Task Five : )

Part One:
Today’s readings talk about fans and their involvement in producing game culture. Provide a short synopsis of the articles assigned for today’s class, and consider the notion of participatory culture. How is this important to our discussion? How does this fit into theories we’ve talked about in relation to audience studies?

Reading # 1:
Fantasy Baseball: A Case for Competitive Fandom
Halverson & Halverson, (2008)

Fantasy baseball as postmodern fandom.. instead of watching sports as a passive audience, the fans are able to utilize old and new media. Traditional statistics gathering with online tools, forums, and communities. Fantasy baseball has gathered extreme press and popularity over the years due to its competitive factor as a game and the inclusion of baseball fan’s love of sports stats. It has become a culture that consumes and produces things such as books, membership clubs, advice blogs, etc. The article stresses that being a fan is different than being a fantasy fan. Fantasy players must view and understand the game separately from just a favourite team. Fantasy gaming becomes a participatory culture because players control elements of the fantasy game. They take on roles as owners/managers in position to make decisions. It includes elements of community as fantasy baseball players interact with other players via forums, places, and websites. The connection that gamers make to trade stats and offer tips becomes completely incorporated with Web 2.0. Also, fantasy baseball gamers are able to have control over rules of the game, for example some make hitting home runs easier in order to make the game more exciting. 

Reading # 2:
Computer Game Modding, Intermediality and Participatory Culture 

Sotamaa

Sotamaa looks at “new types of authorship, new distribution models and new relationships between producers and consumers.” He makes an interesting point that games cannot simply just be called readable texts because they cannot only be read or watched but they must be played, which signals the importance of gamers/players from the beginning. Game modding refers to gamer created designs or modifications for already popular games on the market. Gaming innovation by players need not only be technological, and can also instruct gaming norms & practices.

Gaming mods are not just fun little creations, sometimes entirely new games are created and sold due to the community of gamers working on them. The relationship is complicated between gamers and corporate game owners. Gamers as a participatory culture have been accepted now as a part of participatory production. Importantly, “a participant is never fully independent in her actions but operates only through collaboration and negotiation.” (Sotmaa, 15). Therefore there is still a complex power struggle between gamers and game owners, where game owners want to maintain some form of control over their product while still allowing and profiting off of gamer made mods.

Reading # 3:

Of Mods & Modders

Postigo, 2007

Postigo’s article is similar to Sotamaa’s as it discusses the relationship between game modders and corporate gaming companies. Importantly, the reading asks of the power balance/imbalance between the two parties. Are games more commercially profitable because of independent mods or because they were already a popular game, they attracted more modders? Either way, the mod phenomenon definitely pushes the shelf life of any game. Postigo concludes by noting that both parties benefit from the relationship of fan-modders and gaming companies... but that this relationship must maintain itself to be fair and embraced. Therefore, both must continue to benefit (association/popularity/references/money) The reading also touches upon participatory culture/production where game modders get together to form a community with a similar interest. When interests are not in favour for the modders, this community can band together to stand up to the gaming companies, if necessary. 

Participatory Culture:

These readings clearly give examples of popular modes of participatory culture in our society. All readings reference Henry Jenkin’s work on participatory culture.

“Jenkins suggests that these trends are altering ‘the way media consumers relate to each other, 

to media texts, and to media producers’.” (Sotamaa, 1)

All three readings concluded that neither the players/modders were independent or totally reliable on the game/gaming company. Importantly, gaming cannot be ignored! It is not just a phenomenon on YouTube, Facebook, or Flickr but participatory culture is an important part of gaming in our lives. These readings also work against theories that place the audience as a passive blob absorbing all of the mass media without hesitation. Who knew?! 

Part Two:

Find another serious game that is the same theme/topic as the one you’ve chosen. Give the name of the game and a link; how is this game different or the same? How does it compare or contrast? Is one better or more effective (in terms of perhaps game play, game mechanics or raising social awareness) than the other?

Energyville 

Sponsored by Chevron (wtf)

Industrial city where YOU choose how to meet energy demands. Higher scores gained by low impact on economy, environment, & security. Hovering over various energy sources available gives information: benefits & restrictions. After each round (15 years) there are various unexpected energy crisis that randomly effect your scoring.

