cape Cod, MA, August 14–17, 2017, edited by Alessandro Canossa, 1–10. ICPS. New York: The Association for Computing Machinery. Watanabe, Kazuhiro et al. 2017. “Pokémon GO and Psychological Distress, Physical Complaints, and Work Performance Among Adult Workers: A Retrospective Cohort Study.” Sci Rep 7 (1): 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-11176-2

The Case of Pokémon GO or How an AR-Game Influences Our Lives

Kim, Hana, Hyung Lee, Hosoo Cho, Eungdo Kim, and Junseok Hwang. 2018. “Replacing Self-Efficacy in Physical Activity: Unconscious Intervention of the AR Game, Pokémon GO.” Sustainability 10(6): 1971. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su10061971 Lariviere, Christine. 2016. “Pokémon Go for Businesses: Drive Foot Traffic and Increase Revenue.” Accessed February 26, 2020. https://sumup.co.uk/blog/ pokemon-go-for-businesses-drive-foot-traffic-and-increase-revenue/ Lindqvist, Anna-Karin, Darla Castelli, Josef Hallberg, and Stina Rutberg. 2018. “The Praise and Price of Pokémon GO: A Qualitative Study of Childrenʼs and Parentsʼ Experiences.” JMIR serious games 6 (1): e1. https://doi.org/10.2196/games.8979 Liu, Wei and Arika Ligmann-Zielinska. 2017. “A Pilot Study of Pokémon Go and Players’ Physical Activity.” Games for Health Journal 6 (6): 1–8. Accessed February 26, 2020. https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/g4h.2017.0036 Loveday, Paula and Jacqueline Burgess. 2017. “(PDF) Flow and Pokémon GO: The Contribution of Game Level, Playing Alone, and Nostalgia to the Flow State.” e-Journal of Social and Behavioural Research in Business 8 (2): 16–28. Accessed February 26, 2020. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322581896_ Flow_and_Pokemon_GO_The_Contribution_of_Game_Level_Playing_Alone_ and_Nostalgia_to_the_Flow_State Melendez, Monique. 2016. “Genius.Com Documents Pokemon References in Hip-Hop, from Ice Cube to A$AP Rocky.” July 16, 2016. Accessed February 28, 2020. https://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/hip-hop/7439057/ pokemon-hip-hop-references Mendelowitz, Josh. 2016. “Looking for Pokemon? Try Going Somewhere Jewish.” Jewish Week. Accessed February 28, 2020. https://jewishweek.timesofisrael. com/looking-for-pokemon-try-going-somewhere-jewish/ Mignogna, Justin G. 2018. “Pokémon Go, Augmented Reality Games, and How the Insurance Industry Will Help Protect a Distracted Society from Becoming Even More Distracted.” Rutgers University Law Review (50): 675-716. Misener, Jessica. 2016. “21 Hilarious Pokémon Go Memes.” BuzzFeed, July 11, 2016. Accessed February 28, 2020. https://www.buzzfeed.com/jessicamisener/teamblue-forevs Murphy, Margi. 2017. “Drivers Playing Pokemon Go at the Wheel Linked to Two Deaths and Hundreds of Car Crashes.” Accessed February 24, 2020. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/11/27/drivers-playing-pokemongo-wheel-linked-two-deaths-hundreds/ Nishiwaki, Masato and Naoyuki Matsumoto. 2018. “The Effects of Pokémon GO Playing on Daily Steps: A Retrospective Observational Study in Japanese Male College Students.” Japanese Journal of Physical Fitness and Sports Medicine 67 (3): 237–43. https://doi.org/10.7600/jspfsm.67.237

199

200

Sonja Gabriel

Oidtman, Rachel J. et al. 2016. “Pokémon Go and Exposure to Mosquito-Borne Diseases: How Not to Catch ’Em All.” PLoS Currents 8. https://doi.org/10.1371/ currents.outbreaks.2d885b05c7e06a9f72e4656d56b043cd Palaus, Marc, Elena M. Marron, Raquel Viejo-Sobera, and Diego Redolar-Ripoll. 2017. “Neural Basis of Video Gaming: A Systematic Review.” Frontiers in human neuroscience 11: 248. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00248 Patrick, Atack. 2017. “’Pokemon Go’ Player Guilty of Religious Hatred in Russia.” Euronews, May 11, 2017. Accessed February 28, 2020. https://www.euronews.com/ 2017/05/11/pokemon-go-player-guilty-of-relgious-hatred-in-russia Pourchon, Romain et al. 2017. “Is Augmented Reality Leading to More Risky Behaviors? An Experiment with Pokémon Go.” In HCI in Business, Government and Organizations. Interacting with Information Systems: 4th International Conference, Vancouver, BC, Canada, July 9-14, 2017, Proceedings, Part I. Vol. 10293, edited by Fiona F.-H. Nah and Chuan-Hoo Tan, 354–61. Cham: Springer International Publishing. Rasche, Peter, Anna Schlomann, and Alexander Mertens. 2017. “Who Is Still Playing Pokémon Go? A Web-Based Survey.” JMIR serious games 5(2): e7. https://doi. org/10.2196/games.7197 Shi, Jing, Rebecca Renwick, Nigel E. Turner, and Bonnie Kirsh. 2019. “Understanding the Lives of Problem Gamers: The Meaning, Purpose, and Influences of Video Gaming.” Computers in Human Behavior 97: 291–303. https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.chb.2019.03.023 Statt, Nick. 2020. “Pokémon Go Never Went Away — 2019 Was Its Most Lucrative Year Ever.” The Verge, January 11, 2020. Accessed February 22, 2020. https://www.theverge.com/2020/1/10/21060877/pokemon-go-recordrevenue-2019-niantic-labs-ar-growth Universal Life Church Monastery. 2016. “Pokémon Go: Good for Religion?” Accessed February 28, 2020. https://www.themonastery.org/blog/pokemon-gogood-for-religion Uzialko, Adam C. 2016. “Small Businesses Catch a Boost from Pokemon Go.” businessnewsdaily.com, August 15, 2016. Accessed February 26, 2020. https://www. businessnewsdaily.com/9328-small-business-pokemon-go-impact.html Yang, Chia-chen, and Dong Liu. 2017. “(PDF) Motives Matter: Motives for Playing Poké Mon Go and Implications for Well-Being.” Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 20 (1): 52–57. Accessed February 26, 2020. https:// www.researchgate.net/publication/312488856_Motives_Matter_Motives_for_ Playing_Poke_mon_Go_and_Implications_for_Well-Being Yano, Christine. 2004. “Panic Attacks: Anti-Pokemon Voices in Global Markets.” In Pikachu’s Global Adventure: The Rise and Fall of Pokémon. vol. 70, edited by Joseph J. Tobin, 108–38. Durham and London: Duke University Press.

The Case of Pokémon GO or How an AR-Game Influences Our Lives

Zendle, David, Daniel Kudenko, and Paul Cairns. 2018. “Behavioural Realism and the Activation of Aggressive Concepts in Violent Video Games.” Entertainment Computing 24: 21–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2017.10.003 Zeroghan. 2019. “PokéStop Removal Lawsuit: Everything You Need to Know.” Pokémon GO Hub, September 6, 2019. Accessed February 26, 2020. https:// pokemongohub.net/post/guide/pokemon-go-nuisance-litigation-everythingyou-need-to-know/ Zsila, Ágnes et al. 2018. “An Empirical Study on the Motivations Underlying Augmented Reality Games: The Case of Pokémon Go During and After Pokémon Fever.” Personality and Individual Differences 133: 56–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. paid.2017.06.024

201

Mixed Reality | Theory

An Introduction to Theory Daniela Bruns and Sonja Gabriel

While truth and fiction were still clearly separated from one another and marked as such in modernity, their boundaries are becoming increasingly blurred in postmodern times. In times of reality TV formats, digital retouching, photorealistic simulations, and cyber terrorism, it is hardly possible to set them apart. Media technologies and products offer constructed realities that neither reflect the physical nor can be understood as pure fiction without any link to reality. Take cryptocurrencies as an example: This completely new way of payment emerged without any physical counterpart that existed beforehand in the real world. Nevertheless, it affects actual money flows and transactions, influencing corporate decisions and university curricula. Existing outside banking and governmental institutions just by using blockchain technology and computational power, it demonstrates that the virtual comes with opportunities and challenges that we did not anticipate before. Because of that, it is important to rethink what already exists, to break ties and bring them back together in new ways. This is also true for human-machine interactions which produce various outputs by the interplay of organic and artificial matter. When the player’s body encounters a game system, interacting with its control devices, absorbing visual, haptic and auditory stimuli, something new emerges that cannot be traced back to a single origin. Current developments in technology enable us to mix and combine virtuality and reality in various settings, pushing the limits of what is possible while making software and hardware more accessible for institutions as well as individuals. In public perception, virtual realities are increasingly valued as productive environments for teaching skills that are beneficial for actual jobs as well as private lives. Simultaneously, they are extensively discussed in the context of addiction, antisocial behaviour, and protection of minors. Large parts of today’s social encounters happen in virtual environments, mostly not offering something completely different, as cyber optimists have thought, but transforming what is already there. Simulations and games are not just digital playgrounds for people trying to escape reality, leaving everyday life behind. On the contrary, they are part of our reality and have as many facets and mysteries to offer. Therefore, studying videogames means questioning and re-evaluating socially constructed dichotomies, like mate-

206

Daniela Bruns and Sonja Gabriel

riality and immateriality, virtuality and reality, gaming and ordinary, actual and fictional, playful and serious, escapism and activism. John N. A. Brown understands the act of playing as a process combining reflexive as well as conditioned interaction with game space. The, at first, conscious and thoughtful performances transform into bodily reactions where reflexes and muscles are automatically activated. Reaching a state of flow means the disappearing of distractions, paving the way for developing skills unconsciously. Because these skills are not only needed for mastering the game but can contribute in various ways to real life challenges, Brown suggests using game jams as testing ground for further examinations. Executing speedruns as a player requires a distinctive skillset, that is based on both a deep understanding of the game system as well as the repeated and accurate execution of action processes. In his contribution, Dejan Lukovic examines speedrunning as a phenomenon brought to life by human and machinic acts. As a metagame, building on pre-existing games but focusing on achieving goals as fast as possible portrays different kinds of human-machine-interaction. Lukovic identifies and discusses three of them: glitchless speedrunning, glitched speedrunning, and assisted speedrunning. In Frank Fetzer’s contribution, the virtual avatar is discussed as an important instrument for the player to enter the gameworld from a post-phenomenological perspective. It not only enables actions but also comes with a technological intentionality, co-shaping a meaningful relation with the world and therefore also our engagement with it. Ultimately, the encounter of flesh and technology results in a cyborg relation, dissolving the pure human status of the player-subject. While Fetzer rethinks the nature of the player-avatar-relation, Florian Kelle does the same for the ontological status of videogames and how we as scientists can approach them appropriately. By understanding them as hyperobjects, he proposes a holistic perspective on games that focuses three levels: their intentionality to facilitate playfulness, the situatedness of user and system – while treating them as ontologically equal – as well as their surrounding elements like paratexts, practices and other digital artifacts. Gernot Hausar, on the other hand, deals with the example of EVE Online and highlights the interconnectedness of digital ecosystems like game worlds and the daily lives of its inhabitants. With EVE Online, he portrays a literal microcosmos that shares more underlying and man-made principles with the real world than we might initially think, spanning all kinds of social interaction from diplomatic communication to function stock markets for galactic trade. He furthermore discusses how to integrate these (perceived) digital spaces into society on what might be considered pragmatic terms. And finally, Alexander Pfeiffer and Georg Sedlecky look into the common roots of gambling and games by discussing Huizinga’s work and Caillois’ criteria for games.

An Introductoin to Theory

Both Caillois’ playing criteria and Bartle’s player types are revisited in the context between gaming and gambling, Casinos are examined as places of theatrical play and finally attention is paid to the mechanics of gambling that are being applied to the gaming industry. The authors in this chapter focus on different practices, skills and experiences that are part of both the virtual and the physical world. By rethinking established beliefs and refining existing concepts, a basis for new theories of games and gaming can arise. In view of the progressive development and application of gaming technology in our everyday life, new approaches are needed for not only giving valuable insights in human-machine interactions but also addressing challenges and opportunities of the present and the near future.

207

Save Gamer Gamification is Making Us Less Thoughtful; Are Gamejams a Testbed for the Cure? John N. A. Brown

Abstract: Video games require the player to iterate; to repeat their behaviour over and over again, making slight progressive changes each time. This is how the player learns how to move through and interact with the gamespace, and it is also how humans learn and master new skills in the real world. In both cases, new skills are first performed slowly and deliberately, with conscious and thoughtful reflection. Eventually, through iteration, these new skills are mastered and become pre-attentive: either predictions and reactions based on high-speed pattern recognition, or bursts of incredibly fast previously learned coordinated reflexes called muscle memory. After the right kind of reinforcement, the conditioned behaviours can be triggered unconsciously. When someone’s pre-attentive and reflexive skills are repeatedly triggered, forcing them to respond too quickly for conscious and thoughtful reflection, they enter into a state of performance called flow. In gameplay and in real life, this is where distractions disappear and mastery of multiple overlapping skills can be developed. As with real life skill mastery, time spent in “gameflow” changes the player’s mind and body at an unconscious level. Application-specific gamification has been used to condition and reinforce pre-attentive behaviours that allow people to be put to more efficient use as a resource for military, political, and commercial interests. Gamejams could become the testing ground for games that develop unconscious skills that will help players level up in the real world. Keywords: Anthropology-Based Computing; BRAINS model; Conditioning; Flow; Gameflow; Gamejams; Games; Gamification; Skinner Boxes; Social Media; Triune Brain; #SAVEGAMERCHALLENGE   John NA Brown is a wandering polymath who has spent years trying to write the perfect autobiographical blurb. In this quest, he has become a research scientist, public speaker, author, designer, human factors specialist, cartoonist, bricklayer, encyclopedist, storyboard artist, and much more. He has written and taught university courses in Scientific Thinking, Research Methods, Computer Animation & Storytelling, and Applied Biomechanics, and has solved problems for Google, Face-

210

John N. A. Brown

book, and LinkedIn. Along the way he picked up a few PhDs and an embarrassing number of other academic degrees, as well as awards for animation, teaching, applied mathematics, and haiku. Currently at Evolv Technologies in San Francisco, Dr. Dr. Dr. Brown has previously worked in a dozen countries, in the private and public sectors, in serious games, in recreational sports, and in his pyjamas. He has yet to win an award for any of his autobiographical blurbs.

“You Are Standing in an Open Field.” An Introduction. This chapter is a discussion of the simple, natural fact that the tools we use change us. More specifically, this chapter will describe how the software and hardware we use unthinkingly changes the way we think. For most of the world’s population today, almost all of the information we take in and give out has to be translated to suit the hardware and software running on a few machines. This means that the hardware limits what we can experience individually and in groups, and the software? Well, the software is teaching us not to use the tools that enabled us to evolve into humans; our ability to carry on handling regular tasks while we think deeply about something else. That is where this problem ties in to the field of games. Players become engaged when an increasingly challenging game allows them to learn and master new skills to the point where those skills become ‘pre-attentive’, that is, when those skills can be exercised without conscious attention. This is how gameplay has likely been helping us adapt to our environment for millions of years. We acquire new skills and learn to perform them unthinkingly, so that we can devote our conscious attention to another problem – whether it is some new challenge, or an old puzzle that cannot be solved quickly. Commercial software products take advantage of the biochemical reward and punishment that happens in our brains, compelling us to play along whenever we are triggered to do so (Eyal 2014). This is an abuse, especially since it is not done to help us learn and grow, but to generate advertising revenue. They are happy to make more money every time you scroll your feed, even though they know that the triggered compulsion to scroll endangers lives through distraction (Carney, Harland, and McGehee 2018) and reduces the ability to think slowly and deeply (Odell 2019), which endangers lives on an even larger scale.12

1

2

https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NTSB_Determines_Engineers_Failure_to_ Observe_and_Respond_to_Red_Signal_Caused_2008_Chatsworth_Accident;_Recorders_ in_Cabs.aspx https://www.aviationpros.com/home/press-release/10397250/ntsb-issues-update-on-itsinvestigation-of-flight-188-that-overflew-intended-minneapolis-airport

Gamification is Making Us Less Thoughtful, Are Gamejams A Testbed for the Cure?

That’s a harsh statement, but I am going to spend the rest of this chapter building up a cross-disciplinary argument to show you why I believe it to be true, and I am going to provide a method to help you escape your current fate. In the end, I am going to issue a challenge to everyone who plays and makes games – especially jammers. I hope that you will follow along, that you will give the idea some thought – if you are still capable of doing so. I also hope that you will drop me a line to let me know if you have managed to start thinking rationally again. Please do not bother dropping me a line if you are still being irrational, I get enough of that every time I go out in public, whether on-line or irl.

“Somewhere Nearby is a Colossal Cave.” What’s in a Game? Games are challenging and rewarding and distracting and engaging. That is all true, but what are they really? For a good and detailed discussion of the academic study of games, please consider reading the review of literature in René Schallegger’s contribution to the 2018 FROG conference (2019). I found it informative and think you will, too. That said, his chapter and mine come from different perspectives. I want to talk with you now about the nature of games from the perspective of evolutionary psychology. Good games are small and simple enough to feel understandable, even when they also feel immense, complex, and immersive. They feel winnable, even when they also feel incredibly challenging. And, even though they are exciting and demanding, they are not deadly. Really, games are smaller, more restricted, more limited, less stimulating, and less rewarding, ridiculously primitive, recreations of some small part of real life. This is not an insult, nor is it a bad thing. Games are the evolutionary method by which thinking creatures iterate on real world skills without risking real world consequences. They are vital to our evolution and to our individual development as individually- and socially-skilled creatures. Simply put, the real world is too dangerous for us to play in when we are learning fundamental skills. The young gazelle that has not played racing games will not be able to run as quickly or turn as suddenly when faced with a lion. The lion cub that has not wrestled with its sibs will not know how to roll free should a hyena land on its back. Primates play all kinds of social games, learning physical skills, and also the social skills that enable them to live with each other according to the stable rules of their elders and the fluid behaviour of their peers. In short, a game is a closed system in which one or more players are required to solve an artificially-generated problem (or series of problems) by acquiring and demonstrating skills. Felix Schniz provides insight into one way in which

211

212

John N. A. Brown

videogames provide this service in his haunting and rigorous contribution to FROG in 2018: “To Save What’s Gone: Videogames as Eulogy” (Schniz 2019). Gameplay seems to be a trick played on us by the natural forces of evolution: due to the interesting ways in which our brains work, learning and mastering new skills in order to meet challenges happens to feel like great fun! Let’s take a look at why that is, which natural human systems make it so, and how some people are using the innate human proclivity for game play to control and diminish us so that they can profit by triggering our unconscious behaviour. Let’s also take a look at what we can do about it.

“You Are in a Maze of Twisty Little Passages, All Alike.” Conditioning; It’s Not Only for Hair Games are learning environments – they are a small, controlled, very limited system in which a player is rewarded for learning and applying new skills. This is a simplified and miniaturised version of the real world, a Skinner Box. What is that, you ask? That story starts about a hundred years ago, with a young man named Burrhus. Burrhus Frederic (BF) Skinner was a genius. He started a lifelong path of making innovative hardware in his teens, and developed psychological theories and practical methods for behaviour analysis and modification, reflecting his theory that the behaviour of all organisms is elicited and controlled by environmental variables. His Radical Behaviourism is well described in the 21 books and 180 articles he published, and in countless related works by other authors, but the curious reader would do well to start with 1958’s Verbal Behaviour (Skinner 1958). One of his most widespread innovations is the theory and practice of Operant Conditioning (Brown 2016), in which behaviour can be induced or changed through specifically-targeted variables in a controlled environment. He built, tested, and used controlled environments called Operant Conditioning Chambers, though they are more commonly known as Skinner Boxes. His other inventions are well-worth investigating. Brief summaries of his cumulative recorder, verbal summator, and teaching machine (and more, like his pigeon-guided missiles) can be found on his Wikipedia page3 , along with links to more traditional academic sources. Those with more interest and the time to invest it might consider reading his three autobiographies (Skinner 1976; 1979; 1983). Here and now, however, we are going to focus on the development and reinforcement of behaviour in controlled environments, because that is what is going on every time you feel compelled to check your social media feed. 3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._F._Skinner

Gamification is Making Us Less Thoughtful, Are Gamejams A Testbed for the Cure?

Using a deliberately-built environment in which a creature is subjected to controlled stimuli, Skinner demonstrated that behaviour can be shaped. Even if those stimuli are shallow and small on their own, the frequency and immediacy of the feedback can make any behaviour become an irresistible habit. Does that sound familiar? Do you recall ever feeling a sudden rush of relief or joy on levelling-up in a challenging game? What about when you see someone has “liked” one of your social media posts, or disliked one of your trollish comments? No? Well, did you feel a little emotional spike when I just accused you of making trollish comments? If either of those triggers worked, then you just participated in a successful experiment demonstrating that your brain is flooded with chemicals that make you feel good (a balance of dopamine, oxytocin, serotonin, and endorphine) or bad (an imbalance of serotonin and cortisol) after even the slightest stimulus. If neither of those triggers worked, then I think you are lying to yourself, even in the little, self-reflective personal voice in which you are reading these words. There, did that trigger work? Now that I have risked insulting you, let’s move on to a brief discussion of my own theories about just why your emotions are able to override your intellect. Oh, and that is not an insult about you, it is a fact about all humans.

“You Are in a Maze of Twisty Little Passages, All Slightly Different.” Thinking Fast, Slow, and Not at All. How do humans experience the world? We have to sense ourselves and the world around us before we can start learning about how the two interact, or exerting control in any meaningful way. For a more detailed examination, please consider reading the 8th and 9th chapters of my first book, ”Anthropology-Based Computing: Putting the Human in Human-Computer Interaction” (Brown 2016). If you do not have time for, or interest in how your mind and body work, then please accept the following. Here is a quick look at how our nerves and our brains work together to give us a workable illusion about the world around us. When the wind blows cool on the back of your neck, the fine hairs there stand on end. This is due to a simple, unconscious reflex arc that took place in a small subset of your nerves and muscles. Thermoreceptors in your skin detected the chill and sent an electrochemical signal to local muscles called erector pili that make your hair stand up. They can also be triggered by fear or anger, but in this particular case, skin temperature makes them stand up, exposing the skin to more temperature data, and turning the reflex arc (stimulus/reaction) into a reflex feedback loop in which the reaction changes the ability to receive further stimuli. This is illustrated in Figure 1.