The game is generally the same topic as Climate Challenge, but Energyville comes with more of a focus on energy generation/resources while Climate Challenge is overall more of a ‘well-rounded’ attempt to focus on global warming and emissions. Both games are strategy based and call upon the player to use their knowledge of resources, and environmental issues to make decisions that are environmentally friendly. Climate Challenge is ultimately more complex, but it is also marketed to a slightly older age group (18+ rather than 14+). 

I argue that Climate Challenge is the better game, but that also may be due to my age (20). A weakness of Energyville is that the environmental information is limited, and the games seems too restrictive for choices by the player each level. Also, its kind of confusing placing the energy sources on the city. That makes it hard to keep track of how much of that resource you are using... it might be easier with meters you can raise and lower, or just with +1/-1 buttons as opposed to the drag and drop. Although, at the end you can compare your city to the top ranked cities, and view what they chose to play with. This increases Energyville’s value as a serious game because you can then learn from your mistakes. Climate Challenge is more effective because it allows itself to be a complex game. The points ranking system takes in more factors than that in Energyville. In effect, Energyville is almost too simple to learn from. It tells you the stats, but doesn’t incorporate them into the game play nearly as much as Climate Challenge does. Instead, you read them separately and most after you have completed playing. The target age group for Energyville is high school kids, who are learning calculus and chemistry, which makes me think that they need to be given more credit. I would lower the age specifications for Energyville to about 8+. Climate Challenge also makes global negotiations and political action into account using a public opinion factor that effects your score as president. Overall, I would say that Climate challenge beats out Energyville in terms of game play, game mechanics, and raising social awareness.

Task Numero 4

Part One:
This exercise is intended to get you thinking about identity in digital spaces, but also for some self reflection on how you might ‘present’ yourself in these spaces.

What MMORPG did you (hypothetically) decide to play?

What compelled you to choose this game over the other?

I hypothetically decided to play Everquest II because I knew someone who failed like 4 courses at Brock due to a World of Warcraft addiction and I did not want to hypothetically follow in his footsteps. Clearly, Everquest is the right choice.

What race did you choose – why? What appealed to you? What didn’t?

Kerra

Kerra worship the spirits of the land and those of their ancestors.  Their often docile demeanor masks the fearsome and powerful predators that they are.  Kerra are a large humanoid feline race, their bodies covered in fur with colors and patterns denoting their lineage. They are tall and powerful with great agility, their tails able to perform menial tasks almost with minds of their own.Kerra are a neutral race. Kerra who start in Qeynos are good, those who start in Freeport are evil.

I was drawn more towards good but figured choosing a neutral player would be nice because who knows, maybe I would like to test out my dark side. Might be more fun. Also, because tigers look badass and I liked the sound of myself being a 'tigress'. About the Kerra itself I was interested in the connection to the land in being an animal. They are beautiful but dangerous and unpredictable at the same time. I think that sounds like a lot of fun in a roleplaying environment.

What class did you choose – why? What appealed to you? What didn’t?
Ranger 

Rangers are unrivaled in their ability to hunt foes and scout dangers in the untamed wilds of Norrath.  Known for sneaking safely through dangerous territory, Rangers use stealth, perception and cunning to seek out enemies and fell them from a distance with a deadly volley of arrows.

I chose the class of the ranger because instead of just using their brute force they use “cunning, stealth & perception” which I think is highly admirable. Also adventuring through a forest sounds like something I would enjoy very much because I love the outdoors, even the virtual outdoors. 

What would you name your character?
raassci- my name all jumbled.. sounds fierce though (silent c! like 3 sss's crazy, i know)

What kind of personality would your character have?
My avatar would probably have a personality similar to myself, kind and caring but I would embrace the Kerra and Ranger and be totally unpredictable and strategic about my gameplay.

Is this anything like your ‘real life/physical’ identity?
Yes but instead of just trying to please the people around me I might try to be more misleading, not in a negative way but in a more mysterious way. That would be cool. 

Do you have any avatars/characters that you are using now in any type of video/computer game or virtual world?
No I do not!