213

214

John N. A. Brown

Figure 1 Reflex feedback loop (own image)

When the wind blows cool on the back of your neck, you shift your balance slightly, and rotate just a little in your hips and up along your spine, and you drop your chin lightly towards your chest. This is still just unconscious reflexes, but it is a whole bunch of them synchronised in your hindbrain. When the wind blows cool on the back of your neck, and you realise that you have flipped up the collar of your jacket without even knowing you were doing it. That is not a reflex, though we sometimes call it that. That is another type of preattentive action. If it was a reaction to the wind, then it was a bunch of unconsciously-triggered reflexive responses working in complex coordination, like in the example above. On the other hand, if you flipped up your collar because all of the people around you did it, then the pre-attentive triggering may have happened in the Limbic region of your brain, the part where complex patterns are recognised and reactive responses are triggered. When the wind blows cool on the back of your neck, you think: “Wow, that’s a chilly breeze, I should flip up the collar of my jacket” that is not a pre-attentive reflex or reaction, because it required your conscious attention, your reflection, which happens in an entirely different part of your brain. So, these three different types of reaction you have to your environment take place in three different biological processing systems. This seems to be a clue as to why we react in these different ways. You see, those three different biological processing systems developed at different times in our evolutionary history, in response to the environmental forces acting on our great-great-great-etc… grandparents. To understand that, let’s take a quick look at the very roots of our family tree.

Gamification is Making Us Less Thoughtful, Are Gamejams A Testbed for the Cure?

“It Is Pitch Black. You Are Likely to Be Eaten by a Grue.” Brain Evolution. We have discussed pre-attentive reflexes that happen, individually or in small groups, in the nerves embedded throughout our bodies. Single-celled choanoflagellates sent internal electro-chemical signals like that 850 million years ago (Burkhardt et al. 2011) and there is a general scientific consensus that those choanoflagellates evolved into all animal life on earth (Robson 2011). Modern sponges do that, too, with the same kind of simple reflexes that humans have (Leys 2015). Of course, nerve cells that specialise in carrying messages (axons) did not appear until multicelled creatures came into being. We can see the kind of reflex arcs and feedback loops that we discussed earlier in modern equivalents of primitive life forms like sea anemones (Batham and Pantin 1950). Complex combinations of reflexes that you have learned to coordinate (neuromuscular skills you have mastered like walking or juggling or catching your balance) seem to be pre-attentively triggered in your hindbrain. Primitive, jawless fish like the living lancelet (considered the closest living invertebrate relative of the vertebrates) show the development of separate forebrains and hindbrains as little bumps on the spinal cord (Stokes and Holland 1998), but it is believed that their hindbrains work like ours. As fish evolved, they developed many of the brain components that still exist in humans today. After about 150 million more years in the sea, some of our ancestors moved onto land, and after about 150 million years on land, some of their great-grandchildren became mammals. By the time that happened, these mammals had already developed a new type of brain tissue (neo-cortex). This seems to have started with an improvement in their senses of smell and then touch, the latter of which may have been linked to the development of body hair and the resultant increase of haptic input (Rowe, Macrini, and Luo 2011). They moved into the trees around the time the dinosaurs were decimated (about 65 million years ago) and their brains changed again as they developed better vision and, according to Professor Robin Dunbar of Oxford, better social relations. At some point a small subgroup of these ancestors, one of many that had moved out of the trees and back into the grass, shared a single mutation that made their jaws weaker (Stedman, et al. 2004). Smaller jaw muscles may have made it possible for their brains to expand and fill up more space. And their brains did expand, maybe because they built better tools and started eating more protein, as argued by Professor Todd Preuss of Emory University, or maybe because they learned to control fire and that changed everything about how they lived, as argued by Professor Richard W. Wrangham of Harvard. Whatever the cause, these bigger 6-layered sheets of tissue – crammed into their skulls like a handkerchief in a pocket – are where intellect expanded. In fact, you are using yours to read this now. Now, please do not make the common mistake of thinking that these sections of the brain evolved sequentially, each stopping before the next started. Instead, it

215

216

John N. A. Brown

seems that each new development led to changes in how the older sections could work, and that is likely continuing today. One lovely example is the way that natural selection favoured the gene (FOXP2) that made one subgroup of our grandparents better at using complex mouth shapes and breathing patterns. That, in turn, enabled them to have more complicated language. By a marvellous coincidence, the modifications it caused in the hindbrain and in the tissues that connect it to the rest of the brain also allowed us to store muscle memories. And yes, that takes us back to learning slow, deliberate skills, and then moving the triggering and performance of them to the hindbrain where they can be triggered pre-attentively. Cool, eh? Let’s take another look at just how very cool that is, and how it worked to our advantage for the last 200,000 years, until some profiteers figured out how to hack the system and commodify us all.

“…A Game of Adventure, Danger, and Low Cunning.” Go with the Flow. When someone is repeatedly triggered to use their pre-attentive and reflexive skills, responding too quickly for conscious and thoughtful reflection, they enter into a state of performance called Flow (Csikszentmihalyi 1997). In gameplay and in real life, this is where distractions disappear and mastery of multiple overlapping skills can be developed. As with real life skill mastery, time spent in “gameflow” changes the player’s mind and body at an unconscious level. Time spent in flow allows us to increase cell density and blood circulation in specific parts of our brain, and gives us the unconscious repetition that allows us to turn deliberate, conscious, complex muscular coordination into pre-attentive, complex muscle memories. This results in the mastery of many of the skills we take for granted in real life, such as forming complex speech sounds with unconscious precision, learning to walk and drive, to knit and read, to perform calculus and carpentry. But which physical and mental qualities do we develop in gameflow? It is not as simple as developing fast thumbs and learning command combos. In gameplay the player is learning new ways of thinking, even if they are unaware of it. What’s that? You have been playing games for years and you are absolutely certain your way of thinking has not been manipulated by them? That may be so, but please consider that games are designed slowly and deliberately, and then played quickly and unthinkingly. Whatever has or has not happened in your specific case, it is a simple fact that games have been designed to build unconscious skills that allow the player to be put to more efficient use as a resource for military, political, and commercial interests (Brutzman 2011; Hassan and Hamari 2019; Rey 2015). Is it really that easy to manipulate other people? Yes, yes it is. And it is really that easy to manipulate you, too, and me. Again, this is not an insult. It is a statement of fact. Please understand: the part of your conscious self that is reading this

Gamification is Making Us Less Thoughtful, Are Gamejams A Testbed for the Cure?

chapter is not in charge of the rest of you. We think our thoughtful, personal, self is in charge, but conscious, reflective decision-making is always trumped by unconscious reactions, and those reactions are always trumped by reflexes. Do you remember when I referred to reflex arcs a little while ago, and how they become feedback loops? And do you remember the suggestion that we have three different biological processing systems? Let’s consider all three processing systems as the sites where simple feedback loops take place. Figure 2 shows those processing systems stacked in order of priority… but the priority is depth, not height. The ones taking place in your nerves and spinal cord – the real reflexes – go through a cycle in thousandths of a second. For practical purposes, we lump them together with the reflexes you have learned to coordinate (muscle memory) cycle through at about the same speed, in your hindbrain or cerebellum. That is much faster than the hundredths of a second it takes to react to something according to pattern recognition which happens in your midbrain or limbic system.

217

218

John N. A. Brown

Figure 2 Hierarchy of Feedback Loops (own image)

And your conscious thought? The part of your brain that can apply logic rather than habit, that can read rather than react? Those thoughts happen in the wrinkled and folded sleeping bag-sized brainhat that is the neocortex, and that is slow. Thoughts there happen over seconds, minutes or hours… even days, weeks, or years. That is, if we give them enough time to happen at all. Professor Einstein famously claimed that his deep thoughts were not the result of being particularly smart, but the result of spending more time thinking about any given problem. If this is so, and I would not dispute the good professor’s observations, then what is to become of human problem-solving when we are training ourselves to react rather than to reflect?

Gamification is Making Us Less Thoughtful, Are Gamejams A Testbed for the Cure?

“Kill the Troll with the Sword.”: Games Don’t Kill Thinking, Foozle Kills Thinking Gamification used to be the addition of game elements to non-game enterprises, but the simple addition of badges was not always engaging (Hamari 2013). Modern gamification has gone much further. It is the deliberate attempt to design an interaction that will engage a user at one or more pre-attentive level, allowing the owner and clients of the gamified system to interact directly with the user’s emotional and irrational, easily scared and impressed, completely illogical midbrain. The people who are doing it have a lot of money at stake, as is shown in the ongoing legal battles they engage in to protect and preserve their property and processes. Evidence of this kind of corporate behaviour in regards to gamification can be found in the popular press (Wingfield 2012). For a discussion of similar battles in the field of computer games, please consider reading the extensive legal history in Emir Bektic’s contribution to the 2018 FROG conference (Bektic 2019). In both cases, the corporations are well aware of the fact that those who interact with their software cannot think logically during gamified interaction. Consider Figure 3, an illustration I have been using for years in lectures and in publications to illustrate the hierarchies of our thoughts. The image shows a starfish holding a protoprosimian which, in turn, is holding a small ivory tower. The starfish represents your nervous system and hindbrain: all of your senses and your individual and coordinated reflexive responses to the world.

219

220

John N. A. Brown

Figure 3 The BRAINS model (own image)

The protoprosimian represents the fast predictions and reactions that happen based on complex pattern recognition in the limbic part of your midbrain, based on complex streams of sensory information from the starfish. And the small ivory tower? Well, it has a single small window, into which the protoprosimian is constantly screaming or whispering. And the creature informed only by those whispers? That is your conscious, attentive, reflective mind. According to that model, gamified social media create an environment where the protoprosimian is constantly demanding more information from the starfish, and constantly reacting to the resultant data in order to trigger more. Maintaining the

Gamification is Making Us Less Thoughtful, Are Gamejams A Testbed for the Cure?

flow triggers a constant stream of pleasure. The protoprosimian knows it is doing a very good job. This means that the thoughtful and deliberate and conscientious person in the ivory tower never has a chance to participate in processing information until after that information has already been accepted or rejected. And this is very, very dangerous, indeed. Remember, please, that conscious and deliberate thought – thought that includes logic – is very, very slow when compared to pre-attentive reactions. By the time we can apply logic to assessing this new information, we are too late. We have already reacted to that information, and used our feelings about it to build up complex and illogical new ideas that we have never taken the time to evaluate with the only part of our brain capable of critical thinking. To use a different analogy, imagine architects looking at a tower that is being built far faster than they can make a plan. The bricklayers are high above her, working fast and paying no attention to the source or flimsiness of their materials, or to her intent to be in charge. With no way to take control, and a strong feeling of possessiveness, they begin to use all of their skills to build a support structure that might serve to keep the tower from collapsing. Best to hold your tongue if you see any flaws in the tower. The architect does not want any outside critiques, no matter how logical or well-intentioned. They have neither time nor resources to reconsider any aspect of the tower. That opportunity has passed. They shout the slogans, and wear the red cap: “Make Architecture Great Again”. They are devoted to the cause of the tower, and they put all of their effort into finding ways to buttress the turrets, no matter which way they turn, and regardless of any obvious flaws in their foundations.

“As We May Think”: The Intersection of Moore’s Law and the Dunning-Kruger Effect Let’s leave the architect and the bricklayers to their observably-fragile and illogical skyscrapers; their complex constructions built on blind ignorance and reinforced with desperate, convoluted scaffolding. Let’s stand back a little ways, and discuss how people might have thought under the influence of immersive computing, if the designers had been better-informed and better-intentioned. There once was a man who tried to imagine a day when the average worker would benefit from personal computer technology, vast communications networks, and access to all of the information in the world. In 1945 the world war had ended and most people were looking towards the future. The general population got in-depth news by reading hard-copy websites called “magazines”. Most of their content was long-form, by today’s standards, and

221

222

John N. A. Brown

it was almost always written by and edited by experts. In one such magazine, The Atlantic Monthly, one of the leading scientists of his day tried to explain how technology was going to change the workplace, and not just by changing our tools. “As We May Think” is more than just a beautiful futurist essay by Dr Vannevar Bush, the Director of the Office of Scientific Research and Development. Dr Bush was telling the 6,000 scientists working under him, and the general public, that knowledge was going to become the currency of the future, and that true value would be in knowing how to use it (Bush 1945). The technology of his time was very different from the technology we use today, but his idea of the desk of a knowledge worker became the model for the “desktop” that is ubiquitous in all of our Graphic User Interfaces. Seriously, read that article. Yes, it is more than 200 words long, and it has no ad breaks or memes to distract you. But it does contain a complete masterclass in how to motivate and inform the public. What’s that, you say? You do not need a 75-year old masterclass delivered in an obsolete medium? You already know everything you need to know? Well, I am impressed. I have got more than a handful of university degrees, and a couple of decades of experience working in industry on half the continents on our planet. I have written and conducted academic training at half a dozen universities, and I have written and conducted professional training for dozens of companies, including three of the biggest in Silicon Valley. And you know what? In the greater picture of things, I don’t know squat. I work hard to learn new things every day. But there is way more to learn than I will ever be able to absorb. The only way we can avoid ignorance is by embracing it. Every day, I remind myself that I am more ignorant than knowledgeable; that everyone I meet has something to teach me; that everything I try to do can be improved by the thoughtful, well-intentioned critique of others. This is the fundamental, underlying principle of scientific thought, as opposed to faith: I must not ever use my ignorance as a shield. Now, not everyone thinks this way. In fact, I would go so far as to say that no one thinks this way naturally: we have to learn that it’s a viable strategy, and then we have to work at it (Brown 2018). If we do not, then we will be like the architects watching the bricklayers in my earlier example. We can assume that they are intelligent, and well-trained, and board-certified, and that they are members of the local, national, and international chapters of their professional association, but the way they are working prevents them from using any of their intellect productively. Instead, they are using all of their skills to defend the indefensible.

Gamification is Making Us Less Thoughtful, Are Gamejams A Testbed for the Cure?

As We Should Think: The Intersection of Reasoning and the Unreasonable. We are tribal by nature, having evolved in social groups that depended on one another for survival. As such, we are conditioned to react in accordance with the herd. Scientific thinking – using the opinions of informed others to calibrate our own – is a modification of that instinct based on reacting with the slow and rational processors in our prefrontal neocortex, rather than with the fast, emotional and illogical pre-attentive processors in our limbic system or the cerebellum’s unconscious reflexes that can manifest individually or as herd behaviour. And well-informed others are the key. Wellinformed others help us progress from bird-brained superstition based on misunderstandings and ego-centric assumptions (Skinner 1948; Barnes, Esterle, and Brown 2019) to rational acceptance that the as-yet unknown is, simply, unknown. But, boy is that hard to learn! The processor in our limbic system is, well, intuitive. It is faster and less demanding, and provides chemical rewards more quickly… and it is what we are used to. The prefrontal neocortex is the last processing system to develop as our brains mature. In most people, it is not fully functional until they are in their early- or mid-twenties. That means that we usually have a couple of decades of using the faster, reactive, unthinking systems before we are fully able to think deeply. It is really no wonder that people, all people, find it harder to think deeply than shallowly. Thinking deeply and slowly and rationally is a learned skill and, frankly, it is not always rewarded. For a beautiful discussion of this concept, and the self-discipline required to be truly thoughtful (rather than self-deluded about our thoughtfulness), please consider reading Jenny Odells’s new book How To Do Nothing (2019). In the growing field of epistles to deliberate thoughtfulness, her work stands out. For a better understanding of how we may think when our thinking is shallow, please consider reading the collection of essays Self-insight: Roadblocks and detours on the path to knowing thyself, by David Dunning (2012). The semi-eponymous DunningKruger effect is the observation that, the less one knows about something, the less they believe is knowable about it. The result is that the informed realise that they have a lot more to learn, while the ignorant believe that no-one could possibly know more than they do. Looking into this might help you to understand current worldwide political trends. If you really take the time to think about it, it might even help you see where you are deceiving yourself. And speaking of deceit, when did it become acceptable to put short-term profit ahead of potential long-term harm to others? If you know, beyond any reasonable doubt, that your company’s strategy for revenue generation is based on exploiting unthinking reflexes and reactions, and you see strong evidence that this aspect of your product is a latent hazard to user safety, should you rethink your strategy? And if you decide, in rethinking your strategy, to further exploit those hazards, and you

223

224

John N. A. Brown

see that your exploitative model is being used by malicious actors against the best interest of your clients, and even against the governments that protect the rights of client base you are exploiting, well, when do you accept responsibility and look for another, safer way to generate your profits? I mean, now that the effects are known, we cannot reasonably expect companies to put the safety of others ahead of their corporate profit margins, can we? What would be next? Should we then demand that gamification be used to make people better at thinking rather than just reacting? Why that seems ridiculous, doesn’t it? Or does it? What do you think? Please take your time to reflect on the question, and then answer again. If you would like some more data to work with, you might consider reading the next section.

As We May Game: The Intersection Between Gamers, Scientists, and the Popular Press. I almost subtitled this section: the intersection between problem-solving girls and insensitive boys, but decided it might accidentally upset any particularly fragile Men’s Rights activists who might stumble across this book. I would hate to accidentally offend them. I would much rather do that on purpose, just by pointing out current and historical facts. But I digress. This section starts with a story about violent boys, and moves on to a story about cooperative girls who are good at math. Hrmm.. that really does sound like I am provoking someone, does it not? Once upon a time, the news was full of stories about how violent video games were making boys more violent. This was largely due to a misunderstanding of the scientific studies those news stories claimed to be reporting. You see, exposure to recurrent violence in video games was having an effect on the behaviour of the boys in question. It just was not the effect that was usually reported. I think that we all heard about the studies in question. I also think that less than 1% of the people who heard about the studies ever read them. According to the aforementioned Dunning-Kruger effect, we can predict that most people who heard of the studies believe that they know the whole truth about games changing brains and, in their ignorance, either agree or disagree with conviction, passion and even vehemence. In fact, as explained above, that passionate certainty is a very strong sign of ignorance. The few of us who actually read the studies have our own calm and reasoned reservations. Work towards finding causality between violent play in video games and violent behaviour irl has been going on since violent video games appeared on the radar of the scientific community. Dr. Christian Montag from the Institute of Psychology at the University of Bonn was lead author on the much-cited study on this topic

Gamification is Making Us Less Thoughtful, Are Gamejams A Testbed for the Cure?

(Montag et al. 2011). The title and abstract of the original study reveal a bias and, in my opinion, an experimental flaw, neither of which were mentioned in the popular press. Basically, the press reported that playing violent videogames made boys more violent. This was immediately used to link video games to real-world violence, including school shootings and other extreme behaviour among young men. Let’s take a quick look at what the study actually reported. The paper was called “Does excessive play of violent first-person-shooter-videogames dampen brain activity in response to emotional stimuli?” Honestly, the answer lies in the second word, doesn’t it? “Excessive play”? Well, if it is excessive, then yes, I suppose it leads to all kinds of bad things, because that is what excessive means, isn’t it? Excessive drinking of good, clean water can poison a healthy human, and excessive breathing can make you pass out. It might be better to ask how much is excessive, and in what ways will it effect the player and those around them. Now, let’s try again to look at the actual paper. The paper was an attempt to see if young men who played an average of 15 hours of Counterstrike per week would react abnormally to violent images, and whether those reactions might be linked to neuronal changes observable on an fMRI. There are a lot of causative and associative assumptions inherent in this design. I will not go into them very deeply here, but I do encourage the reader to go through the paper themselves – especially those aspiring to a career in research. The subjects reacted to seeing the images of gameplay violence with greatly increased activity in their amygdala, the limbic region of the brain, where fast reactions and emotions are processed. This finding was one of two points heavily reported in the popular press and in the University of Bonn’s official press release from 2011.4 However, Montag provided an additional piece of information that should not have been ignored. What’s more, the first word of the following quote from the press release seems to me to reveal a slight experimental bias. “Surprisingly, the amygdalas in the subjects as well as in the control group were similarly stimulated […] This shows that both groups responded to the photos with similarly strong emotions.” Where the experimenters did find a measurable difference was in the part of the neocortex where we attempt to control our fear or aggression. The left medial frontal lobes of the game players were less active than those of the control subjects. Please think about what that might mean before you read the next quote. I am wondering, specifically, if your interpretation might be different than the one that was reported: “First-person shooters do not respond as strongly to the real, negative image material because they are used to it from their daily computer activities. One might also say that they are more desensitized than

4

https://www.uni-bonn.de/Press-releases/violent-games-emotionally-desensitizing

225

226

John N. A. Brown

the control group” (ibid.). Now, personally, I think that being “used to” or “desensitized” to images of violence (25% of which are from familiar gameplay) is quite different to being desensitized to violence. It is also interesting to note that the brain activity that was actually being measured was their own effort at self-control. The experimenters seem to me to have assumed that measuring less effort meant that the gamers were not trying to control their emotional reactions. And sometimes when people put less effort into something it means that they are not trying. But other times, less effort is expended because the person being observed is better at the task being performed. Is it not possible that this means that the gamers in question were better at self-control? Please take a little time to think about this report of observed differences in the brains of gamers and non-gamers. I am not asking you to agree or disagree with the findings reported in the paper or in the press. I just think it would be a good thing for you to consider that gaming might make a measurable difference in how your brain works. Maybe even in more than one way.

As We Shouldn’t Game: The Intersection Between Gamification and Conditioning. The paper I have been talking about includes another interesting piece of information that didn’t get as much attention in the press release or in the press. They report that the brains of Counterstrike players reacted differently than expected when exposed to images from the game. Montag et al. expected to capture addiction-style reactions in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and the temporal lobe, as reported in an earlier study on WOW players (Ko et al. 2009). Instead, the gamers in this study showed activity that “might reflect the planning of game moves” and “automatized neuronal processing relevant for a successful outcome in ego-shooter games”. The authors also referred to this “automized neuronal processing” as “action scripts” (ibid). This is what I have been referring to as the fast, emotional, and illogical, preattentive processes in our limbic system. So, it seems that these boys had learned new strategies for dealing with familiar problems, and had developed the ability to execute these strategies unthinkingly. Now, to me that seems to point towards three interesting lines of thought. The first runs like this. Are we all developing patterns of unconscious behaviour based on the repeated experiences that manifest in our preferred game(s)? If so, does this learning only affect our unconscious behaviour in-game, or does it also change the way we do things in real life? The second line of thought runs like this. Martial artists spend years training so that, when there is no time for conscious thought, they can cede control to a carefully designed sub-routine that runs in a faster part of their brain. What are

Gamification is Making Us Less Thoughtful, Are Gamejams A Testbed for the Cure?

the unconscious behaviours that we are learning to perform? If our gameplay is training us, what is it training us to do? And the third line of thought runs like this. Could gameplay be designed to deliberately change the way that players will react, even when they are not playing? Could it be that every hour you spend improving your gameplay is also changing your behaviour in real life? In case you have skipped all the earlier parts of this paper, and just landed on this page by accident, the answer is: Yes, they can. Gamers tend to have faster ‘working memories’ or reaction times (Colzato et al. 2013). Now, these skills are not what worry me. What worries me is the fact that the skills shown to have developed in gameplay involve fast, unconscious reactions – faster than the individual gamer can exert conscious control. Why do I worry about that? Because I believe that this also applies to gamification of non-game products, and as such, it is absolutely pervasive. I believe that the conditioned reflex to scroll on a live feed is responsible for a terrifying number of deaths, as reflected in the World Health Organization’s road traffic injuries fact sheet (World Health Organization 2020), and that it is also responsible for a terrifying amount of profit for the people who use it to manipulate us into scrolling past more ads, which makes them more money.

As We Should Game: The Intersection Between Levelling Up i-g and Levelling Up i-r-l. So, it seems that gameplay has always been a part of fundamental skill development, training, and familiarization. And it seems that video games do the same, whether intentionally or not. For an in-depth discussion of games that have been deliberately and transparently designed to train the user, please consider reading Daniela Bruns’ extensive discussion of the topic in the chapter that she has contributed to the previous FROG volume (Bruns 2019). Not all in-game training is for the benefit of the player. Games can be specifically designed to train unconscious player responses in real life (Platoni 1999). I have designed and produced games that were intended to change the thinking of the players, and I believe that you should be designing them, too. But, you know, you should be designing them for the purposes of Good, not Evil. And I am not kidding; I truly believe you could and should do that. Please consider the following brief report on an interesting example, a study that got a lot less coverage in the popular press than the ones that focussed on violence and insensitivity. I strongly recommend that you read the paper I am about to discuss. It contains some information that you really should know if you play games at all, and if you design games at all, and if you happen to know and care about any humans at all, or

227

228

John N. A. Brown

even happen to be one yourself. Seriously, this is important stuff. And it has some cool pictures of brain activity. For those of you who hate cool pictures, it also has long, boring columns of words and numbers – something for everyone! In 2009, three scientists from the USA and Canada published an open access article about research they had done showing that playing Tetris (Pajitnov 1984) actually changed the brains of a group of girls (Haier et al. 2009). Haier and his team recruited 26 young women between the ages of 12 and 15, none of whom self-identified as players of Tetris or other games. All of the participants were taught how to play the game, and given 15 minutes to practice before undergoing an fMRI scan of their brains. The test group (n=15) were given access to an on-line version of Tetris where their timing and scores were tracked during 40-line games. They were asked to practice “as their schedules permitted”, and they averaged 90 minutes per week. The control group was asked not to play Tetris at all during the three-month trial period. At the end of the trial, all of the girls underwent another fMRI session, including the 15 minutes of gameplay. Here’s what they found. The group who had been playing Tetris all had real, physiological changes to their brain structure. The part of the brain that processes the relationships between multisensory input became more active (as measured in the amount of blood flow), and the part of the brain related to planning complex coordinated movement actually got thicker. Now, they didn not end up looking like the Star Trek’s Talosians, but then again, they only trained for three months. So, the repetitive movements and thoughts involved in gameplay seem to have a conditioning effect on humans, and that conditioning seems to be associated with changes in behavior and in the physical structures of both brain and body. And body? Yes, your neuromuscular structure changes with repeated movements, and this naturally includes repetitive gameplay. That your body changes in accordance with activity should not be surprising. We are now learning that the same is true of our brains. Now, just to keep you all from getting too excited about being on the cutting edge of self-improvement, I want to stress that playing in real life has the same effect, as illustrated in a study that showed increased brain size related to learning to juggle (Draganski et al. 2004). So calm down, playing video games is not going to change you into the Avengers… or even Freakazoid. But it could improve your ability to think – consciously and unconsciously. Which makes me wonder if gameplay could not also improve one’s ability to switch from one style of thinking to the other. That would be a real superpower, and it would do a lot of good in the world.

Gamification is Making Us Less Thoughtful, Are Gamejams A Testbed for the Cure?

“The Dungeon Master Is Taken Momentarily by Surprise.” We Are Already Living in Augmented Reality. MORPHEUS This is your last chance. After this, there is no going back. You take the blue pill and the story ends. You wake in your bed and you believe whatever you want to believe. The pills in his open hands are reflected in the glasses. MORPHEUS You take the red pill and you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes. Remember that all I am offering is the truth. Nothing more. (The Wachowskis 1999) Let me ask you another question. If playing Tetris for 30 minutes every day can change the structure and performance of your brain, what does it do to your brain when you spend about 8 hours every day using the GUI on your laptop and at least that much time using your smartphone? Mark Weiser predicted the Internet age and the importance of truly humancentered software and hardware design in a paper which concluded: “Machines that fit the human environment instead of forcing humans to enter theirs will make using a computer as refreshing as taking a walk in the woods” (Weiser and Brown 1995). Well, it seems that machines that force humans to enter their environment are making something else, entirely. They are changing our brains and we don’t know how. Now, that is frightening for an old man like me, but what about for a young child? Today, children are growing up using computerised devices more than non-computerised devices. How are their brains adapting to this? It seems very, very likely that this would be affecting both their behaviour and their actual brain structure. That is an idea that could seem to be very, very scary… Or it could be very promising. What if we start building interfaces that improve cognitive abilities and the understanding of complex relationships? What if we hide them in elements of gameplay so that our everyday, gamified computer use would make deliberate improvements to our brains, rather than the coincidental changes that are likely being made when designers and engineers only considers the human as a commodity – a generator of remunerative ad views. Then our digital world would have the possibility to become something vastly more wonderful than it is now, something that could literally empower us all. This is an incredible opportunity, my friends, and I invite you to join me in rethinking the way computer games should be built and played. The choice is yours.

229

230

John N. A. Brown

Take the blue pill and carry on living as a reflexive spark plug in the Commodification Matrix, playing with or even building tools that will help people be better unconscious income generators for billionaires. Or take the red pill, and step out of the illusion that the gamified software in your computers, tablets, and phones is there for your own entertainment. Think about how gameplay really interacts with the human mind, and try to design and build tools based on empowering gamers. It will not be easy, but it is possible to imagine a world in which every gamified device we use makes our brains stronger, kinder, more thoughtful, more powerful, and more gentle. If you want to try, please start by turning off scrolling on all of your apps and devices. If you have a hard time doing that, it may be because you are unconsciously dependent on the positive chemical feedback the process is triggering in your brain. Of course, it is also possible that your software and/or hardware have been built in a way that makes it hard or even impossible to turn off the option that is training you to be a commodity. If you find that to be true, how will you react? Will you stop using it, or change the way you use it, or will you just accept that some billionaire is exploiting you to generate revenue? That is a decision that smokers and other addicts must make every day. What will you choose?

“…Dispelling the Darkness of Ignorance and Danger.” Big Boss Battle! Congratulations, you have reached the final section of this chapter. Of course, that means that you are now faced with the greatest challenge of the entire experience. You have defeated long-winded phrases and idiomatic grammar, overcome obscure academic and cultural references, and maybe decided to accept responsibility for your own unconscious interaction with your own devices. Now, you face a new challenge, one much harder than any so far. For the final Boss Battle of this chapter, I challenge you to come up with a gameplay element that will change the unconscious irl behaviour of those who play it. Specifically, I challenge you to find a way to condition gamers to switch from unconscious reactions to conscious and deliberate thoughtfulness when the time is right. How would that look? Well, I could tell you what I imagine, but that would defeat the purpose. And besides, I am hoping you will think of something even better. Just imagine any gameplay scenario in which a player is usually in flow – unconsciously performing tasks faster than her conscious mind can follow. Got one in mind? Okay… now interrupt it with a task based on cognitive reasoning, like logic, arithmetic, geometry, or reading comprehension. Find a way to do it in gameplay, so that the player can iterate, and learn, and become conditioned to easily and unconsciously switch processing systems and think slowly in the midst of flow. Maybe

Gamification is Making Us Less Thoughtful, Are Gamejams A Testbed for the Cure?

the player does this by leaving flow, or maybe by multitasking, using complex pattern recognition and muscle memory to perform tasks, while also engaging their cognitive abilities in a parallel task. Now that would be a super power! What do you think? Can you- eh? What’s that? Oh… Excuse me for my lack of clarity. This is not a challenge for game designers, and I do not expect to see it answered with a full-fledged commercial video game. Of course, that would be great, but it is not what I am expecting. This is a challenge for anyone reading this chapter, and for anyone they chose to tell. You do not need to produce a full game to test your ideas, just a bit of gameplay. Why not give it a try in the next short game you build, whether by yourself, with friends, or with strangers. Anyone can build games, regardless of their skill set, just by teaming up with others whose skills complement your own. The best venue I know of for this kind of task is a Game Jam. It’s been about 25 years since I last worked in a game studio, about 15 since I wrote and produced my last serious game, and about 10 since I last wrote any functional code, but I have had a lot of fun at Game Jams, working with friends and strangers to build playable short games by contributing ideas and artwork and voices. You could be doing the same. Not sure where to start? Well, for an in-depth introduction to the concept of short games, with specific examples of game jams, please consider reading Wilfried Elmenreich’s excellent contribution, “Short Games – Quickly Made, Quickly Played” (2019). Professor Elmenreich is a dedicated gamer and jammer, and his work is always interesting and informative. And when you do start building and testing your own gameplay elements, please consider answering the #SAVEGAMERCHALLENGE. The gameplay element you design could be the one that prevents distraction in drivers, or subconscious indoctrination on social media. Want to find out if you can do it? I do not blame you… I also want to find out if you can do it. If you do try, please use the #SAVEGAMERCHALLENGE hashtag on social media, and please reach out to me through the editors, or via my contact information provided in this volume. I would love to know how you tried, what you learned, and where and when you are going to try next. If you try and succeed, please send me a link to the game. If yours is one of the innovations that frees humanity from the Commodification Matrix, I’d like to be able to thank you in person.

References Barnes, Chloe M., Lukas Esterle, and John N. A. Brown. 2019. “”When you Believe in Things that you don’t Understand”: the Effect of Cross-Generational Habits

231

232

John N. A. Brown

on Self-Improving System Integration.” In 2019 IEEE 4th International Workshops on Foundations and Applications of Self* Systems (FAS*W), 28–31. Batham, Elizabeth J., and C. F. A. Pantin. 1950. “Muscular and hydrostatic action in the sea-anemone Metridium senile (L.).” Journal of Experimental Biology, 27 (3): 264–289. Bektic, Emir. 2019. “Game Preservation.” In Savegame: Perspektiven der Game Studies, edited by Elmenreich W., Schallegger R., Schniz F., Gabriel S., Pölsterl G., and Ruge W., 207–224. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Boot, Walter R., Arthur F. Kramer, Daniel J. Simons, Monica Fabiani, and Gabriele Gratton. 2008. “The effects of video game playing on attention, memory, and executive control.” Acta psychologica 129 (3): 387–398. Boot, Walter R., Daniel P. Blakely, and Daniel J. Simons. 2001. “Do action video games improve perception and cognition?.” Frontiers in psychology 2: 226. Brown, John N. A. 2016. “Anthropology Based Computing: Putting the human in human-computer interaction.” Cham: Springer. Brown, John N. A. 2016. “Ergonomics and Biomechanics: The Surprisingly Simple Science of Using Your Body.” In Anthropology-Based Computing, 89–101. Cham: Springer. Brown, John N. A. 2016. “Operant Conditioning.” In The Bloomsbury Encyclopedia of Design. London: Bloomsbury Academic. Brown, John N. A. 2016. “Psychology and Neurology: The Surprisingly Simple Science of Using Your Brain.” In Anthropology-Based Computing, 103–118. Cham: Springer. Brown, John N. A. 2018. ““Logic is the beginning of wisdom… not the end” Using Star Trek to Teach Scientific Thinking.” In Set Phasers to Teach!, 161–172. Cham: Springer. Bruns, Daniela. 2019. “Negotiating Fun and Seriousness in Commercial Videogames.” In Savegame: Perspektiven der Game Studies, edited by Elmenreich W., Schallegger R., Schniz F., Gabriel S., Pölsterl G., and Ruge W., 111–128. Wiesbaden: Springer VS, Wiesbaden. Brutzman, Don. 2011. “MMOWGLI, Massive Multiplayer Online Wargame Leveraging the Internet: New Capabilities for Crowd-Sourcing Innovation.” Dudley Knox Library. Accessed 27 March, 2020. https://calhoun.nps.edu/handle/10945/ 44376 Burkhardt, Pawel, Christian M. Stegmann, Benjamin Cooper, Tobias H. Kloepper, Cordelia Imig, Frédérique Varoqueaux, Markus C. Wahl, and Dirk Fasshauer. 2011. “Primordial neurosecretory apparatus identified in the choanoflagellate Monosiga brevicollis.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108 (37): 15264–15269. Bush, Vannevar. 1945. “As we may think.” The Atlantic Monthly 176(1): 101–108.

Gamification is Making Us Less Thoughtful, Are Gamejams A Testbed for the Cure?

Carney, Cher, Karisa K. Harland, and Daniel V. McGehee. 2018. “Examining teen driver crashes and the prevalence of distraction: Recent trends, 2007–2015.” Journal of safety research 64: 21–27. Colzato, Lorenza S., Wery PM van den Wildenberg, Sharon Zmigrod, and Bernhard Hommel. 2013. “Action video gaming and cognitive control: playing first person shooter games is associated with improvement in working memory but not action inhibition.” Psychological research 77 (2): 234–239. Csikszentmihalyi, Mihali. 1997. Finding flow: The psychology of engagement with everyday life. N.p.: Basic Books. Draganski, Bogdan, Christian Gaser, Vannevar Busch, Gerhard Schuierer, Ulrich Bogdahn, and Arne May. 2004. “Neuroplasticity: changes in grey matter induced by training.” Nature 427 (6972): 311–312. Dunning, David. 2012. Self-insight: Roadblocks and detours on the path to knowing thyself. New York and Hove: Psychology Press. Elmenreich, Wilfried. 2019. “Short Games.”In Savegame: Perspektiven der Game Studies, edited by Elmenreich W., Schallegger R., Schniz F., Gabriel S., Pölsterl G., and Ruge W., 41–53. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Eyal, Nir. 2014. Hooked: How to build habit-forming products. Penguin UK. Haier, Richard J., Sherif Karama, Leonard Leyba, L., and Rex E. Jung. 2009. “MRI assessment of cortical thickness and functional activity changes in adolescent girls following three months of practice on a visual-spatial task.” BMC Research Notes 2 (1): 174. Hamari, Juho. 2013. “Transforming homo economicus into homo ludens: A field experiment on gamification in a utilitarian peer-to-peer trading service.” Electronic commerce research and applications 12 (4): 236–245. Hassan, Lobna and Juno Hamari 2019. “Gamification of e-participation: A literature review.” In Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Ko, Chih-Hung, Gin-Chung Liu, Sigmund Hsiao, Ju-Yu Yen, Ming-Jen Yang, WeiChen Lin, Cheng-Fang Yen, and Cheng-Sheng Chen. 2009. “Brain activities associated with gaming urge of online gaming addiction.” Journal of psychiatric research 43 (7): 739–747. Kruger, Justin and David Dunning. 1999. “Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77 (6): 1121. Latham, Andrew James, Lucy L. M. Patston, and Lynette J. Tippett. 2013. “The virtual brain: 30 years of video-game play and cognitive abilities.” Frontiers in psychology 4: 629. Leys, Sally P. 2015. “Elements of a ‘nervous system’ in sponges.” Journal of Experimental Biology 218 (4): 581–591.

233

234

John N. A. Brown

Montag, Christian, Bernd Weber, Peter Trautner, Beate Newport, Sebastian Markett, Nora T. Walter, Andrea Felten, and Martin Reuter. “Does excessive play of violent first-person-shooter-video-games dampen brain activity in response to emotional stimuli?.” Biological psychology 89 (1): 107–111. Nouchi, Rui, Yasuyuki Taki, Hikaru Takeuchi, Hiroshi Hashizume, Takayuki Nozawa, Toshimune Kambara, Atsushi Sekiguchi, et al. “Brain training game boosts executive functions, working memory and processing speed in the young adults: a randomized controlled trial.” PloS one 8 (2). Odell, Jenny. 2019. How to Do Nothing: Resisting the Attention Economy. Brooklyn and London: Melville House. Pajitnov, Alexey. 1984 Tetris. Pajitnov, Alexey. Platoni, Kara. 1999. “The Pentagon goes to the video arcade.” Progressive 63 (7): 27–30. Rey, P. Jessie. 2015. “Gamification and post-fordist capitalism.” In The gameful world: Approaches, Issues, Applications, edited by Steffen P. Walz and Sebastian Deterding, 277–296. Cambridge and London: The MIT Press. Robson, David. 2011. “A brief history of the brain.” New Scientist, 211(2831): 40–45. Rowe, Timothy B., Thomas E. Macrini, and Zhe-Xi Luo. 2011. “Fossil evidence on origin of the mammalian brain.” Science 332 (6032): 955–957. Schallegger, René Reinhold. 2019. “Challenging Challenge.” In Savegame: Perspektiven der Game Studies, edited by Elmenreich W., Schallegger R., Schniz F., Gabriel S., Pölsterl G., and Ruge W., 129–148. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Schniz, Felix. 2019. “To Save What’s Gone: Videogames as Eulogy.” In Savegame: Perspektiven der Game Studies, edited by Elmenreich W., Schallegger R., Schniz F., Gabriel S., Pölsterl G., and Ruge W., 129–148. Wiesbaden: Springer VS. Skinner, Burhuus F. 1983. A matter of consequences: Part three of an autobiography. New York: Knopf. Skinner, Burrhus F. 1948. “Superstition in the pigeon.” Journal of experimental psychology 38 (2): 168. Skinner, Burrhus F. 1958. Verbal Behaviour. Acton, MA: Copley Publishing Group. Skinner, Burrhus F. 1976. Particulars of My Life: Part one of an autobiography. New York: Knopf. Skinner, Burrhus F. 1979. The Shaping of a Behaviourist: Part two of an autobiography. New York: Knopf. Stedman, Hansell H., Benjamin W. Kozyak, Anthony Nelson, Danielle M. Thesier, Leonard T. Su, David W. Low, Charles R. Bridges, Joseph B. Shrager, Nancy Minugh-Purvis, and Marilyn A. Mitchell. 2004. “Myosin gene mutation correlates with anatomical changes in the human lineage.” Nature 428 (6981): 415. Stokes, M. Dale and Nicholas D. Holland. 1998. “The lancelet.” American Scientist 86 (6): 552.

Gamification is Making Us Less Thoughtful, Are Gamejams A Testbed for the Cure?

Subrahmanyam, Kaveri, Patricia Greenfield, Robert Kraut, and Elisheva Gross. 2001. “The impact of computer use on children’s and adolescents’ development.” Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 22 (1): 7–30. The Wachowskis, directors. 1999. The Matrix. Burbank, CA: Warner Home Video, 1999, DVD. University of Bonn Press Office 2011 https://www.uni-bonn.de/Press-releases/ violent-games-emotionally-desensitizing Weiser, Mark and John Seeley Brown. 1995. “Designing Calm Technology.” Powergrid Journal, 1 (1): 75–85. Wingfield, Chris. 2012. “All the world’s a game, and business is a player.” The New York Times. Accessed April 27, 2020. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/24/ technology/all-the-worlds-a-game-and-business-is-a-player.html World Health Organization. 2020. “Road Traffic Injuries.” Accessed April 27, 2020. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs358/en/

235

Gotta Go Fast Insights into the Human-Machine-Interaction in Speedrunning Dejan Lukovic

Abstract: This paper focuses on the question of how one can make sense of the humanmachine-interaction in speedrunning, especially in speedruns of virtual reality games. For this purpose, speedrunning is conceptualized as the act of completing a goal (most often a game) as fast as possible under certain rules as defined by the corresponding community of speedrunners. In this endeavor to reach the fastest possible time speedrunners approach games differently to so called ‘casual runs’ (normal playthroughs) and this fact thus changes how the runners and the machines are interacting with each other. Especially these changes in how runners act together with the machine are the focus of this paper, exemplified by the analysis of how these changes occur and how they can be described. The hypothesis of this paper then is that there are three distinct kinds of human-machine-interaction which occur during speedrunning and which depend on each other to constitute the phenomenon known as speedrunning. This approach will allow for a better understanding of what happens during speedrunning, what it means to do so and how humans and machines interact while doing so. Keywords: speedrunning, HCI (Human-Computer Interaction), gaming community   Dejan Lukovic earned his bachelor’s degree in german philology at the LeopoldFranzens-Universität Innsbruck, where he also wrote his master’s thesis for the media studies program about speerunning. He is currently enrolled in the comparative literary master’s program as well as in the doctoral program for literature and cultural studies of the Leopold-Franzens-Universität Innsbruck.