Does your character/avatar’s appearance or personality really matter to you when you’re playing a game or when you’re immersed in a virtual world? (you can answer this whether you’ve played before or not or whether you have an avatar or not). Would it depend on what you’re playing?
Yes it would totally matter to me. I would want to be unique, not blend in with all of the other shmoes. Even if that means I would be singled out, it would just show me who I should not play with / stay away from. Its just like in real life: you don’t want fake friends. My appearance would be a clue to others who I am and I think it would definitely keep me more invested in the game. I would care more about winning or losing. 

Part Two:

Thinking about the things you could talk about in your research paper – the discussion topics you noted on Monday – what theory or theories could you apply to your discussion topics (give at least two)?

(Cultivation) Symbolic annihilation: Cultivation theory says that heavy TV viewers opinions, values, and thoughts are mainstreamed by what they see and more in line with those presented in the TV world. To use cultivation theory with the Internet I would say that the games we play effect what we think about. Therefore in serious gaming, the effects must be great. Symbolic annihilation would be a key concept to discuss because it explains when something is not on tv it is not something that heavy tv viewers think about. Translated to the Internet, is there a difference now that serious games are present. Was the environment a victim of symbolic annihilation before Climate Challenge? And therefore is the impact of this game present simply because it is present. 

Overall, this is an interesting tidbit but I don’t think it would be best for my paper because it kind of looks at the past. I would need to combine this information with something else 

Uses & Gratifications Theory: says that people use specific media for specific things rather than using it passively. This theory challenges a passive audience so I would use it to analyze whether this game is used by people for a specific reason. Do players play it to gain knowledge or solely for entertainment. Uses & Gratifications would suggest gamers would play it for a benefit like knowledge. Does this translate into environmental activism?

This theory makes sense to see the cause & effect relationship between the game and the player. If people actively seek out media such as serious games, why do they? It is a strong theory because it challenges the passive audience. Its weakness would be that it is a ‘simple’ theory. Could be combined with dependency theory that says people need information form the mass media/Internet, and the more relevance the message the greater the impact. If the target audience is young voters, does the increased relevance mean a greater impact on that target audience? 

Hall’s Cultural Studies: This theory says that the mass media manufacture consent for dominant ideologies. Interesting fact: this game is sponsored by the BBC (mass media). There are clearly strong ideologies being communicated through these serious games that are associated with ethical and moral thought. But are they? 

This theory would be useful for my research paper because it could be used to analyze the usefulness of the game. Is this serious game just another part of the culture industry, or is it more grassroots, a challenge to the status quo? Does the game contribute to acts of hegemony (tells us whats important, what to think, what to do?) or does it revert hegemonic sources, and act as a vehicle to encourage the player’s independent agency as a citizen. 

Task # 3

Part One:

Digital Artifacts & Research Tools

Find a digital artifact: video game, PC game, virtual world, game ad etc

Sega Saturn console advertisement for system and various games. 

Think of a research question – what do you want to know?

Why do women identify less as gamers, and why does the gamer stereotype perpetually maintain itself as a male only label?

What theory would you use? Why?

Feminist theory to analyze the advertisement. I would use this because my research question is gender based and the advertisement is very sexual and constructed for a male audience. I want to know about gaming stereotypes, so to analyze the advertisement with a feminist analysis is very useful to see how the company is targeting its gamer audience. 

What kind of research method would you use to collect data & answer your research question?

I would probably attempt to randomly select gamers and non-gamers, ask them to fill out a likert scale coded survey and then construct 2 focus groups, one male and one female. 

What limitations are there to your research approach?

Time expended would be a limitation, because the focus groups are complicated and it would take forever to transcribe the conversation and code it.

Also my sampling method would be limited because I could only complete so many focus groups with just myself as an interviewer. That means my sample size will be small and limited and it will be very important to choose a proper demographic and equal gender ratio. 

What are some of the weaknesses of the theory that you’re using?

It doesn’t really give an impartial view of the advertisement, it automatically assumes there is a power issue (which there is). Harder to quantitatively prove, mostly qualitative research can be gathered. It would be better to also do a textual or semiotic analysis of the image/advertisement for a better all around research solution. 

Part Two:

You’ve now been playing and thinking about your serious game.