Introduction When one thinks of charity events that are able to collect many millions of dollars for cancer research or humanitarian aid only a few will think about a weeklong

238

Dejan Lukovic

livestream of gamers completing their favorite game in the fastest way possible. But this is the case, at least since the last ten years in which the videogame practice of speedrunning skyrocketed (partly) to the success of the Games Done Quick marathons (cf. Koziel 2019, 123), during which speedrunners come together to perform their hobby for a weeklong livestream, which binds hundreds of thousands of viewers behind their computers at home spectating and donating to a good cause. But what is this practice called speedrunning, how does it work and how is the human-machine-interaction realized? To answer these questions is the goal of the following remarks. Firstly, an overview is going to be given about how speedrunning communities and game studies scholars tried to grasp the phenomenon. These preliminary works will then be the basis for new definitions of the terms speedrun and speedrunning. Secondly, the people behind speedrunning are going to be examined further to get a better understanding of how and which communities formed in this particular videogame practice. Thirdly, the status of the machine is in focus and how different approaches to speedrunning are changing how the computing machine is behaving and thus becoming an actor on its own. Lastly, insights are going to be given into how humans and machines work together during speedrunning, how these human-machine-interactions can be understood and how the creation and sharing of new knowledge about a given speedrun is at the core of the phenomenon. This approach allows for a better knowledge of what happens during speedrunning, what it means to do so and how humans and machines interact while doing so.

Definitions But first, it is important to clearly define what one means when talking about the human-machine-interaction in speedrunning. This task is made up of two distinct questions: 1.) What does human-machine-interaction mean? 2.) What does speedrunning mean? The first question is rather easy to clear out, as this paper follows the definition of Heinecke, who writes: “For the collaboration of humans and computers in interactive computer applications we are using the term human-computer-interaction […], abbreviated HCI […].” (2012: 4, own translation) It is important to note that Heinecke is distinctly writing about human-computer-interaction rather than humanmachine-interaction. In his understanding, the term computer is limited to computers per se as in a machine upon which one is able to install applications, and which is predominantly used via a keyboard and mouse. But in videogames, there are not just computers in this narrow sense, but a wide array of different machines with alternative input-devices and without the possibilities to install whatever applications one would like to. Insofar, it is important to talk about human-

Insights into the Human-Machine-Interaction in Speedrunning

machine-interaction when studying videogames, so that one is able to encompass the whole array of machines and games. Within this adapted framework, one is able to process every interaction that occurs during playing a videogame as a human-machine-interaction, which in turn is important to use this concept when studying different machines and videogames. The second question is a little harder to get around as there is no universally shared definition of the term speedrunning. The different speedrunning communities came up with different definitions and the currently most visited website for speedrunning, Speedrun.com, defines Speedrunning as “the act of playing a video-game with the intent of completing it as fast as possible, for the purposes of entertainment and/or competition” (Speedrun.com “About”). The former most visited website for speedrunning, SpeedDemosArchive.com, defines speedrunning in the following manner: “When you speedrun a game you try and beat it as fast as you can without cheating.” (SpeedDemonsArchive.com “Getting Started”) The website SpeedRunsLive.com, which is specialized on the livestreaming of races between speedrunners, writes: “[p]laying a game with the intent of completing a goal as fast as possible.” (SpeedRunsLive.com “Glossary”) In an introductory stream to speedrunning, two contributors to the Games Done Quick marathons came up with the following definition: “Trying to beat a game as fast as possible under the restrictions of a particular category of the game.” (Games Done Quick “GDQ Hotfix Presents: Speedrunning 101 with Spikevegeta and Darkman78”) Inside the scientific community, speedrunning did not get as much attention as there are only a handful of scholars who studied the phenomenon. Rainforest simply defines Speedrunning as follows: “Speedrunning is the practice of completing a videogame as quickly as possible without the use of cheats or cheat devices.” (Rainforest 2017, 1) Standke defines the term two times in different articles. In 2012, he writes: “Speedrunning is the practice of playing through a video-game in the shortest possible time span.” (Standke 2012, 95, own translation) In 2016 he elaborates: “Generally speaking, speedrunning is the act of playing through a digital game on time, where the focus lies on the fastest possible speed. There are also special variants which are limited to certain levels.” (Standke 2016, 187, own translation) Mitchell is posing the following definition, which is broader in its scope than the before mentioned, when he writes: “In a speedrun, a player attempts to reach the end of a game as quickly as possible through game knowledge, manual dexterity, and any other means that the game provides. Speedrunners aren’t supposed to cheat […], but they can do everything else: glitch through walls, manipulate the randomness of numbers, boost through otherwise unavoidable cutscenes, abuse temporary invincibility, perform credit warps and other forms of sequence breaking, and on and on.” (Mitchell 2018, 147) Probably the latest definition stems from Koziel as he writes in his 2019 publication: “A speedrun is the act and process of reaching a goal in a video-game while intending to minimize interaction cycles be-

239

240

Dejan Lukovic

tween human and machine. Or, in simpler terms: finishing a game in the fewest frames possible.” (Koziel 2019, 24) This definition of Koziel is of special interest as it is the only one which explicitly mentions the interaction between humans and machines in it. These different definitions – either from communities or scholars – share some similarities while also showing a lot of deviations. To get to a common definition, upon which this paper is building up, two definitions are proposed, to differentiate between the act of speedrunning and the speedrun as a system – as it is done with the terms play and game (cf. Huizinga 2016, 28–45) – which allows for a more nuanced understanding of the phenomenon. In this sense, speedrunning is the act of trying to achieve a goal (most often the end of the pre-game) as fast as possible under certain rules, defined by a community, for the purpose of entertainment and/or competition. This definition brings together the important aspects of speedrunning: Beating a goal (game) as fast as possible, the community-driven formalization of speedruns and the purposes of speedrunning. A speedrun then is a metagame following Boluk and LeMieux (cf. 2017, 42), in which a (pre-existing pre-)game is taken and transformed into a new game whose main goal is to achieve a goal (most often the end of the pre-game) as fast as possible. With this definition, we can handle the fact that a game can have many different categories (Any%, 100%, Blindfolded, etc.), which are meta-games on their own, as one can observe for example with the different main categories of Super Mario 64 (1996) – which are going to be fur-ther examined later on. This differentiation of speedrunning and speedruns allows one to take a closer look at how the act of running and the systemic aspects of speedruns as metagames changes as the different kinds of human-machine-interaction are realized and what their characteristics are.

The Human in Speedrunning With this in mind, one is able to examine the first part of the human-machineinteraction in speedrunning: the human activity. Generally speaking, humans in Speedrunning assemble in one large speedrunning community, wherein the term community is handled through the concept of the community of practice, in which people assemble around a specific activity and construct special structures, in which they interact with each other, to collectively tackle a common task, wherein a common language and common methods are created to achieve their goals. (cf. Barton and Tustin 2005, 1–2) This large speedrunning community should be understood as an umbrella quasi-organization, wherein every activity around speedrunning falls. This meta-community itself is composed of four distinct communities, which are different in how they approach speedrunning but in their interactions nevertheless constitute the phenomenon of speedrunning as a whole.

Insights into the Human-Machine-Interaction in Speedrunning

Firstly, there is the community of speedrunners, which are most important, as there would be no activity to study if it were not for them. Typically, they gather around certain speedruns or even categories of a given speedrun, about which they share information through forums, video-sharing platforms (e.g. YouTube), livestreaming platforms (e.g. Twitch), dedicated websites (e.g. Speedrun.com), voice speak applica-tions (e.g. Discord), and so on. They work together in a collaborative competition to lower the time of any given speedrun. Verification of a recorded speedrun is very important in this regard, as through the sharing of one’s own videos full with (eventually new) tactics, tricks, glitches, etc. new information is pouring into the community and no speedrunner is able to withhold time saving mechanics. Secondly, there is the community of the viewers, which follow their favorite speedrunners or speedrunnings organizations such as Games Done Quick or European Speedruner Assembly on livestreaming platforms, video-sharing platforms or social media channels. Thanks to viewers, buzz is created around speedrunning which draws more people to it and in return motivates more speedrunners to perform. This positive feedback loop may be shown with the Games Done Quick marathons, which are hosted semi-annually and where a lot of speedrunners come together in real life to stream for one week continuously while also collecting donations for charity organizations. Throughout the history of the GDQ marathons, almost every iteration was able to attract more viewers and donations than its predecessor. (cf. Koziel 2019, 123) This only exemplifies which important role viewers are holding in speedrunning. Thirdly, there is the community of glitchhunters, which may or may not be speedrunning actively. Rather, they are searching for new information within videogames and these acquired insights may be used in speedrunning for example if a new glitch or mechanic is discovered that could be utilized to save time in a given speedrun. Glitchhunters are a borderline case, as they overlap with the meta-community revolving around speedrunning but are also outsiders to the whole phenomenon. Lastly, there are tool assisted speedrunners (TAS), who use machines and applications to literally program the fastest – often humanly impossible – speedruns that there can be, as they are inputting commands frame by frame, which – regarding the framerate – could mean 60 inputs in one second. (cf. TASVideos.org 2017) This also means that TAS runners do not require the motoric skillset normal speedrunners possess but they must have a deep knowledge about the inner workings of a videogame on its code level. As normal speedrunners, the TAS community also assembles around certain forums, websites and very specific games, for which they can program applications to control them as they please. Again: It is important to differentiate the meta-community around speedrunning into these four distinct communities due to their different approaches to

241

242

Dejan Lukovic

speedruns and speedrunning. Because of their different goals, different aspects of speedrunning are focused, which not only shows the wide array of possible opportunities regarding speedrunning but also changes how the community members interact with the videogames and machines: • • •

They either just consume speedruns in a way that they only perform or view them, like viewers and a lot of speedrunners do. They understand them on a technical level, like a lot of speedrunners and glitchhunters do. They disassemble them on a code level – like a lot of glichthunters and tool assisted runners do.

These three terms – consuming, understanding and disassembling – are going to be of importance later. Beforehand, it is crucial to take a look at which role the machine is playing in speedrunning as the mediator between code and players.

The Machine in Speedrunning Apart from the human, the machine is the most important aspect in speedrunning, as the status of the machine is determining which human-machine-interaction may occur and how knowledge is created, shared and used in a speedrun. The status of the machine can be described by three parameters:

Time in Speedrunning The first one is the concept of time in speedrunning, which again can be differentiated into how timing works and how time passes during a speedrun. In the past, speedruns were generally divided into segmented and single-segment runs. A segmented run means nothing other than that a speedrunner is dividing a speedrun into many different portions and records them each by each, trying to achieve the best possible time for each portion through iteration and then cuts them all together to get a whole speedrun. In a single-segment run, the speedrunner tries to achieve a goal – most often the end of the pre-game – in one sitting without any breaks for the timer. Although this differentiation is nowadays nearly insignificant, due to how the act of livestreaming speedruns necessitates a single-segment run, it sheds light onto diverging skillsets speedrunners need. In a single-segment run the runners need more mechanical skills so that they are able to input commands at the right time – often frame- or pixel perfect – while in a segmented run, there is more need of configurational skill to iterate between different possible paths and outcomes.

Insights into the Human-Machine-Interaction in Speedrunning

Other than the passing time of speedrunning, the act of how to track times is still relevant today, as there are two dominant methods that are in use.1 The first one would be in-game timing, where speedrunners are using timers that are already built into the pre-game, like in Doom (1993), GoldenEye 007 (1997) or Dark Souls III (2016). This timing method was especially relevant during the early days of speedrunning, when no external timers were in common use but the runners still had to verify their time somehow. In-game timing therefore has the advantage that it is the same for every speedrunner and there is no need to setup an external timer, which may be difficult for some. On the downside stands that ingame timer usually are not adaptable to external factors. One example for this situation is the videogame Super Metroid (1994), which uses an internal timer to show how fast a player was and displays the achieved time in full minutes, which was suitable until speedrunners were competing on the same level and were just seconds apart. (cf. Snyder 2017, 18–19) In addition, the usage of in-game timers may also hinder speedrunners to perform certain tricks or techniques, which the game cannot include into the tracked time, which alters the possible routes through the speedrun – this can also happen due to the fact that some in-game timers do not track loading times, whereas tracking time in real times does. The counterpart to in-game timers would be the so-called real time attack (RTA), where speedrunners are tracking their time in real time and are using an external timer. RTA is the de facto standard for speedrunning nowadays, as this timing method can be theoretically used for every speedrun and it allows the most varied usage of techniques, routes, tricks, glitches, and so on. One should also take into consideration that during livestreaming and the usage of external timers it seems logical to track the time real time, as this gives instant feedback to the runners and viewers how they are performing. Which timing method is used is typically determined by the corresponding speedrun community and they may also decide to allow different timing methods for different categories of any given speedrun. For example, in-game timing is commonly used for individual tracks in Mario Kart 64 (1996) whereas RTA is used for the “All Cups (Skips)” and “All Cups (No Skips)” categories of the game (cf. Speedrun.com “All Cups (Skips)”; cf. Speedrun.com “All Cups (No Skips)”), as this allows the runners to skip a cutscene at the end of each cup through resetting the console, which would not be possible otherwise.

1

In the past there was also the so called “Speed Demos Archive Timing” (SDA-Timing), which was heavily in use during the heydays of the former most visited website revolving around speedrunning, namely Speed Demos Archive. This timing method fell out of favor once speedrun.com took over SDAs status as the go to place for speedrunning.

243

244

Dejan Lukovic

Definition of Goals Another measure to describe the status of the machine is how the goal of a speedrun is defined. In speedrunning one can observe a continuum between “Any%“ – where the only goal is to achieve only on requirement which in turn is most often the end of the pre-game – and “100%“ speedruns – where every community defined requirement must be achieved. It is important to note that this continuum is not one regarding the grade of complementation of a given pre-game but rather one that is signalling how many restrictions runners face when being active in a certain category. As said, “Any%” categories usually do not restrict runners in any other way than that they must complete one goal while the rules of a “100%“ category restrict runners to perform certain tasks which prolongs the run. In this sense every other category can be deduced from these two poles as the only thing that changes is the number of restrictions and nearly every pre-game can be metalized – meaning turned into a metagame – through the application of this continuum. An example for how the amount of restrictions is growing inside the continuum could be the five main categories for Super Mario 64. The “Any%” category – in this community named “0 Star” – just states that the game should be finished as fast as possible without collecting any stars. (cf. Speedrun.com “0 Star”) The “1 Star” category introduces the requirement that a certain level must be finished and that the corresponding star must be collected. (Speedrun.com “1 Star”) The “16 Star” category does prohibit some techniques and orders the runners to collect at least 16 Stars. (Speedrun.com “16 Star”) The “70 Star” category is the developer intended way to beat the game as the usage of glitches and some tricks is not allowed while the rules do not prescribe which stars a speedrunner has to collect. (Speedrun.com “70 Star”) In a casual run, 70 Stars are the lower limit to get to the last boss fight. The “120 Star” category corresponds to a “100% category”, as every possible star in game must be collected before the game is finished while the usage of every glitch or trick is allowed. (Speedrun.com “120 Star”).

Interference with the Code and Developer Intended Mechanics The last measure to determine the status of the machine is to look at how speedrunners are allowed to interfere with the code of the pre-game, the developer intended mechanics or both. There are three common methods on how to interfere with these two aspects. The first is through the usage of cheats, which are developer intended way of altering the videogames code, to trigger certain effects like invincibility, but they are generally not allowed in speedrunning as they are destroying the magic circle of the game, as the games rules are invalidated and therefore their usage is seen as spoil-sport. (cf Huizinga 2016, 11–12; cf Standke 2016, 188) Runners therefore must rely on glitches that are unintended flaws in a videogames code,

Insights into the Human-Machine-Interaction in Speedrunning

which may be used in a speedrun to save time. As their usage is seen as being part of the game, because the videogames rules are not being broken, they are allowed in certain categories of speedruns while the usage cheats is generally not. The third and last way is the usage of exploits or tricks, which are not changing the code of a videogame in any way, but rather are utilizing the mechanics of a game in a developer unintended way, to save time. Most often tricks and exploits are leading to so called sequence breaks, where whole parts of levels are skipped like in Half-Life 2 (2004) through the techniques called “Bunnyhopping” (cf. SourceRuns.org “Bunnyhopping”) and “Accelerated Back Hopping” (cf. SourceRuns.org “Accelerated Back Hopping”). These three concepts establish another continuum, ranging from developer intended ways to interfere with the videogames code, to unintended ways of doing so to unintended ways of exhausting the given gameplay mechanics. Inside this continuum every speedrunning action, like the manipulation of randomness (RNG manipulation), skips, sequence breaks and so on, finds its place. These actions are also signifiers for how the status of the machine is changing, as either its code is altered or it has to compute outputs that are not intended. Insofar the machine becomes an actor of its own with certain abilities and limitations, which speedrunners have to consider if they – for example – do not want the machine to crash. Through these ways to alter the videogames code or the developer intended mechanics, the machine gains opacity and becomes visible to the speedrunners, which in turn is one way to frame the human-machine-interaction in speedrunning.

Human-Machine-Interaction in Speedrunning These three statuses are playing directly into the three meta-categories of speedruns and speedrunning: glitchless speedrunning, glitched Speedrunning and tool assisted Speedrunning. They all differ in how knowledge is created, shared, and used but also in how glitches, exploits, and tricks are allowed. Glitchless speedrunning prohibits every usage of glitches, which leads to a speedrun that is relying on exploits and tricks or is just optimizing the developer-intended way of completing it. No special knowledge about the inner workings of the pre-game on a code level is created or used, but the pre-existing contents of the pre-games are analyzed deeply. Glitched speedrunning allows the usage of glitches, which differs the status of the machine, as runners are actively working with the code and altering it but without a deep understanding of what they are doing on a code level, for example knowing which values get changed and how. This level of knowledge is only achieved in tool-assisted speedrunning, which is – most of the time – only concerned with programming new TAS videos and trying to advance the best possible time a little bit further, to cut seconds or even single frames from

245

246

Dejan Lukovic

an already established route. While glitchless speedrunning is only concerned with the surface of the game and the contents of the pre-game, glitched speedrunning is also taking the interface between sur- and subface into consideration, where elements of both levels are coming into contact with each other. Tool assisted speedrunning is only concerned with the subface of a game, which is taking place on a code level and thus, tool assisted speedrunners are circumventing the intended (not so) impossibility that players should not directly interact with the code and alter it in a way which fits them best. These three meta-categories then nearly perfectly overlap with the different kinds of human-machine-interaction that occur during speedrunning. The term human-machine-interaction is deliberately used in singular, even though there are three different kinds, but while speedrunning, only one of these interactions is ever realized. Firstly, there is the consuming human-machine-interaction, which corresponds with most of the glitchless speedrunning and some kinds of glitched speedrunning. If runners only work with the surface of the game and the possibility and contents that the pre-grame is offering them, they are just consuming what the machine is putting out. There is no extra need for special knowledge of how the inner-mechanics of the videogame are working and so even some forms of glitched speedrunning can be subsumed in this consuming human machine interaction, as in some cases runners only perform a glitch without even knowing what they are doing and without the slightest understanding of how certain glitches work on a code level. Most of the speedrunners are running while this consuming humanmachine-interaction is realized, where the collaborative competition is the focus and goal of the runners. Secondly, there is the understanding human-machine-interaction, which is occupying most of the glitched speedrunning and some aspects of tool assisted speedrunning. With the knowledge of all the content of the pre-game, some runners try to get a better understanding of what is happening on a code-level when they are performing a glitch, exploit or a trick. They may be able to explain what is happening, but they do not understand which code-values are actually changing and how this affects the output of the machine. With this in mind, we can say that the understanding human-machine-interaction is taking place on the interface of the interaction, where runners dip into the subface of the machine, but do not go all the way down. This is also due to the fact that competition is still an important motivation in this kind of human-machine-interaction, but the drive to create new knowledge becomes more important. Lastly, there is the disassembling human-machine-interaction, which is predominantly taking place in toll assisted speedrunning. Here, competition and or personal bests are not of importance. The focus is to create the best possible speedrun there could be and to achieve this goal, TAS runners may have to understand every single line of code, to program their scripts and bots to perform

Insights into the Human-Machine-Interaction in Speedrunning

their programs. A TAS is almost only working on the subface of the pre-game and the machine, a level, which players normally should not have access to, which is why they even have to program their own applications, so that they can even manipulate the code and the machine in a way that they want to.

Conclusion Speedruns and speedrunning are multi-layered phenomena which is also reflected in the different kinds of human-machine-interaction that can be realized during the activity. The crucial part of this interaction is the creation and sharing of knowledge throughout the different communities and how this process is taking place in different approaches to speedruns. These three described kinds of humanmachine-interaction thus can occur in every meta-category of speedruns, but there is a distinct three folded vertical structure like an inverted pyramid. On top is the consuming human-machine-interaction, in which every speedrunner is starting and through which runners must go to get to the understanding human-machineinteraction. Doing so, runners acquire knowledge about the content of the pregame as well as information about glitches, exploits and tricks. If there is a need to understand these aspects in a deeper more structural way, runners get to the disassembling human-machine-interaction, where new knowledge is created. But this process is neither top-down nor bottom-up. It is a constant flow of information and knowledge between every layer up and down, which evokes a continuous stream and therefore keeps speedrunning always fresh and new. In conclusion, the constant creation and sharing of knowledge is at the core of speedrunning and how the different kinds of human-machine-interaction contribute to this process with the common goal to best oneself and others. Speedrunning is in this sense a genuine human activity.

References Bartion, David and Karin Tusting. 2005. “Introduction.” In Beyond Communities of Practice. Language, Power and Social Context, edited by David Bartion and Karin Tusting, 1–13. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Boluk, Stephanie, and Patrick LeMieux. 2017. Metagaming. Playing, Competing, Spectating, Cheating, Trading, Making, and Breaking Videogames. London, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Games Done Quick. 2018. “GDQ Hotfix Presents: Speedrunning 101 with Spikevegeta and Darkman78.” YouTube.com. Accessed January 5, 2020. https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=wTomK_DjcMU

247

248

Dejan Lukovic

Heinecke, Andreas M. 2012. Mensch-Computer-Interaktion. Basiswissen für Entwickler und Gestalter. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer. Huizinga, Johan. 2016. Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Element in Culture, trans. Kettering, OH: Angelico Press. Koziel, Eric. 2019. Speedrun Science. A Long Guide to Short Playthroughs. Tuscon, AZ: Fangamer. Mitchell, Liam. 2018. Ludopolitics. Videogames Against Control, Alresford: Zero Books. Rainforest, Scully-Blaker. 2016. Re-curating the Accident. Speedrunning as Communtiy and Practice. Montreal: Master’s Thesis. Snyder, David. 2017. Speedrunning. Interviews with the Quickest Gamers. Jefferson, NC: McFarland and Company. SourceRuns.org. 2018. “Bunnyhopping.” SoureceRuns.org. Accessed 05.01.2020. https://wiki.sourceruns.org/wiki/Bunnyhopping SourceRuns.org. 2019. “Accelerated Back Hopping.” SoureceRuns.org. Accessed January 5, 2020. https://wiki.sourceruns.org/wiki/Accelerated_Back_Hopping Speedrun.com. n.d a. “About.” Speedrun.com. Accessed January 5, 2020. https:// www.speedrun.com/about Speedrun.com. n.d. b. “All Cups (Skips).” Speedrun.com. Accessed January 5, 2020. https://www.speedrun.com/mk64#All_Cups_Skips Speedrun.com. n.d. c. “All Cups (No Skips).” Speedrun.com. Accessed 05.01.2020. https://www.speedrun.com/mk64#All_Cups_No_Skips Speedrun.com. n.d. d. “0 Star.” Speedrun.com. Accessed January 5, 2020. https:// www.speedrun.com/sm64#0_Star Speedrun.com. n.d. e. “1 Star.” Speedrun.com. Accessed January 5, 2020. https:// www.speedrun.com/sm64#1_Star Speedrun.com. n.d. f. “16 Star.” Speedrun.com. Accessed January 5, 2020. https:// www.speedrun.com/sm64#16_Star Speedrun.com. n.d. g. “70 Star.” Speedrun.com. Accessed January 5, 2020. https:// www.speedrun.com/sm64#70_Star Speedrun.com. n.d. h. “120 Star.” Speedrun.com. Accessed January 5, 2020. https:// www.speedrun.com/sm64#120_Star SpeedDemosArchive. 2014. “Getting Started.” SpeedDemosArchive. Accessed 05.01.2020. https://kb.speeddemosarchive.com/Getting_Started SpeedRunsLive.com. n.d. “Glossary” SpeedrunsLive.com. Accessed January 5, 2020. http://www.speedrunslive.com/faq/glossary Standke, Sebastian. 2012. “‘Schwester, ich entferne nun die Narration!‘ Ein Selbstversuch. Über das Verhältnis von Speedrun und strukturell bedingtem Flow.“ In: Flow aus Spielen: Optimale Erfahrungen durch Computerspiele, edited by Anne Kristing Langner and Mathias Mertens, 95–106. Salzhemmendorf: Blumenkamp.

Insights into the Human-Machine-Interaction in Speedrunning

Standke, Sebastian. 2016. “Geronimo! Oder: Eine kurze Kulturgeschichte des Speedrunnings.“ In: Time to play. Zeit und Computerspiel, edited by Stefan Höltgen and Jan Class van Treeck, 187–203. Glückstadt: Verlag Werner Hülsbusch. TASVideos.org. 2017. “Welcome To TAS Videos.” TASVideos.org. Accessed January 5, 2020. http://tasvideos.org/WelcomeToTASVideos.html

Ludography From Software. 2016. Dark Souls III. Bandai Namco Entertainment. Nintendo EAD. 1996. Mario Kart 64. Nintendo. Nintendo EAD, SRD 1996 Super Mario 64. Nintendo. Nintendo RandD1; Intelligent Systems 1994 Super Metroid. Nintendo. Rare. 1997. GoldenEye 007. Nintendo. Valve Corporation. 2004. Half-Life 2. Valve Corporation.

249

Mixed Reality Is Already There! The Player’s Body as Foundation of the Videogame Experience Frank Fetzer

Abstract: The different ontological status of the virtual gameworld and the material world has frequently led to a certain disregard of the player’s lived body on the one hand (all the action takes place in the game world) and a disparaging indifference towards the gameworld on the other (It’s not real! Why bother?). Employing the phenomenology of French philosopher Maurice Merleau-Ponty (2012), I will argue that these two planes of existence are completely interwoven in the act of playing; that gaming is an activity deeply grounded in the carnal being-in-the-world and that virtual action, as it is based on the subject’s lived body, is not less real than physical action. Taking Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s (2012) notion, that “[m]y body is wherever it has something to do” (260) as a starting point, I will – with the help of Don Ihde’s and Peter-Paul Verbeek’s post-phenomenological analyses (Ihde 1979, 1990; Verbeek 2008) – sketch a framework for closing the ontic difference between physical and virtual worlds via the lived body’s capacity to incorporate technological artifacts. Playing a video game necessarily means to extend the body into the virtual and it is for that reason that, indeed, we have to conceive playing videogames as a mixed reality experience. Keywords: embodiment, phenomenology, philosophy of technology, post-phenomenology   Frank Fetzer is a PhD candidate in his final year at the University of Vienna. He holds a master’s degree in film studies from the same institution. His work focuses mainly on phenomenological and post-phenomenological theories. Key elements of his research are embodiment, human-technology relations, cyborgs, the ontology of virtual worlds and of course the videogame as such. In his dissertation project, he tries to disentangle the manifold relations between player and videogame as technological artefact and extension of player and actual world.

252

Frank Fetzer

Introduction Reading the call for paper for the FROG 2019 conference, I was surprised to be informed that the advent of mixed reality is nearly there, and also about the question whether we are ready for it. This struck me as odd especially, because in my experience, we, as gamers, are confronted with mixed reality on a daily basis. Playing a videogame means experiencing mixed reality. The media scholar Mark B. N. Hansen (2006) goes even further when he claims, that “[a]ll reality is mixed reality” (5). He argues that the world as it is conceived by the human subject is a mix of the physical reality or the world as such and the world as depicted in the subject’s mind, “a system of possible actions” as Merleau-Ponty (2012: 260) calls it. While Hansen’s claim seems quite plausible from a phenomenological point of view, I am going to focus on the more obvious manifestation of mixed reality that we find in videogames. I will argue from a (post-)phenomenological perspective, that the mixture of virtual and material reality we encounter in videogames already constitutes a mixed reality experience. By applying the phenomenological concept of the lived body to the videogame experience I will demonstrate that we have to conceive the videogame as mixed reality experience. Starting with Merleau-Ponty’s (2012) Phenomenology of Perception, it will be shown how our body provides us with an experience of the world. After that is established, I address how the player’s being-in-the-world, the player’s existence, is transduced into the virtual. Here, we can spot a major complication. The game world exists on a different ontological plane from the physical body. So, the question is, how to traverse this “material” or “ontical gap” (Klevjer 2011, 36)? The bridging of this gap includes of course the use of physical interfaces like controller, mouse or keyboard that transform the player’s motor intentionality into the game world, as well as the screen, that provides the player with a notion of the content of these worlds. While those interfaces are vital for the videogame experience, I am going to focus on the avatar as extension of the player’s physical body in this contribution.

The Body Let us start with the body. For Merleau-Ponty (2012), “[t]he body is our general means of having a world” (147). It is “[…] the vehicle of being in the world[...]” (84). With this, Merleau-Ponty aims at the old topos of mind-body-split that we encounter, for example, in the prominent Cartesian “ego cogito, ergo sum” and from which stems the disregard of the body in Game Studies. Without a body, Merleau-Ponty argues, there is no world to experience. The body provides us with

The Player’s Body as Foundation of the Videogame Experience

access to the world, with means for perceiving the objects of the world and for acting within it. Body and world are inextricably intertwined, the world provides background and context for action and perception. Being in the world means to have or better to be a body and it is this composite of body and world that provides the subject with means for potential actions. I conceive the body as an instrument, which, unlike every other instrument, one cannot put away. It is irreducible. The physical body cannot be separated from the human subject. “I am my body,” (187) as Merleau-Ponty puts it. Our notion of the world is not given a priori as Descartes conceived it, instead it is experienced through our incarnate existence. Therefore, it is not easy to grasp the body as fundamental instrument, as tool that you cannot put away. Jack Loomis (1992) states: “The perceptual world created by our senses and nervous system is so functional a representation of the physical world that most people live out their lives without ever suspecting that contact with the physical world is mediated […]” (113). This instrument, the body, is, like every other tool, not neutral. It mediates our relations with the world. Its capabilities for action and perception as well as its spatial dimensions shape our experience of the world. In other words: there is no world but only a world for us.

Intentionality The world as world for us is what phenomenologists call intentionality. Basically, it is just another word for the primordial relations between human subject and world. It is the fundamental structure of our relations with the world, the function of human existence itself. World and human subject are forever intertwined. There is no consciousness without content. There is no action without context. The philosopher Peter-Paul Verbeek (2008) claims: “They [the human beings] cannot simply ‘think,’ but they always think something; they cannot simply ‘see,’ but they always see something; they cannot simply ‘feel’ but always feel something” (288). Intentionality is a pre-reflective process “that silently and spontaneously organizes our world of perception” (Shusterman 2005, 161). Basically, it is the expression of existence, of our incarnate being in the world. Merleau-Ponty (2012) conceives motricity or motor action as original intentionality. “Consciousness,” he states, “is originally not an ‘I think that,’ but rather an ‘I can’” (139). On this account, we can understand intentionality as pre-reflective function that provides us with possibilities for action. Because motricity depends on perception to provide the foundation for meaningful actions, they form a single whole. Merleau-Ponty argues: “Vision and movement are specific ways of relating to objects and, if a single function is

253

254

Frank Fetzer

expressed throughout all of these experiences, then it is the movement of existence […]” (139).

Technological Intentionality Before we enter the virtual, I will address how the use of technological artifacts, of instruments, co-shapes our relations with the world. This is especially relevant regarding the videogame experience, as relations to the game world are necessarily technologically mediated. To engage with the world through technological instruments makes us subject to the latent amplification/reduction structure of those instruments. For example, using a dentist’s probe you get a better sense of the structure of the tooth than with your fingers. You feel the hardness and softness, the cracks and holes far better than you would while using your fleshy fingers. The probe extents or amplifies your tactile intentionality, but you won’t sense the wetness or warmth of the tooth that you would experience with your finger. The use of the instrument therefore reduces and amplifies your tactile intentionality at the same time. The philosopher Don Ihde (1979) claims: “The difference [between body and technological artifact] is that all instruments have differently shaped ‘intentionalities’ which expose precisely those aspects of the world which have hitherto either been overlooked, taken as unimportant, not known at all, or even totally unsuspected” (78). The technological intentionality is narrower than the general intentionality of the body. Ihde (1990) has schematized the embodiment relation that we encounter in regular tool use. Here, the arrow stands for the technological intentionality towards the world, while the dash represents the unspecified relation between human and technology: (human – technology) → world Ihde, who came up with the concept of technological intentionality in the first place, is reluctant to call the amplification/reduction structure of the probe “technological intentionality.” He reserves that term for instruments that do not provide the users with direct access to the world but let them experience only the results of the instrument’s engagement with the world, like for example radiotelescopy or infrared photography (cf. Ihde 1979, 78). These instruments reveal a reality that is inaccessible by human intentionality alone. Verbeek (2008) states that a double intentionality is involved in this kind of relations: “[…] one of technology toward ‘its’ world, and one of human beings toward the result of this technological intentionality” (393). This composite relation is based on a hermeneutic relation that Ihde (1990, 89) has schematized as follows: I → (technology – world)

The Player’s Body as Foundation of the Videogame Experience

Verbeek (2008, 393) now replaces the dash with an arrow to include the technological intentionality into what he now calls a composite relation: human → (technology → world) I argue, following Peter-Paul Verbeek, that the intentionality involved in embodied relations, like using a probe, is not completely human either. The specific ways of experiencing the world through the probe can only exist because of an intimate relation between human and technology. The major difference is that – while all instrumental use co-shapes our experience of the world – the instrumentally constructed reality – that we encounter in computer games – is exclusively accessible via instruments. Therefore, to experience that reality, the use of instruments is indispensable. Like the body is the only means for accessing the world; to experience the game world is to become involved with technology. It is impossible to untangle human intentionality and technological intentionality from the gameplay experience. Because, as game scholar Ollie Leino (2012) observes: “it is impossible to atomize phenomenon of gameplay to separate the influences of the player and Far Cry in the player-game relationship like I can separate the influences of myself and my eyeglasses by simply taking them off and seeing what the world looks like without them” (72).

The “Material Gap” The requirement for instrumental mediation to experience the virtual worlds of the videogame arises from the ontical gap between physical world and game world. That gap is a complication, but probably not a major one, as every gamer knows. Because the game world is an environment that “consists of pure information,” and “the player is a carbon-based lifeform having no apparent way out from meatspace in the near future” (Wirman and Leino 2008, 461), the question is, how to transform the objective properties of the body as well as its capacities for motricity and perception into the virtual world? That is, how can the body stretch into the virtual and how can we end up with a mixed reality experience? The body is not limited to its physical properties. Instead, it is conceived in terms of possibilities for action. Merleau-Ponty (2012) states: “What counts for the orientation of the spectacle is not my body, such as it in fact exists, as a thing in objective space, but rather my body as a system of possible actions, a virtual body whose phenomenal ‘place’ is defined by its task and by its situation. My body is wherever it has something to do” (260). Still, to perceive the world and to interact with objects of the world, the ontological state of the subject has to be the same as the world’s. To bridge this material gap, to inhabit the game world, the player-subject has to extend the subjective and objective dimensions of her body across the border between materiality and virtu-

255

256

Frank Fetzer

ality. That is, the lived body of the player has to become part of the virtual world. Merleau-Ponty (1964) states: “Visible and mobile, my body is a thing among things, it is one of them. […] The world is made of the very stuff of the body” (124). To extend the player’s embodied existence into the game world, it is essential that the capabilities of the body for movement and perception are transformed into the virtual: “[…] to inhabit a computer game the player has to be able to perform her embodied intentionality, or, motility, in the game” (Wirman and Leino 2008, 461). To perform meaningful movement or motor intentionality, the player has to be provided with context. This goes for the physical world but applies to the game world as well, as Wirman and Leino (2008) demonstrate: “If the player is not given the possibility to sense what there is in the environment, it is impossible to offer him abilities to act within the environment” (463). Perception and movement are deeply interconnected, they form our relation to the world. Merleau-Ponty (1964) makes clear that action and perception are two sides of the same coin: “We only see what we look at. What would vision be without eye movement?” (162)

The Avatar The videogame experience is based on instrumental mediation. Control interfaces mediate the player’s movement, and the screen enables her to sense the virtual environment. So, while there is a complex gameplay apparatus at work to provide us with the gameplay experience, I will focus on the player’s virtual body, that is, the avatar. This virtual entity enables us to experience the game world from within, it is the avatar that relocates the player’s existence into the virtual. To actually be in the game world, the player needs a vicarious body that transforms her physical properties into the virtual. This virtual body extends the materiality or “thingness” of the body into the virtual. Like the body, it can be described as vehicle, as “a set of available techniques and capabilities” (Newman 2002, n.p.). Like our physical body it is “a suite of capabilities for action” (Clark 2007, 272) and like our physical body it determines our relation to the (virtual) world. As the intentionality that organizes our existence in the material world, the technological intentionality of the avatar organizes our virtual existence. The intentionality that is involved here is not the narrow “instrumental intentionality” Don Ihde had in mind, but a broader, more complex intentionality not unlike human intentionality. To be clear: the avatar is not a subject in a phenomenological sense. As extension of the player’s lived body, as instrument, the avatar is hollow. It is a mere tool, to be filled with the player’s subjectivity. But of course, since the gameplay experience depends entirely on the coupling of human subject and technology a closer relation is achieved than the embod-

The Player’s Body as Foundation of the Videogame Experience

ied relation accounts for. I think we could characterize this relation also as cyborg relation: human/technology → world (Verbeek 2008, 391) In the process of playing a videogame, a new entity comes into being. A composite of flesh and technology that forms “a single cyborg consciousness” (Friedman 1999, 136). The player-subject is no longer entirely human but an undissolvable mixture of technological and “natural” relations with the (game) world.

Conclusion To wrap up, I have argued that the foundation for our experience of the world or reality depends on our incarnate being in the world. That is, to have or to be a body. To experience the virtual worlds of videogames we have to team up with technology. Here, a new entity comes about. The player is a hybrid, consisting of flesh and technology. Depending on the avatar to interact with the objects of the virtual, the player still is part of the material world. It is because of this inseparably intertwined relation between human subject and technology, that we should grasp videogames as mixed reality experiences.

References Clark, Andy. 2007. “Re-inventing Ourselves: The Plasticity of Embodiment, Sensing, and Mind.” Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 32 (3): 263–282. Friedman, Ted. 1998. “Civilization and Its Discontents: Simulation, Subjectivity, and Space.” In On a Silver Platter: CD-ROMs and the Promises of a New Technology, edited by Greg M. Smith, 132–50. New York: NYU Press. Hansen, Mark B.N. 2006. Bodies in Code: Interfaces with Digital Media. London and New York: Taylor and Francis. Ihde, Don. 1979. Technics and Praxis. vol. 24. Dordrecht, Boston MA, and London: Reidel. Ihde, Don. 1990. Technology and the Lifeworld: From Garden to Earth. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. Klevjer, Rune. 2011. “Telepresence, Cinema, Role-Playing. The Structure of Player Identity in 3D Action-Adventure Games.” Invited talk at The Philosophy of Computer Games, April 6–9, 2011, Athens. Leino, Olli Tapio. 2012. “Untangling Gameplay: An Account of Experience, Activity and Materiality Within Computer Game Play.” In The Philosophy of Computer

257

258

Frank Fetzer

Games, edited by John R. Sageng, Hallvard Fossheim, and Tarjei Mandt Larsen, 57–75. Dordrecht, Heidelberg, New York, et. al.: Springer. Loomis, J.M. 1992. “Distal Attribution and Presence.” Presence 1 (1): 113–8. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1964. “Eye and Mind.” In The Primacy of Perception: And Other Essays on Phenomenologica. Psychology, the Philosophy of Art, History and Politics, translated by Carleton Dallery, 159–91. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. (1945) 2012. Phenomenology of Perception. New York: Routledge. Newman, James. 2002. “The Myth of the Ergodic Videogame. Some Thoughts on Player-Character Relationships in Videogames.” Game Studies 2 (1). Accessed April 26, 2020. http://www.gamestudies.org/0102/newman/ Shusterman, Richard. 2005. “The Silent, Limping Body of Philosophy.” In The Cambridge Companion to Merleau-Ponty, edited by T. Carman and M. B. Hansen, 151–80. Cambridge, New York, and Port Melbourne: Cambridge University Press. Verbeek, Peter-Paul. 2008. “Cyborg Intentionality: Rethinking the Phenomenology of Human–Technology Relations.” Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 7 (3): 387–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-008-9099-x Wirman, Hannah and Olli Tapio Leino. 2008. “For Interface, Against Regression! An Exploratory Surgery of the Transhuman Umbilical Cord.” Proceedings of ISEA 2008, International Symposium on Electronic Art, July 25–August 3, 2008, Singapore.

Settlement of Digital Land Living Part of Your Life in the Sandbox MMO EVE Online Gernot Hausar

Abstract: As parts of the digital ecosystem, game worlds get more and more interconnected with the physical world and the daily lives of its inhabitants, and the discussion on how to integrate these (perceived) digital spaces into society is ongoing. Using the massively multi-player online (MMO) game EVE Online as an example, this paper argues that there might already be historical precedents, like the three international spaces and especially the High Seas, on how to possibly integrate spaces with similar properties into society. It further looks at the individual benefits and consequences of the digital gaming ecosystem for gamers and at large. Keywords: digital ecosystem, digital humanities, digital space, EVE Online, game studies, MMO   Gernot Hausar is a historian based in Vienna, Austria. Interests and research include information exchange and transfer, digital humanities, digital archaeology and archival studies, international law, hackers, net-policy, CEE, eLearning, OCR, game studies, and data mining/exploration/visualisation.

Gaming Ecosystem and Game Spaces Content delivery platform Limelight estimates in its yearly State of Online Gaming research report that “people who play video games spend an average of seven hours [...] each week playing”, (Limelight 2019, n.p.) with men playing slightly longer than women. This means that people are in a gaming environment for the better part of one workday a week. A ‘gaming ecosystem’ and a specific ‘Gamespace’ in the context of this paper encompasses beings (‘gamers’), material things, and content related to ‘digital’ aspects, and is defined as “all infrastructure (hard- and software), especially the critical components, used in the operation of the global systems of interconnected computer networks that users interact with and the signals that can be sent, stored

260

Gernot Hausar

and/or exchanged through it” in the context of digital games (Hausar 2020, 10), while gaming spaces in contrast are “subjective and sociocultural meanings imposed unto material things without becoming material content” (Werlen 2008, 310). The game space for a specific MMO in the context of this paper thus extends out of the programmed gaming world by the game developers and into the wider parts of the internets, where gamer groups have their virtual presence, e.g. in the case of player websites, chat groups, platforms, and forums.

The Space-MMO EVE Online EVE Online (2003), a one-shard-universe (excluding the PRC) by Icelandic game studio CCP Games has a rich history of in- and out-of-game play, ranging from thefts and spy craft, serious mini-games, player charities to propaganda and real life (RL)-communities (Groen 2016). It therefore offers great examples of how the game- and physical world interact, interweave and still differ in life – and death. According to CCP, the game has around 300.000 active players from all over the world. EVE Online’s gameworld offers 7.800 starsystems. CCP regularly polls its customers to better understand what makes them want to play the game and react accordingly to deepen engagement. Further, players can also vote for representatives each year (Council of Stellar Management – CSM) that act as a focus group and communicate the wants and needs of the community to CCP. The corner-stones of what makes people want to play EVE Online, as stated by CCP CEO Hilmar Veigur Pétursson (CCP Games 2019), are: • • • • • •

Large and Beautiful World,  Lots of Choice over Playstyles,  Digital Social Economy,  Loss has Meaning and being ‘bad’ is allowed (e.g. CCP as neutral arbiter),  All Play is Social (e.g. 3rd party tool integration),  Built with the Community (player focus groups etc.)

EVE Online is especially interesting because of the possibility of being evil in-game – something which is discouraged and sometimes forbidden in other MMOs – as well as the player-based economy together with choice over playstyles. Because of this, the EVE community, according to CCP, includes many long-time players. To keep players logging in and playing regularly, CCP uses an adaptation of popular science author Jack Schafer’s (Schafer and Karlins 2015) friendship formula (friendship = proximity + frequency + duration + intensity) as the basis for their player engagement efforts. In the presentation (CCP Games 2019), CCP also devised a hierarchy of needs based upon Maslow’s theory of human motivation (1943, 370):

Living Part of Your Life in the Sandbox MMO EVE Online

Physiological Needs (Login works, no crashes et al.) Safety Needs (Fair playground, no botting/scamming/cheating et al.) Love and Belonging (‘EVE the friendship machine’) Esteem Needs (Alliances, Corporations, CSM, citadels, history of EVE e.g. cemetery) 5. Self-Actualization (famous players and groups) 1. 2. 3. 4.

Based upon these needs one can now take a closer look at the various activities players encounter during the game.

Living the Life Fulfilling physiological and safety needs allows gamers to connect with dedicated hard- and software through the digital ecosystem to their gaming space, in this case the servers of EVE Online. While this process is essential, it is only when it does not work that this is generally understood, as it was during the 2020 distributed denialof-service (DDoS) attacks on EVE servers, before it fades into the background again and is taken for granted again by gamers. Therefore, a typical gamer will log in and do a variety of tasks like managing his virtual real estate (‘space home’), do some mining, industrial production and market trading, sometimes human resources and due diligence on other players, as spying for rival corporations is an established part of the game, coordinate and organize meetings and finally outfit and fly in fleets to attack or defend against other player alliances. All of this is done in-game but also with the help of playerprogrammed out-of-game tools, including a great deal of spreadsheets. This description of a typical day in the virtual universe of EVE Online will sound quite familiar when compared to a real-life day of a corporate worker, more so in EVE which is sometimes called ‘spreadsheets in space’ because of its complex digital economy. Moreover, all of these activities are done under constant threat of permanent loss through adverse actions by other players. As game time can be traded in the form of a pilot’s license as an item on the in-game markets, this loss can be converted into real-world money value. This is also the basis of all the outrageous claims of losses of hundreds of thousands of dollars in assets, that regularly brings EVE Online into the media spotlight (Kain 2014). So why do players bother? As EVE Online is a sandbox game, all assets are playergenerated and can be destroyed permanently. This not only produces a feeling of ‘real loss’, but also makes it necessary and essential to play together to protect assets. This differentiates EVE Online from many other games, where asset loss is only temporary, and it is this factor that drives social interaction (Maslow’s Love and Be-

261

262

Gernot Hausar

longing, see above) the most. At the same time, too much gaming could become pathological and is recognized as an illness by the WHO (gaming disorder). Another important part of why gamers log in regularly is the player history (‘player lore’), e.g. the history of a player alliance or a well-known character in the game (Maslow’s Esteem and Self-Actualization, see above). These are important for having a purpose – a winning condition – in the game. They can vary widely, from helping players find their way back to their home station (‘rescue services’) to offering transport of goods or playing as mercenaries that other groups can hire. This versatility makes the game interesting for a long time as there are many different playstyles, keeping players engaged. This results in more players that are engaged over longer periods of time (often called ‘bittervets’), with various real-life events being interwoven into the narrative of the game space, e.g. by maintaining a cemetery for deceased EVE players, collecting funds for charities (e.g. Care4Kids), looking out for players that have to deal with difficult psychological situations (e.g. Broadcast4Reps) or hosting an EVE-themed wedding. There is also a variety of ‘serious’ games that are integrated as themed in-game activities, like an image analysis game (Human Protein Atlas cancer research project) or helping in the search for exoplanets (Project Discovery by physics Nobel prize laureate Michel Mayor), where the long-term engagement of players in the game helps in the furthering of scientific discovery. Having thus established the means and some of the motivations for playing EVE Online, the next section will focus on the benefits of playing.

Benefits Recent studies suggest that videogames can be used for training various skills (Wang et al. 2017). One example that has been looked at is how working together in a group in games in order to achieve a goal can be translated into management competences in real-life (Lu et al. 2014). As the tasks are in the context of enjoyable games, it is also easier to concentrate while developing these skills. An EVE player has mapped the skills he developed in a table, which offers some insight into the possibilities:

Living Part of Your Life in the Sandbox MMO EVE Online

Table of the skills from EVE vs the real-life skills gained (Freeman 2019 ) In Game Skill

Real World Application

Spreadsheet skills/napkin maths from P/L calculations from production

Useful in office environments. Everyone loves someone who is good at doing excel magic

Meta game espionage

Reading people and knowing your audience

Corp/Alliance leadership

Organisation and People Management

Recruiter

Understanding people and, of course, recruitment/on boarding

Coding – Eve is driven by 3rd party apps/websites

Coding – directly transferable skill

Market sales

Broad understanding of finance, with lots of dynamics on how markets work

Scanning patch notes for incoming changes that will cause market fluctuations

Stock market opportunities/deals

Diplomacy with other player groups

Directly transferable skill

As EVE Online offers a great deal of variety in playstyles and as some of the interactions require out-of-game tools and knowledge, there can be many directly transferable skills for players, from managing teams effectively to coordinating fleets of hundreds of players up to and including spreadsheet magic. With the benefits at least partly established, the final aspect will be one of location.

Digital Homes: Location, Location, Location. The physical anchors of the digital homes players build in games like EVE Online are first and foremost the underlying infrastructure, e.g. the cables and digital tools. So, if players are living part of their lives in a virtual space, where is it situated in real life? The IP-address might give an indication as to the country the provider is in, and the location of the user on a nation state-based map. If the perspective is changed to the game space, it is difficult to reconcile the two perspectives as a nation state-centric view might not be the best analogy for the digital home in EVE Online. Looking at local laws, there are mainly two opposing views: on the one hand, the physical place of the event and actions (Lex loci solutionis) might be an indicator (where does it physically happen?). This gets more and more difficult to determine as cloud services enter the mix.

263

264

Gernot Hausar

On the other hand, questions of sovereignty must be asked: if a state argues that national law is applicable with regard to a gamer’s online actions, is it state territory? And if yes, is it a failed state, as there seems to be no control over any of the necessary elements, neither the digital populace, nor the territory, nor is there a monopoly on violence (Jellinek and Jellinek 1966) in the online ecosystem? The three established international spaces, namely the high seas, outer space and Antarctica, are a much closer match to the digital eco-system than the nation states. All states are involved, there are provisions for exclusive zones, (in theory-) protection of common goods and the option for individuals to choose their jurisdiction through flags of convenience. It serves as a much better analogy for a gamer’s digital home that exists somewhere on the storage devices, server centers and cables spanning the world.

Costs As this paper has now established aspects of benefits and location of a digital home, the last remaining aspect will be costs. This work would be remiss not to mention the question of inequality and the ecological impact of maintaining continuous game spaces. The UN estimates that around 3.8 billion people are without net access, including around 13% of people living in Europe. And the carbon footprint of the internets – it is estimated – rivals the entire aviation industry’s emissions (Vaughan 2015).

Outlook While the settlement of digital land in the context of EVE Online has some benefits, sustaining the digital ecosystem and the variety of spaces also poses some major environmental challenges that have to be tackled, before it will be possible to sustainably maintain it. The question of inequality of access should also be a focus, especially since there are clear benefits of living at least part-time in digital spaces. The recent COVID-19 pandemic (2020), which globally forced mayor parts of public and private life into the digital ecosystem, drives home the need to rapidly establish common rulesets and find long-term sustainable solutions for integrating digital land into citizen’s day-to-day lives.

Living Part of Your Life in the Sandbox MMO EVE Online

References CCP Games. 2019. CCP Press Conference and Presentation. Accessed February 27, 2020. https://m.post.naver.com/viewer/postView.nhn?volumeNo= 18117901andmemberNo=24985926 Freeman, Paul. 2019. “How Playing Video Games Got Me My Dream Career Path.” LinkedIn. Accessed February 27, 2020. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/howplaying-video-games-got-me-my-dream-career-path-paul-freeman Groen, Andrew. 2016. Empires of EVE: A History of the Great Wars of EVE Online. N.p.: Lightburn Industries. Hausar, Gernot. 2020. “Digital Primary Sources – Raum für primär digitale Angelegenheiten: Von Definitionen der Digital Humanities über das digitale Ökosystem als Primärquelle bis zur Erhaltung von digitalen Quellen.” In Digital Humanities Austria 2018: Empowering researchers, edited by Marlene Ernst, Peter Hinkelmanns, and Lina Maria Zangerl, 10–15. Jellinek, Georg and Walter Jellinek. 1966. Allgemeine Staatslehre, 3rd ed. Fellbach: wbg. Kain, Eric. 2014. “Massive ‘EVE Onlineʼ Battle Could Cost $300,000 In Real Money.” Forbes. Accessed February 27, 2020. https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/ 2014/01/29/massive-eve-online-battle-could-cost-500000-in-real-money/ Limelight. 2019. The State of Online Gaming. Limelight. Accessed February 27, 2020. https://www.limelight.com/resources/white-paper/state-of-onlinegaming-2019/. Lu, Li, Cuihua Shen, and Dmitri Williams. 2014. “Friending your way up the ladder: Connecting massive multiplayer online game behaviors with offline leadership.” Computers in Human Behavior 35: 54–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb. 2014.02.013 Maslow, Abraham H. 1943. “A Theory of Human Motivation.” Psychological Review 50 (4): 370–96. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346 Schafer, Jack R. and Marvin Karlins. 2015. The like switch. New York: Simon and Schuster. Vaughan, Adam. 2015. “How viral cat videos are warming the planet.” Guardian, September 25. Wang, Chaoguang, Gino Yu, and Hanqiu Sun. 2017. “The Relationship between Player’s Value Systems and Their In-Game Behavior in a Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game.” International Journal of Computer Games Technology 2017:6531404. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/6531404 Werlen, Benno. 2008. Sozialgeographie: Eine Einführung, 3rd ed. Bern: UTB/BRO; Haupt Verlag/BRO.

265

266

Gernot Hausar

Ludography CCP Games. 2003. EVE Online. CCP Games.

Archaeology and Videogames Towards the Nature of Artifacts as Hyperobjects Florian Kelle

Abstract: Videogames are cultural artifacts. Just like in the real world, archaeology can be conducted in digital spaces. Recent developments in the archaeological treatment of videogames, archaeogaming, strive to regard videogames as hyperobjects. Whereas this concept does well in accounting for the pervasive nature of videogames, it further complicates how videogames can be interacted with and analysed from an archaeological perspective: What constitutes a videogame? Who plays and where is play situated? Where do we start when dealing with this unfathomable artifact? Videogames have traditionally been defined through cultural play theory and mediumspecific theories from the school of ludology. Taking into consideration discussions of the magic circle and surrounding contexts, it is evident that there must be more to what constitutes the game. Consequently, demarcating what truly constitutes the digital artifact through established positions becomes difficult. In this paper, I address the nature of videogames as hyperobjects. First, I look at how archaeology and archaeogaming deal with artifacts. By extending on existing notions of archaeology in and of videogames, I complement theories of archaeogaming with the mediumspecific character of play and interaction. I claim that playfulness should be considered as a central aspect for all the features that constitute the artifact ‘game’ as a hyperobject. Keywords: archaeology, archaeogaming, games as artifacts, rethinking games   Florian Kelle, former chef, is a master’s student in the Game Studies and Engineering programme at Klagenfurt university. Prior to studying in Klagenfurt, he received a bachelor’s degree in British and American studies from Bielefeld University. His bachelor’s thesis dealt with the topic ‘If I Throw a Ball at You, You Could Wait until It Starts Telling a Story – A Ludo-Narratological Approach to Metal Gear Solid 3 and 4’. Beyond narrative and formalist approaches, he is interested in procedural literacy and the extra-academic communities of knowledge that arise around videogames. During a seminar he taught on horror in videogames, he has developed an interest in the archaeological implications of exploring games as virtual

268

Florian Kelle

spaces. Currently, he is working towards his master’s thesis on conducting archaeology in and of videogames.

Introduction Videogames are making good progress when it comes to the acceptance within society and academia thanks to the field of game studies. Their status as cultural artifacts that are worthy of archaeological inquiry, however, is still very tentative. Andrew Reinhard (2016, n.p.) provides a list of challenges the nascent field of archaeogaming is facing in order to legitimise its existence. The blog entry shows that much work must be put into cementing the field, namely publications, definitions, heuristics as well as connections to the communities and producers of games. Similarly, his introduction to the field (2018a) is indicative of a lack of a solid body of literature pertaining directly to the archaeology in and of videogames. Whereas the book is a good starting point for thinking about the connection of archaeology and videogames, it merely attempts to situate videogames within the already existing field of archaeology, threatening to bury them amongst the dominance of other (cultural) artifacts. The medium of games has already suffered from a damaging discussion during the formation of the field of game studies. Having been “colonised from the fields of literary, theatre, drama and film studies” (Eskelinen 2001, under “Introduction”), initiated torrential discussions that did more harm than good to the formation and diversification of the field of game studies. Whereas a large portion of the tension in early game studies stemmed from the resistance of ludologists to the encroachment of humanities, there is no denying that theory needs to be adapted to the medium, not the other way around. Whereas theoretical adaptation may be a slow endeavour, it may help by mitigating the damage done by misapplication. Lest I fall into that pitfall myself, I endeavour to put forth a synergetic approach that combines discourses from game studies as well as archaeology. In this paper I will pick up on established definitions of game and play and extend the discussion by employing the notion of games as hyperobjects, as suggested by Reinhard (2018b). In doing so, I wish to put forth an understanding of videogames as artifacts that combines an archaeological approach to games with an ontological account that is appropriate to their nature.

Towards the Nature of Artifacts as Hyperobjects

Drift, Archaeology, and Archaeogaming Beyond two larger publications (Mol et al. 2017; Reinhard 2018a), archaeogaming largely consists of a blog1 as a means of giving an account of what the field is about. Whereas Mol et al. (2017) paint a very colourful picture with articles “written by game developers, archaeologists, heritage specialists, educators, ethicists and archivists, spanning the globe from Australia to Alaska” (8), Reinhard’s introduction comes across as much more exclusive: The main difference between archaeogaming and media studies is the attention paid to the material culture of videogames themselves, the use of hardware and software, and the material culture of virtual spaces created when the software is run. While game players and gaming culture certainly inform archaeogaming to some extent, they are not the end goal for archaeological research but rather a means to an end, especially when describing an object’s biography, its history of use. Understanding how a culture comes to create a video game (and why), or how a community chooses to spend discretionary time and income on some games and not others, is important to put a game into a sociocultural context but ignores the artifact of the game itself, and of the creation of the virtual world and culture(s) held within as created by code. (2018a, under “Archaeogaming and Game Studies”) This statement creates quite some tension between the two publications and how they attempt to connect archaeology and games. Whereas players certainly are not necessarily the same as experts, and archaeology is not the same as media studies, it is safe to assume that those using these artifacts co-constitute their situatedness in a material culture. More importantly, material culture takes into account both user and artifact. Especially in a time of digital literacy, players do not just play the game, they use, modify, and perpetuate the artifact. The users should be considered just as useful as the artifact in question. We are looking at artifacts in use while the users are alive. They are a vital part of the ends. As shown above, archaeogaming is concerned with the artifact and one interesting aspect of how this artifact is currently defined is that “[v]ideo games, as with other software, are [...] not only artifacts (and sites) but also sources of preservation.” (Reinhard 2018a, under “How Is Archaeogaming Archaeology?”) This notion makes for an interesting trichotomy that shows just how different videogames are when regarded through an archaeological lens. It shows “that games cannot be disentangled from the context and culture in which they were made” and that they “contain far more than whatever manifests onscreen.” (under “How Is Archaeogaming Archaeology?”) While this notion is very helpful by providing the artifact with a unique feature that sets it apart from (many) other artifacts, no in-depth account 1

https://archaeogaming.com/about/

269

270

Florian Kelle

is given that would truly help to demarcate this “complex site-artifact” (under “Virtual Artifacts and Their Real-World Manifestation”) in its entirety. We are thus still left with artifacts where “the traditional definition holds that artifacts are things of cultural/historical significance made by people.” (under “The Artifacts of Digital Fiction”) While the notions presented hold some truth, the strong focus on a traditionally archaeological perspective on the artifact should undergo additional modification. My vantage point for rethinking the ontology of videogames as cultural artifacts stems from a general shift in both archaeology and philosophy towards object-oriented ontology (Harman 2017). The ontological inquiries of post-structuralism have given rise to many scholars (cf. Morton 2010; Bogost 2012; Haraway 2016) putting forth theories that account for the ever-growing complexity of our world and the relation between humans and non-human entities. In their article “Theory adrift: The matter of archaeological theorizing”, Þóra Pétursdóttir and Bjørnar Olsen (2018) touch upon these issues of post-humanism and new materialism. Whereas their work focuses on beached drifting matter in the literal sense, the very notion of things drifting out of (human) context and clumping back together, “forming unimaginable coalitions and fusions” (98), is employed as a metaphor for theorization in archaeology: As such, these beach assemblages also bring to light some of the difference and even incommensurability between our material and the theoretical bodies we employ to interpret it; that is, the difference between the ‘wild’, scattered and incomplete nature of archaeological things and the expected coherency, wholeness and rational logic of theory. (Pétursdóttir and Olsen 2018, 98) The field of game studies is no stranger to this issue. In the face of an ever-growing complexity of games, the emerging cultural artifacts we analyse appear subtended to the pressure of formalisation and categorization from theorists. Just like these assemblages, games and what constitutes them beaches on our theoretical shores, beckoning us to ascribe new meaning. Especially in an age of virtual and augmented reality, artificial intelligences playing games or games being dug (cf. Caraher et al. 2014), we need to seriously reconsider the ontology of videogames. What these examples demonstrate is that as much as a theoretical body is necessary, it will always be behind how games actualise and materialise themselves as cultural artifacts. Rather, we should consider theory as incomplete: [I]s it possible to imagine theory as something else than hitherto conceived, something that comes unfinished and fragile? And therefore, perhaps, better prepared for embracing and interacting with these very particular aspects of the archaeological? (Pétursdóttir and Olsen 2018, 99)

Towards the Nature of Artifacts as Hyperobjects

Unlike the aforementioned colonising approach, theory adrift is of a different quality. “[T]heory is not merely something to be employed, but something to be worked on in specific empirical contexts.” In order to come up with an account of artifacts that is appropriate to the medium, it needs to come in contact with and be reworked in the context it drifts into: “Rather, much like marine debris and things adrift, theory is challenged, torn, transmuted and shattered by its encounters with stuff.” (102) To a certain degree, we should let theory drift and do its own thing, rather than blindly stick to the rigid frameworks we take with us as we come across new games and new fields of study. While we certainly do not have the same freedom of movement that floating debris has outside of human context, games do have something to their nature that we never truly come in contact with.

Play, Magic Circles, and Games As I am writing this paper, a Twitch channel2 entertaining about 300 viewers is visible on my second screen. People are frantically typing commands into the chat, levelling up their relation to the channel, eliciting information from the bots in chat, and betting fictional currency. Odd as it may appear, especially on a platform like Twitch that so heavily relies on socialising and viewers being entertained by a content creator, this channel is primarily operated by a chat bot and an AI playing a rom hack of Final Fantasy Tactics. The rom hack ‘plays’ pretty much the same as the original game: It employs the same rules and aesthetics. The difference is that it is being played. The playfulness that humans can bring to the table is limited to the chat and placing bets on how the matches will play out. The game AI displays the stats of the characters involved and begins randomizing a match shortly afterward. Those having played the actual game as well as those having played on the channel long enough, may bring their experience to the table and make elaborate guesses on how a match will play out. Occurrences such as these challenge the established notions that constitute our theoretical body in game studies, namely what play means and how it relates to the definition of games: Games are both object and process; they can’t be read as texts or listened to as music, they must be played. Playing is integral, not coincidental like the appreciative reader or listener. The creative involvement is a necessary ingredient in the uses of games. The complex nature of simulations is such that a result can’t be predicted beforehand; it can vary greatly depending on the player’s luck, skill and creativity. (Aarseth 2001, under “A cognitive, communicative revolution?”)

2

https://www.twitch.tv/fftbattleground

271

272

Florian Kelle

If we follow Aarseth’s statement, we are confronted with the dilemma that there certainly is a game running and it does do the things that would normally emerge from it being played, however there is no player. What about the viewers gambling then? Playful as their interaction may be, according to Juul’s model of games (2005, 44) we sadly have a borderline case, not a game. If we were to adamantly stick to these established scholars or any other in the field of game studies for that matter, we would not get very far. One way to do away with this, is to look at the bigger picture of games. Rather than merely juxtaposing and comparing the various definitions of play and game (cf. Juul 2005, 32–3; Salen and Zimmerman 2003, 79) only to come up with one’s own re-condensed understanding, we should consider a more holistic approach. Much of the theory established in game studies about the definition of play and games is set up to limit rather than expand. For the individual’s focus this may make sense. For the sake of establishing an extended notion of videogames as artifacts, we should endeavour to expand, rather than condense. Furthermore, in the long run, openness akin to the notion of drift, may also serve to foster theoretical vividness within the field. In “The Need for Play for the Sake of Play”, Serenella Besio points out that since “[play] began to be studied and analysed in an effort to recognise and understand it, play escaped any definition that tried to fix it, define it, encode it.” (2016, 10) Her article discusses a large variety of approaches to play, which not only hints at the complexity of the topic but also at the fact that the borders between game and play blur as they are used throughout literature. Similarly, Sutton-Smith reflects on his earlier work: My argument held that play was ambiguous, and the evidence for that ambiguity lay in these quite different scholarly ways of viewing play. Further, over the years it became clear to me that much of play was by itself […] intentionally ambiguous […] regardless of these seven general cultural frames. (2008, 112) Again, this observation shows how elusive of a concept play is: Play happens everywhere, it is an integral part of human nature. Even activities that would not be considered as games carry elements of play, as Frans Mäyrä showcases. Rather than focusing on play and games, Mäyrä focuses on the playfulness of social media as what is called “‘contextual gaming’” (2008, 1), hinting at “the increasingly visible playful attitude and adoption of game-like practice” (12) therein. While it may not appear to make much of a difference, playfulness as a term is less contested than play and, as such, can serve a better basis for what constitutes a game as an artifact. The broader notions of playfulness, however, do not necessarily mean that the magic circle and play as “an act apart” (Huizinga 1949, 10) are a thing of the past. Huizinga’s definition still stands:

Towards the Nature of Artifacts as Hyperobjects

[P]lay is a voluntary activity or occupation executed within certain fixed limits of time and place, according to rules freely accepted but absolutely binding, having its aim in itself and accompanied by a feeling of tension, joy and the consciousness that it is “different” from “ordinary life”. (28) This definition shows that a particular mindset and rules must be adopted as well as the autotelic nature of play. What has caused issues within game studies, however, is the notion of separation from everyday life. Whereas this notion of the magic circle is helpful, the context from which it arose is one largely different from the society we live in today. In response to the usefulness of Huizinga’s account, Calleja points out that “digital games have radically expanded the landscape of possible types of games” (2015, 211). According to Calleja, experiences made in life and game inevitably interact and mix (215). Similarly, Salen and Zimmerman complement the magic circle with notions of permeability by introducing systems that frame games “as RULES, as PLAY, or as CULTURE.” (2003, 96–7) What these three systems add, are varying degrees of permeability that help understand which parts of a game are either open or closed to access. In line with these approaches, Juul suggests regarding the magic circle as a puzzle piece in order to do away with the issue of separation of games from real life and helping us to see how a “game may or may not fit in a given context.” (2008, 63) While some sort of apartness certainly is present, literature shows that the separation still retains a degree of openness that is indebted largely to social and technological development, as well as contextdependence. Like the complexity of play, the definition of games requires some deliberations. Given that my endeavour is to rethink videogames as hyperobjects in an archaeological context, it seems sensible to aim for openness and malleability. As the discussion of the Twitch example and the notion of playfulness as opposed to play has shown, a clear demarcation becomes difficult to achieve. Furthermore, it seems sensible to extend our thinking towards digital artifacts in general. As playfulness seems to be the key to how we interact with digital artifacts in many cases, Murray in Hamlet on the Holodeck provides a good definition of what lies at the heart of them: It is surprising how often we forget that the new digital medium is intrinsically procedural. Although we may talk of an information highway and of billboards in cyberspace, in fact the computer is not fundamentally a wire or a pathway but an engine. It was designed not to carry static information but to embody complex, contingent behaviors. ([1997] 2017, 88) This notion of procedurality is what lies at the heart of digital artifacts. For the functionality of the artifact itself, the notion of playfulness is secondary, as, even without it being played, it still holds the potential of facilitating that behaviour. In

273

274

Florian Kelle

the case of the example of Twitch, we can even say that the rom hack very much approximates an expression of “contingent behaviors” (88) that could easily be elicited from Final Fantasy Tactics when played. As such, whether the game is run by an AI or played by a human does not matter so much for the artifact in use. In relation to both player and the AI, the digital artifact exhibits what Murray calls “responsive behavior” (90). It is the amalgamation and outcome of an “environment that is both procedural and participatory”: They are “interactive”. (90) Whereas this may suggest that digital artifacts are, in essence, rule-based systems, this is only partially true. There are multiple layers that come into play in the process of creation and use of the artifact. Even ludologists, such as Jesper Juul in his book Half-Real, point out that there is more to games than just that. To him, “a videogame is a set of rules as well as a fictional world.” (2005, 1) Again, procedurality is what is situated at the core of the game. Yet, fictionality is not something that is situated completely outside of the digital artifact. It sits inside the game in the form of graphics, procedures, and possibilities of interaction. What sparks the fictional aspects to emerge, is a product of interactivity and procedurality as well as the effort that went into the design in the first place. We can see that digital artifacts are multifaceted. At their core sits the notion of playfulness, which, in turn, evokes some sense of segregation. Yet, this separation is not perfect. As literature discussing the magic circle has shown, our societal and technological development has either caused these boundaries to blur or point out that they have never existed in the first place. Yet, human beings are playful in nature. Even AIs are playful in a sense; either because they are crafted for this very purpose or because we see them exhibit behaviour that we deem playful. Whatever our take on the autonomy of AI is, we cannot deny the core of playfulness as a driving force for its proliferation.

Games as Hyperobjects What is it then that surrounds playfulness? What is it that seeps in (and out) of the magic circle? Just how big are games when the concepts that constitute them come with such a complexity? As we have established digital artifacts as something procedural, we are treading on the grounds of the code of the game: To be a computer scientist is to think in terms of algorithms and heuristics, that is, to be constantly identifying the exact general rules of behavior that describes any process, from running a payroll to flying an airplane. (Murray [1997] 2017, 88) These algorithms are the rules that run the game and what sits on the system’s end of interactivity. It is true that we need to understand them if we want to get a

Towards the Nature of Artifacts as Hyperobjects

good grasp of the artifact. One problem that presents itself here, however, is that we never have “direct access to the game’s algorithm under the surface” (Arsenault and Perron 2009, 123). Similarly, Juul points out that “the gameplay is not the rules themselves” (2005, 83) but rather “a consequence of the game rules and the dispositions of the game players.” (88) Thus, we never truly have access to what we are dealing with. This is even true when we have access to the code because of an additional level of abstraction between the language used to code the game and the way in which the code is translated into something the machine can work with. The fact that we can never fully have access to whatever the code is and what it does, adds a level of strangeness to the nature of games as digital artifacts. This notion is akin to Timothy Morton’s thinking in The Ecological Thought. In his inquiry into the nature of life forms he employs the term “strange stranger” (2010, 40) to account for the fact that we can never truly understand the essence of things: We can never absolutely figure them out. If we could, then all we would have is a ready-made box to put them in, and we would just be looking at the box, not at the strange strangers. They are intrinsically strange. (41) This is true of the code as well. The way I see it is that this is what grants things an existence in their own right. Without a level on which things are inaccessible, there would be no way to truly distinguish between individual entities. Yet, we at least have partial, albeit abstract, access to what the code does through the machine’s respone to participation, as was shown with the concept of interactivity. We are thus partially connected to the machine. To stick with Morton’s work, we can use the concept of “the mesh”. According to Morton, everything is connected with everything else through this mesh. (94) Whereas his work largely deals with ecology, his thinking is indicative of a holistic approach of seeing the world: “We don’t have to think special thoughts […] to be ecological.” (95) Looking back at the complexity of digital artifacts that we have unfolded, these notions of interconnectedness and strangeness do prove useful in embracing games and what constitutes them. Morton later extends these concepts into his theory of hyperobjects. “Hyperobjects”, according to Morton, “provide great examples of interobjectivity—namely, the way in which nothing is ever experienced directly, but only as mediated through other entities in some shared sensual space.” (2013, 86) This interobjectivity evokes a notion of “objects massively distributed in time and space relative to humans.” (1) Their manifestation is wide-ranging: A hyperobject could be the very long-lasting product of direct human manufacture, such as Styrofoam or plastic bags, or the sum of all the whirring machinery of capitalism. Hyperobjects, then, are “hyper” in relation to some other entity, whether they are directly manufactured by humans or not. (1)

275

276

Florian Kelle

Andrew Reinhard supports the notion that games fit into this category. He considers both the content of a game as well as the context surrounding games to be hyperobjects. (2018, under “Hyperobjects”). These thoughts are very much in line with the issues discussed by me and other scholars in game studies. If we want to better assess games as digital artifacts, we need to consider regarding them as hyperobjects: playfulness, the player, the system, the magic circle, and paratexts that surround games all constitute the nature of games and influence how individual artifacts are crafted and come to be in our world. The way that I envision digital artifacts as hyperobjects to manifest is of a threefold structure: • • •

Its very nature should encompass the notion that it facilitates playfulness The main aspects that surround play and playfulness are a player as well as a system that process this playfulness by means of procedurality Surrounding paratexts, practices, and other digital artifacts

The first point appears quite broad, however as a first step into the direction of hyperobjects, I would like to embrace an openness to see what examples drift towards me. In doing so, I envision to achieve a closer relation between the subject I am interested in while in the process of testing out my theory and making adjustments to it. On a second level I want to situate both the player and the system. My thinking here is influenced by Ian Bogost’s work in Alien Phenomenology. Inspired by his approach to technology in connection with “flat ontology” (2012, 11–9) and tiny ontology (19–22). In the context of digital artifacts, user and system interact in very specific ways where the actions of one set conditions for those of the other: human and procedural system are ontologically equal. Lastly, the layer of what surrounds the other two essentially consists of things that are either equal to the hyperobject as a whole, such as other digital artifacts, or supplementary to it, such as community practices or, for instance, graphics or code to be used in a game. Beyond that, there are also paratexts, such as fan fiction, rom hacks/mods, interpretation of in-game elements in the community, etc. This third layer is of a two-fold nature. The elements therein influence one-another as well as the inner layers of a digital artifact. They are both (partially) necessary and supplementary to an artifact in particular as well as in relation to other artifacts.

Conclusion In this digital age that we live in, we find ourselves in interesting times. Things and theories drift away from a humanist-driven world into a world that is full of strange things, things interrelated, and things too big to grasp. Technological, societal,

Towards the Nature of Artifacts as Hyperobjects

and academic development break circles and, in turn, facilitate those notions of interconnectedness. With this paper I endeavour to spark interest into rethinking traditional approaches to archaeology when confronted with a new kind of artifact. The notion of drift goes hand in hand with a general tendency to ‘think big’ or outside of the box in archaeology and philosophy. Additionally, the attention to theory as an object itself, puts more attention to what we have available within our theoretical bodies, making us more cautious as to how we use it in new contexts. Concepts within the realm of object-oriented ontology provide us with novel ways of rethinking the state of being in a world that is full of complex non-human beings which deserve more attention and theoretical elaboration. The critical discussion of established theories in game studies has shown that established theoretical bodies are being challenged as the field continues to establish itself. A positive development is visible in that we are moving away from earlier attempts of academic imperialism and colonialism towards a self-sufficient field that is capable and willing to re-negotiate its theories. This, in turn, helps when we begin to take games seriously as digital artifacts that deserve academic attention. The way in which I endeavour to extend and modify discussions in the nascent field of archaeogaming embraces openness to do away with notions of colonisation and provide theory with enough room to grow, to be adapted, and renegotiated. Thinking of digital artifacts as hyperobjects is the theoretical nudge I wish to put forth in hopes of sparking inspiration and positive development that helps to further legitimize archaeogaming as an academic field.

References Aarseth, Espen. 2001. “Computer Game Studies, Year One.” Game Studies 1(1). Accessed April 26, 2020. http://gamestudies.org/0101/editorial.html Archaeogaming. n.d. “Archaeogaming.” Archaeogaming (blog). Accessed February 20, 2020. https://archaeogaming.com/ Arsenault, Dominic and Bernard Perron. 2009. “In the Frame of the Magic Cycle The Circle(s) of Gameplay.” In The Video Game Theory Reader 2, edited by Bernard Perron and Mark J.P. Wolf, 109–31. Ebook. New York: Routledge. Besio, Serenella. 2016. “The Need for Play for the Sake of Play.” In Play Development in Children With Disabilities, edited by Serenella Besio, Daniela Bulagarelli, and Vaska Stancheva-Popkostadinova, 9–52. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110522143 Bogost, Ian. 2012. Alien Phenomenology, or What It’s Like to Be a Thing. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Calleja, Gordon. 2015. “Ludic identities and the magic circle.” In Playful Identities: The Ludification of Digital Media Cultures, edited by Valerie Frissen, Sybille Lammes,

277

278

Florian Kelle

Michiel de Lange, Jos de Mul, and Joost Raessens, 211–24. PDF. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. Caraher, William, Raiford Guins, Andrew Reinhard, Richard Rothaus, and Bret Weber. 2014. “Why We Dug Atari: “Punk archaeologists” explain that they went looking for more than just video-game cartridges in a New Mexico landfill.” The Atlantic. Accessed April 26, 2020. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/ archive/2014/08/why-we-dug-atari/375702/ Eskelinen, Markku. 2001. “The Gaming Situation.” Game Studies 1 (1). http://www. gamestudies.org/0101/eskelinen/ FFTBattleground. n.d. “FFTBattleground.” Twitch. Accessed April 26, 2020. https:// www.twitch.tv/fftbattleground Haraway, Donna J. 2016. Staying with the Trouble: Making Kin in the Chthulucene. Durham: Duke University Press. Harman, Graham. 2017. Object-Oriented Ontology: A New Theory of Everything. Ebook. n.p.: Penguin Books. Huizinga, Johan. 1949. Homo Ludens. A Study of the Play-Element. Translated by n.a. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Juul, Jesper. 2005. Half-Real: Video Games Between Real Rules and Fictional Worlds. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Juul, Jesper. 2008. “The Magic Circle and the Puzzle Piece.” In Conference Proceedings of the Philosophy of Computer Games 2008, edited by Stephan Günzel, Michael Liebe, and Dieter Mersch, 56–67. Potsdam: Potsdam University Press. Accessed April 26, 2020. https://publishup.uni-potsdam.de/opus4-ubp/ frontdoor/deliver/index/docId/2550/file/digarec01.pdf Mäyrä, Frans. 2008. “Play in the Mobile Internet: Towards Contextual Gaming.” Paper presented at Internet Research 9.0, October 15–18, 2008, Copenhagen. Accessed April 26, 2020. https://people.uta.fi/∼frans.mayra/Mayra_Contextual_Gaming_IR9-0.pdf Mol, Angus A.A., Csilla E. Ariese-Vandemeulebroucke, Krijn H.J. Boom, and Aris Politopoulos, eds. 2017. The Interactive Past: Archaeology, Heritage and Video Games. Leiden: Sidestone Press. Morton, Timothy. 2010. The Ecological Thought. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Morton, Timothy. 2013. Hyperobjects: Philosophy and Ecology after the End of the World. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Murray, Janet H. (1997) 2017. Hamlet on the Holodeck: The Future of Narrative in Cyberspace. Updated edition. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Pétursdóttir, Þóra and Bjørnar Olsen. 2018. “Theory Adrift: The Matter of Archaeological Theorizing.” Journal of Social Archaeology 18 (1): 97–117. https://doi.org/10. 1177/1469605317737426

Towards the Nature of Artifacts as Hyperobjects

Reinhard, Andrew. 2016. “Archaeogaming’s Grand Challenges.” Archaeogaming (blog). Accessed February 19, 2020. https://archaeogaming.com/2016/01/25/ archaeogamings-grand-challenges/ Reinhard, Andrew. 2018a. Archaeogaming: An Introduction to Archaeology in and of Video Games. Ebook. New York: Berghan Books. Reinhard, Andrew. 2018b. “Games as Hyperobjects, Manufactured Landscapes, and Archaeological Driftwood.” Archaeogaming (blog). Accessed February 19, 2020. https://archaeogaming.com/2018/11/09/games-as-hyperobjectsmanufactured-landscapes-and-archaeological-driftwood/ Salen, Katie and Eric Zimmerman. 2003. Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals. Cambridge: The MIT Press. Sutton-Smith, Brian. 2008. “Play Theory: A Personal Journey and New Thoughts.” American Journal of Play 1 (1): 80–123. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1068966

Ludography Squaresoft. (1997) 1998. Final Fantasy Tactics. Square.

279

An Introduction to Gambling in the Context of Game Studies Alexander Pfeiffer and Georg Sedlecky

Abstract: Gambling (such as slot machines, betting or casino games) and games (such as board games or digital games) have common roots that began thousands of years before Christ with games like Senet or The Royal Game of Ur. An aspect that is often forgotten or only appears as a marginal note in modern (digital) game studies. This could be because game studies researchers have a certain concern about being associated with the ‘bad reputation’ of the gambling industry. In classical game studies, gambling was intentionally left out of the equation in Huizinga’s work, but it was given a special meaning in Caillois’ criteria for games. In the book chapter “An Introduction to Gambling in the Context of Game Studies” the common roots of gambling and gaming are explored, both Caillois’ playing criteria and Bartle’s player types are revisited in the context between gaming and gambling, Casinos are examined as places of theatrical play and finally attention is paid to the mechanics of gambling that are being applied in the gaming industry (catchword lootboxes). Keywords: gambling, gaming, iGaming, game studies, lootbox   Alexander Pfeiffer is recipient of a Max Kade Fellowship awarded by the Austrian Academy of Science to work at MIT with The Education Arcade. His research focus as a postdoctoral fellow is on blockchain technologies and their impact on gamebased education and learning assessment. Before joining MIT, Alexander headed the center for applied game studies at Danube-University Krems, Austria, for eight years. He is also co-founder of the Austrian-based tech start-up Picapipe GmbH and the Malta-based B & P Emerging Technologies Consultancy Lab Ltd. He holds a doctorate and a social and economic sciences degree (mag.rer.soc.oec) from the Vienna University of Economics and Business, a Master of Arts from DanubeUniversity Krems, and an Executive MBA from Alaska Pacific University, Anchorage. Besides this particular research his fields of interests are e-sports, media studies, emerging technologies, game studies and binge-watching TV series. As part of his Lifelong Learning Philosophy, Alexander is also a PhD candidate at the Department for Artificial Intelligence at the University of Malta.

282

Alexander Pfeiffer and Georg Sedlecky

Georg Sedlecky is head of the mathematics and licensing department at Winfinity Games, a game studio owned by Novomatic - one of the largest gaming technology companies in the world. He startet his career as technical consultant and followed his passion for gaming to join Novomatic in 2012. He loves to analyze game mechanics, to improve strategies and to win – when designing as well as playing games. He lives in the south of Vienna, has a masterʼs degree in mathematics from TU-Vienna and recently graduated with an MBA at the Donau University Krems.

Introduction Gambling (such as slot machines, betting or casino games) and games (such as board games or digital games) have common roots that began thousands of years before Christ with games like Senet or The Royal Game of Ur. This is an aspect often forgotten or only appearing as a marginal note in modern (digital) game studies. Maybe game studies researchers have a certain concern about being associated with the ‘bad reputation’ of the gambling industry. In classical game studies, gambling was intentionally left out of the equation in Huizinga’s work, but it was given a special meaning in Caillois’ criteria for games. In the book chapter “An Introduction to Gambling in the Context of Game Studies” the common roots of gambling and gaming are explored; both Caillois’ playing criteria and Bartle’s player types are revisited in the context between gaming and gambling; Casinos are examined as places of theatrical play and finally attention is paid to the mechanics of gambling that are being applied in the gaming industry (catchword lootboxes). Let us first take a look at the history of the first board games in the context of gaming and gambling.

About the Early History of Game and Play “There were no entertainments for such a huge period of human existence.” [...] In that environment, games had a fantastically strong hold. They reigned supreme.” For centuries, even millenniums, [sic] The Royal Game of Ur served as the PlayStation of its day. (Green 2008) To explore the historical connection between gaming and gambling we have to go to the year 2600 B.C. and take a close look at a game called The Royal Game of Ur, also known as the Game of Twenty Squares or simply the Game of Ur. We know a lot about this specific game, thanks to Irving L. Finkel (2007), a curator at the British Museum and his essay “On the rules of The Royal Game of Ur”, where he summarised all available information about the game which originated 2600 BC in the

An Introduction to Gambling in the Context of Game Studies

Mesapotanian area. Our knowledge of the game is based on a Babylonian clay tablet dating from 177 BC, which is kept in the British Museum and was first translated by Irving. This tablet described the rules of The Royal Game of Ur that were valid at the time. Irving believes that some iteration of the game exists, depending on the particular time period the game has been played. It is the only proof of rules of the game from this period in the ancient world. The British Museum also has five original boards, which were discovered by Sir Edward Woolley during an excavation in 1920. With the translation in hand and the opportunity to work with the original boards, Irving created replicas as part of his work at the British Museum in 1979 and began to bring the game back to life. In The Royal Game of Ur, two parties must first roll their game pieces into the board via a fixed path, and then roll out again with a matching roll at the end. The board contains seven game pieces, each in black and white, and four dice in the shape of a tetrahedron. The dice have small notches at two of the four corners. If such a notched corner points upwards, this is considered a point. For a turn, all points of the four dice are added together. The game pieces are moved in a fixed track over the board according to the number of eyes rolled, with the centre axis being used by both players and the game partners being able to ‘throw each other out’ there. The game is only played forward, and no second game piece can occupy already occupied playing fields. If a gaming piece moves onto a square marked with a star, the same player may throw the dice again. Opposing pieces on the star fields may not be thrown out. From the point of view of game researchers, however, the additional purposes of ancient games are extremely fascinating. For example, Irving describes that inscriptions were found on the boards, which indicate that The Royal Game of Ur also served a purpose as a fortune telling tool. Becker (2007) and Botermans (2008) associate The Royal Game of Ur with gambling and betting, they describe the possible purpose of additional stones found during excavations with the game board. While playing, additional stones could be placed and at certain events from the game these were earned. Pusch (1979) and Glonneger (1999) discuss the game Senet. Senet is an ancient Egyptian board game, which dates back to the year 3000 BC. This game also has a deeper purpose, which we would probably call a ‘serious game’ nowadays. Senet was played by two players. The journey began in a field marked ‘birth’. The last five playing fields contained miniature representations of gods and words: Horus; Re + Osiris; Month (or Thot) + Schu + Maat; Semataui and finally Per-nefer (the ‘House of Good’). Spread over the game rows there were four fields, which brought luck or misfortune. These were scattered more or less unevenly. There was for example the field ‘Flood’, which forced the player to take his figure out of the game. The ‘Frog/Toad’ field, on the other hand, brought good luck – the player was allowed to count his next point roll twice. Each player was given seven figures, which were

283

284

Alexander Pfeiffer and Georg Sedlecky

called Ibau (‘dancers’). Depending on how many counting lines the counting bones pointed upwards after a throw, the player could move forward with a figure of his choice. The aim of the game was to be the first to arrive at one of the last houses with all remaining figures. The game therefore had a religious meaning and the players were in contact with the names of the gods. Furthermore, star constellations, like the one of orion, were named in texts related to the game For Finkel, The Royal Game of Ur game has another educational function: The really good thing about The Royal Game of Ur is that you can never be complacent because just when you think you have it in the bag – Bang! Bang! Bang! – and you have to go all over again. And I think that’s one of the good things about it. So you never know who is going to win until you’ve won and this is a good message for life.1 Nowadays both games are also revived. The Royal Game of Ur is increasingly being played in Iraq again due to a project from University of Raparin (Davis 2018; The Arab Weekly 2018). Backgammon, a game which is assumed to have originated from The Royal Game of Ur, has a very high popularity in Iran and Iraq (Donovan 2007). Replicas of the game are not only available in the British Museum, or via the University of Raparin, but also in online stores like Amazon, where you can also find Senet in the portfolio.

About Roger Caillois and the Forms of Play Roger Caillois was a French philosopher and author. He was a founding member of the French ‘Collège de Sociologie pour l’Étude du Sacré’. His approach to explaining play can be seen as a phenomenological one. Roger Caillois is critical of Johan Huizinga’s approach, saying that Huizinga does not categorize forms of play and instead focuses on the category of regulated competition (âgon), thus neglecting other forms of play. Caillois also finds Huizinga’s theories too general, as they attempt to define game as such without delimiting its content. However, Caillois takes some elements of Huizinga and develops six core features of games on the one hand and distinguishing four basic forms of play on the other. The core characteristics of the game according to Caillois (cf. 1961, 9–10) are therefore that a game is:

1

Irvin L. Finkel during a game at the international table-top days 2017 (cf. The British Museum 2017).

An Introduction to Gambling in the Context of Game Studies

•

• •

•

• •

Free / voluntary meeting of the players: Roger Caillois, like Huizinga before him, stresses that playing games must be voluntary. If this voluntariness does not exist, the game would lose its appeal. Seperate / spatially and temporally limited event: The game has boundaries in terms of space and time, which are agreed in advance. Uncertain / open procedure and uncertain end: The progress of the game and the end cannot be predetermined, but depends, for example, on the skill of the players. Unproductive / playing creates no values: The game creates neither values nor wealth nor anything new in any way. And apart from the possible exchange of property between the players, at the end of the game everything is the same as before the game. Governed by rules / procedure determined by a set of rules: The game is based on fixed rules that the players know and follow. Make-believe / you live in a fictitious reality during the game: the game is played in a second reality and does not relate to the real world.

Furthermore, Caillois defines four basic types of play, which are based on the central interest of the players: • • •

•

Agôn (competition): The competition or contest can range from “racing” to more complicated games like football or chess. Alea (chance): The players want to challenge luck and chance. This can be expressed by tossing a coin, tossing a coin or participating in the lottery. Illinx (intoxication): This is about wanting to put yourself in the state of intoxication. This can be achieved by dancing, roller coastering, downhill skiing, racing or even by childish shooting games. Mimicry, travesty (masking): The attraction of the disguise leads to putting oneself in a different role. This enables the role reversal. You can play a dwarf, a mother, a knight or a famous character.

But, according to Caillois (cf. 1961, 22), even this classification does not cover the entire spectrum of games. However, games may have combinations of two types. Caillois lists acting (masking) and competition as the most common combination. He thinks of the competition at the court of the king, we can think of modern TV-shows like Let’s Dance or The Masked Singer. But he claims that there are combinations that are not possible. And also, a combination of three types is not possible, because the third type would have only a subordinate supporting role but does not describe the basic principle of play. Not possible, according to Caillois, is for example a combination of regulated competi-

285

286

Alexander Pfeiffer and Georg Sedlecky

tion and thrill, while quite possible is a combination of chance and thrill – this is true if the player forgets his surroundings during the competition. In his doctoral thesis, Pfeiffer (2018) notes that, regarding the forms of play it can be said that although they still form a very good basis, our modern narrative forms have made an expanded viewpoint necessary. It is now possible to cover considerably more grey areas and to combine more game forms. Other game forms such as “simulation”, “collecting for oneself” or “collaboration” could also be identified as new basic forms. During the conducted expert interviews formed a certain consensus, that there is no combination that is not (no longer) possible, especially as a sequence (on a timeline, one after the other). Specially Poker but also online role-playing games can be mentioned as examples of games in which the entire spectrum of game forms, as discussed by Caillois is found. Even in professional sports a mix of all four elements can be possible.

About Casinos and Their Function as a Theatre Space Roger Caillois (1961) further writes that games can establish a link to the fundamental character of a society by analysing which games are or were popular in the respective society. Natasha Schüll refers to Erving Goffman in her book Addiction by Design (2012). Goffman was a Canadian sociologist who conducted an ethnographic study in Las Vegas (1967). Goffman acted as a blackjack dealer, a role that seemed to him to be the most appropriate observation perspective for his study. For him, the game at the table was a “contest of character” in which players could demonstrate their courage, integrity and mastery depending on the situation. For Goffman, the casino game offered an opportunity for people in an increasingly bureaucratic society to become heroes, and heroines through “fate”. The casino fulfilled the desire for “action” in the lives of the players. Goffman describes the casino as an arena for mimicry – i.e. masking, theatre play. For Goffman, it is thus not an escape from everyday life, but a conscious entry into a staged world. Here Goffman explicitly refers to tables/games such as roulette or blackjack, in which people compete against each other, with a human croupier. In today’s world, for example, theatre begins at the moment of reaching the strip of Las Vegas. You enter a world full of lights, big screens and surreal seeming buildings: Paris, Venice and New York, less than 200 meters apart. Once in your hotel room, you might think you are a millionaire – a spacious room and, as a highlight, even a TV in the bathroom. The staging begins to work. The theatre play, the “action” described by Goffman, begins. In the gambling room you buy your membership card. Only in the old casinos on Fremont Street there are still a few ‘Quarter operated machines’. On the

An Introduction to Gambling in the Context of Game Studies

membership card the money is topped up (at the machines). It is paid out again in coupons. The cards themselves contribute to the staging. At casinos on the Strip like the Caesars Palace you already get a Gold Membership Card with a booking of $10. Off-strip hotels such as the Eastside Cannery use principles of gamification on the player membership card: no matter whether you win or lose at the machine – credits are loaded onto the card. These credits can be used to win breakfast the next day, dinner, an extra night in a hotel or tickets for a show. The credits can also be bought for money, in order to win a ‘material prize’ at a ‘special slot machine, dedicated to the specific in-casino-gamification’. Most casinos on the Strip are connected underground and take the visitor into another world. At Caesars Palace you are in ancient Rome (where you finally go shopping in luxury shops like Tiffany and Co), around the ‘Venice Hotel’ in Venice or at the ‘Paris, Paris’ in Paris. Due to the high temperatures, most of the day is spent in the hotels and underground. The casinos themselves – or at least their gaming areas – are mostly winding and a labyrinth. You can hardly see the exit. Only modern hotels like the Cosmopolitan, which belonged to the Deutsche Bank until 2014 and was then sold for 1.73 billion dollars, have a straightforward design in which the exits can be seen from everywhere and ultimately a clear structure. One thing, however, is recognizable in every casino: the slot machines are absolutely taking over. Tables with human operators are still there, but no longer the center of attention. Following Schüll (2012), Bo Jason Bernhard, Assistant Professor at the Department for Sociology, Hotel Management at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas and Executive Director of the university’s International Gaming Institute, used the term “deforestation” in his speech at the “International Conference on Gambling and Risk-Taking” to describe the shrinkage of the slot machines. Also Robert Hunter gambling addiction therapist from Las Vegas, calls the advance of the machines “Survival of the Fittest” – in other words “the strongest wins” (again regarding to Schüll). We have therefore been seeing a dramatic increase in the use of digital slot machines since the 1990s instead of classic gaming tables. These are being staged more and more and are often linked to big brands, sometimes with new and own stories and in some cases they show aspects of transmedia storytelling. The branding goes from Star Wars, Godfather, Lord of the Rings to board games like The Game of Life and video game brands like Frogger, Pac-Man or Street Fighter.2 But there are also comments on playing with slot machines from a socio-critical perspective. Callois as well as Goffman say that slot machines are only for people 2

Star Wars slot machines, as well as all slot machines with branding from the Marvel universe, are removed due to rules established within the Walt Disney Group, (cf. Team Jedi News 2018).

287

288

Alexander Pfeiffer and Georg Sedlecky

who lack social competence, or that they are only used when there is no one to interact with. Clifford Geertz, author of the renowned essay: “Deep play: Notes on the Balinese Cockfight (1973)”, says that slot machines are only for women, adolescents, very poor, socially outcast or per se peculiar people. Geertz says that cockfightingman will never go near to these machines, referring to his study on (illegal) Balinese Cockfights, which is seen in Balinese culture as a game of honour and to become the ‘man among men’. A side note: Cockfights are also noteworthy in the context of gaming and gambling and how both the social status of the fighters and betting on the outcome has changed worldwide since the beginning of this (brutal) entertainment form (also referred as blood-sport) 1000 BC in China (cf. Dundes 1994).

About Player Types in Game and Gambling Research In the next section, the authors like to compare the types of players according to Bartle (1996; 2003) with the gaming behaviour in casinos and gambling halls. Achiever – Regular Player: The main purpose is to reach the next level, to defeat the next boss and to find the next best equipment and weapon. The challenge and the struggle of the game drives the player. To break the game and become truly overpowered is the hidden dream of every ‘Achiever’. Paradoxically an ‘Achiever’ will become bored of the game afterwards. Socialising is unimportant unless it is useful for getting new strategies or it is required to achieve something as a group. Competing with other people is also irrelevant, except it is for gaining experience or better equipment. In Gambling Context, the ‘Regular Player’ wants to defeat the Casino / the Machine and to overcome the odds. A ‘Regular Player’ loves the risk and the roller coaster experience. Socialising and direct competition with other players is very limited. Competition is more on a subconscious level, like ‘I can afford a higher bet than the other player’ or ‘I won the higher Jackpot than all of my friends, so I am a better player’. Explorer – Fun Player: The main purpose is the exploration of the whole world, to figure out all (hidden) game mechanics, and to immerse into the game world. The ‘Explorer’ loves an epic main story, lots of side quests and all kind of different NPCs to interact. Gaining experience points and levelling up are just for the purpose to enter new areas or progress in the story. Socialising with other people is limited to in-game situations. In gambling context, the ‘Fun Player’ loves to immerse into the games and the casino. A ‘Fun Player’ needs an exciting casino floor, brand new games featuring movies or TV Series, awesome graphics and impressive sounds. The ‘Fun Player’ tries out all new games, Jackpot concepts and wants to get the whole casino experience. A ‘Fun Player’ often comes with friends, so socialising and sometimes competing is part of the experience, but not the main purpose.

An Introduction to Gambling in the Context of Game Studies

Socialiser – Social Player: The main purpose is the social interaction with other people and friends. A ‘Socialiser’ loves to talk in voice or text chat over in game content, other players and private things or problems. For achieving goals within the game, the team comes first. Every player has his role and takes part of the success of the team. Defeating other people and chasing achievements is not important. In gambling context, the ‘Social Player’ comes to the casino to meet friends and connect with new people. A ‘Social Player’ loves jackpots setups and any games that offer interaction with other people. Competing with other people is just for the purpose to interact with them and have a good time rather than winning at any cost (e.g. a loose Poker round, a crowded Black Jack table). Everyone loves big wins, but the ‘Social Player’ is not chasing for big money. Killer – Competitive Player: The main purpose is either the direct competition with other people, to defeat an opponent and to achieve victory or to find a way to show being superior to others, e.g. through knowledge of the game itself. If defeating others is the higher goal, levelling up and explore the map is only for the purpose of getting stronger and better equipment to be able to compete with other players. Social Interaction depends on the player and the game. Many PvP (player versus player) games are played in teams (e.g. League of Legends, Counter Strike, Overwatch, FIFA). Inventing successful game strategies and maintaining a good team spirit are crucial for success. Sidenote: (Bartle 1996) defines the player as ‘Killer’ but ‘Competitive Player’ would be a more accurate description. In most competitive games (either eSports or Sports in general), you cannot win by just killing the enemy. In gambling context, the ‘Competitive Player’ comes to the casino to challenge other people and to get their money. The number one game is poker with his combination of skill, psychology, strategy and luck. Social interaction is mostly part of the experience.

About Gambling Mechanics in Digital Games At the end of the chapter the authors would like to point out some mechanics which have been adopted from the gambling industry into the gaming industry. The first point to mention is sound. Almost everyone knows the sound of slot machines when the coins roll into the coin cup. This sound, which is also in modern slot machines only a sound file, occurs in games such as World of Warcraft when a monster or chest is looted. This sound is associated with something positive for the players and was therefore used as an amplifying element in videogames. (cf. Madigan 2009; Menhorn 2014) As a second point, the authors would like to mention player-initiated gambling. For example, in CS:GO the topic of ‘skin gambling’ is very much discussed, while in World of Warcraft the /roll function as well as betting on game content (who first kills

289

290

Alexander Pfeiffer and Georg Sedlecky

a certain boss) led to the fact that loot is now split automatically. The /roll function may no longer be used in public chat. These are just two examples that show that if there is the possibility (in terms of technical, but also game mechanics worth betting on), there will be (illegal) gambling within digital games. (cf. Dent 2017) And the third and perhaps most important point is the game mechanics of lootboxes. These are for example currently (2019/2020) being investigated by Meduna et. al. (2019) in their working paper: “Loot Boxes – A Game Changer?”. The topic of lootboxes is where we game researchers should pay much more attention in the near future and in the best case a larger project in which both people from games and gambling research should participate together. Since lootboxes have become popular, one could argue that game designers are now the bad guys and, out of greed for profit, they install unnoticeable mechanics for the players, which are (almost) pure gambling. Whereas the players do not face this gambling voluntarily and consciously but are driven into it with their money to bet on something, in the case of lootboxes virtual objects, without any direct real value for their character or their account.

References Bartle Richard. 2003. Designing Virtual Worlds. USA: New Riders Publishing. Bartle, Richard. 1996. “Hearts, clubs, diamonds, spades: Players who suit MUDs.” Journal of MUD research. Becker, Andrea. 2007. “The Royal Game of Ur.” In Ancient Board Games in Perspective: Papers from the 1990 British Museum Colloquium, with Additional Contributions, edited by Irving Finkel, 16. London, England: British Museum Press. Botermans, Jack (2008) The Book of Games: Strategy, Tactics and History. Fankbonner, Edgar Loy. New York: Sterling. Caillois, Roger. 1961. Man, play, and games. New York: The Free Press. Davis, Mark. 2018. “Royal Game of Ur: the ancient boardgame making a comeback in Iraq.” Euronews. Accessed February 28, 2020. https://www.euronews.com/ 2018/11/26/royal-game-of-ur-the-ancient-boardgame-making-a-comeback-iniraq Dent, Steve. 2017. “YouTubers avoid fine over Valve ’CS:GO’ gambling scam.” Engadget. Accessed February 15, 2020. https://www.engadget.com/2017/09/08/ youtube-csgo-lotto-fcc-no-fine/ Donovan, Tristan. 2007. It’s All a Game: The History of Board Games from Monopoly to Settlers of Catan. New York: St. Martin’s Press - Macmillan Publishers. Dundes, Alan. 1994. The Cockfight: A Casebook. Wisconsin: Univ of Wisconsin Press. Finkel, Irving L. 2007. “On the Rules for The Royal Game of Ur.” https://www. academia.edu/15173145/On_the_Rules_for_the_Royal_Game_of_Ur

An Introduction to Gambling in the Context of Game Studies

Geertz, Clifford. 1973. “Deep play: Notes on the Balinese Cockfight.“ In The Interpretation of Cultures, 412–53. N.p: Basic Books. Glonnegger, Erwin. 1999. Das Spiele-Buch: Brett- und Legespiele aus aller Welt; Herkunft, Regeln und Geschichte. Uehlfeld: Drei-Magier-Verlag. Goffman, Erving. 1967. Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face-to-Face Behavior. Chicago: Aldine. Green, William. 2008. “Big Game Hunter.” Times. Accessed February 27, 2020. http://content.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/0,28804,1815747_1815707_1815665,00.html Madigan, Jamie. 2009. “How are loot-based games like World of Warcraft.” The Psychology of Video Games. Accessed February 15, 2020. http://www. psychologyofgames.com/2009/12/phat-loot-and-neurotransmitters-in-worldof-warcraft/ McCurley, Mathew. 2011. “The Lawbringer: Gambling in World of Warcraft.” Engadget. Accessed February 15, 2020. https://www.engadget.com/2011/09/02/ gambling-in-world-of-warcraft/ Meduna, Marc von; Fred Steinmetz, Lennart Ante, Jennifer Reynolds, and Ingo Fiedler. 2019. “Loot Boxes – A Game Changer?.” Gambling Research Division Working Paper Series, No. 2. Menhorn, Jack. 2014. “Psychology of 10 Years of Sound in World of Warcraft.” Accessed February 20, 2020. http://designingsound.org/2014/12/11/psychologyof-10-years-of-sound-in-world-of-warcraft/ Pfeiffer, Alexander. 2018. “Auf dem Weg zur ludischen Gesellschaft.“ Thesis for: Doktorat der Sozial- und Wirtschaftswissenschaften an der Wirtschaftsuniversität Wien, Advisors: em. o. Univ. Prof. Dr. Johann August Schülein, Prof. Dr. Wilfried Elmenreich, 10.13140/RG.2.2.21808.30725 Pusch, Edgar. 1979. “Das Senet-Brettspiel im Alten Ägypten. Das inschriftliche und archäologische Material.“ Münchner Ägyptologische Studien 38. Munich and Berlin: Deutscher Kunstverlag. Schüll, Natasha. 2012. Addiction by Design, Machine Gambling in Las Vegas. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press. Team Jedi News. 2018. “The Original Trilogy ‘Star Wars’ Slot Machines Discontinued in Vegas.” JediNews. Accessed February 15, 2020. http://www. jedinews.co.uk/gaming/articles/the-original-trilogy-star-wars-slot-machinesdiscontinued-in-vegas/ The Arab Weekly. 2018 “Iraq’s resurrection of the Royal Game of Ur.” Accessed February 28, 2020. https://thearabweekly.com/iraqs-resurrection-royal-game-ur The British Museum. 2017. “Tom Scott vs Irving Finkel: The Royal Game of Ur | PLAYTHROUGH | International Tabletop Day 2017.” Accessed February 27, 2020. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZskjLq040I

291

292

Alexander Pfeiffer and Georg Sedlecky

Ludography Ainsworth. 2017. Pac-Man. Slot Machine. Blizzard Entertainment. 2004 World of Warcraft. Blizzard Entertainment. Blizzard Entertainment. 2016. Overwatch. Blizzard Entertainment. Crytologic. 2015. Street Fighter. Slot Machine. EA Vancouver. 2019. FIFA 20. EA Sports. IGT. 2012. Star Wars. Slot Machine. IGT. 2017. Lord of the Rings. Slot Machine. Konami. 2016. Frogger. Slot Machine. N.a. ∼300 AD, modern chess ∼ 1500 AD. Chess. N.a. N.d. Game of Life. Slot Machine. N.a.. 1350 BC. Backgammon. N.a.. 2600 BC. The Royal Game of Ur. N.a.. 3000 BC. Senet. Riot Games. 2009. League of Legends. Riot Games. Scientific Games. 2016. Godfather. Slot Machine. Valve. EA-Games. 2003. Counterstrike. Valve.

Social and Cultural Studies Ashley J. Bohrer

Marxism and Intersectionality Race, Gender, Class and Sexuality under Contemporary Capitalism 2019, 280 p., pb. 29,99 € (DE), 978-3-8376-4160-8 E-Book: 26,99 € (DE), ISBN 978-3-8394-4160-2

Hilkje Charlotte Hänel

What is Rape? Social Theory and Conceptual Analysis 2018, 282 p., hardcover 99,99 € (DE), 978-3-8376-4434-0 E-Book: 99,99 € (DE), ISBN 978-3-8394-4434-4

Jasper van Buuren

Body and Reality An Examination of the Relationships between the Body Proper, Physical Reality, and the Phenomenal World Starting from Plessner and Merleau-Ponty 2018, 312 p., pb., ill. 39,99 € (DE), 978-3-8376-4163-9 E-Book: 39,99 € (DE), ISBN 978-3-8394-4163-3

All print, e-book and open access versions of the titles in our list are available in our online shop www.transcript-verlag.de/en!

Social and Cultural Studies Sabine Klotz, Heiner Bielefeldt, Martina Schmidhuber, Andreas Frewer (eds.)

Healthcare as a Human Rights Issue Normative Profile, Conflicts and Implementation 2017, 426 p., pb., ill. 39,99 € (DE), 978-3-8376-4054-0 E-Book: available as free open access publication E-Book: ISBN 978-3-8394-4054-4

Michael Bray

Powers of the Mind Mental and Manual Labor in the Contemporary Political Crisis 2019, 208 p., hardcover 99,99 € (DE), 978-3-8376-4147-9 E-Book: 99,99 € (DE), ISBN 978-3-8394-4147-3

Iain MacKenzie

Resistance and the Politics of Truth Foucault, Deleuze, Badiou 2018, 148 p., pb. 29,99 € (DE), 978-3-8376-3907-0 E-Book: 26,99 € (DE), ISBN 978-3-8394-3907-4 EPUB: 26,99 € (DE), ISBN 978-3-7328-3907-0

All print, e-book and open access versions of the titles in our list are available in our online shop www.transcript-verlag.de/en!