What are some of the things you could talk about in your research paper about the game?

The target audience: it targets the young, new voters in the UK. Important? YES. Especially when environmental issues are rising to be of the utmost importance for those campaigning to run for the government.

Are there things or issues that stand out?

Yes the game definitely focuses on political policy and choice effecting climate change. Its not a question whether it will happen or not, but how today's actions effect tomorrows outcome. 

Is there something about the message? The game play? What you’re 

learning/not learning? Etc.

Learning is a key concept for the game, players learn mainly about the causes of global warming from human causes, made aware about government policy regarding climate change, and asked to consider the international challenges regarded climate change policy/negotiation. 

Whats missing? The game does an excellent job of informing the player about resources, money, & whats important for what sector. It kind of misses the boat by leaving out the demographics/cultures of certain areas. If you are in charge of placing a mandatory bylaw for people to buy energy efficient appliances, would it not be important for the player to know income level or general class? Clearly the game cannot include every bit of real life in it or else it probably would not be as fun in its current layout, but to blindly assume is also a problem. 

You should give at least three possible discussion topics in this part of the post and why it’s worthy of further discussion/analysis.

1. Target audience: impact of game on audience and importance for real life decisions... is this game working/effective at all?

2. Political action: does this game create an interest in environmental issues? Or does it foster the interest in those who already have one, leading to agency and action in real life..

3. Environmental knowledge: do players already know the data that are manipulating? Or does this game do a good job in teaching new and unknown information about climate change, policies, and related economic/resource issues. 

Video Gamez; Gen 1-5 & Beyond !

Gaming has evolved drastically since its beginning way back in the 1970's as a commercial medium. The first to fifth generation of gaming are jam packed.  To explain the changes of gaming from gen 1 to gen 5 would take all day. Trust me it took me a whole day just to read the Wikipedia page. The beginning and the end are almost incomparable, except they aren't because even the very first games created are still available thanks to the Internet for many casual gamers alike. Basically, gaming was introduced in arcade environments with massive success, home consoles around the beginning were not very popular until the introduction of cartridge games that could be read by home consoles, rather than buying a console with set games programmed in. This began the 'omggottarunoutandbuythatcoolnewgamedude!' phase. Translation to today: people lining up for days to get into best buy to buy Halo 3. Chaos. The gaming audience was slowly (or quickly depending on how you look at it) formed. Who was responsible? University creative geniuses who saw computer systems as entertainment rather than 00100 001 00101 ! The gaming industry was born. There were many struggles to keep it out of the hands of corporate greed, for the expansion of gaming could only be achieved by those in it for the good of all gamers, to produce creating, challenging, and amazing graphics. Within 30 years sounds chips went from "bee-boop-bee" to recognizable everyday sounds and character voices. Graphics also evolved immensely because of gaming, and computer software as we know it today is in debt to the gaming industry that constantly pushed boundaries to be better than before. 

Sixth & seventh generation gaming has turned into a major cut-throat battle between 3 major home console producing companies that churned out the Wii, PS3, and XBox360. A noticeable change in these generations is Wii's effort to market to 'non-gamers' (because everyone is a gamer at heart) and change the concept of the console controller to something immensely different and never attempted before. XBox360 and PS3 seem to be in competition for 'serious' gamers, by attempting to achieve the greatest graphics and hardware for gaming. They market almost strictly towards people who are already 'gamers' rather than those who are new to the world of gaming (like Wii did). 

Overall I think that gaming has changed for the gamer a lot. Previously it was a challenge, you wanted to win, there were fun obstacles, etc. There is nothing wrong with that but I think the level of gaming in our lives has escalated to a point where games must become more relevant to the 'real world'. Gaming has become much more intertwined with various aspects of popular culture as well as serious issues. Wii challenges gaming stereotypes with WiiFit, and incorporating the physically challenging with the virtually stimulating.  SecondLife allows for a virtual experiment of REAL life. There are endless capabilities. Also, the importance of multi-player and connectivity shows the importance of gaming and also how we as a society value a global network of people from different parts of the world. 

SERIOUS gaming. No jokes.

The serious game I am choosing to research and write about is called Climate Challenge and is (obviously) about the environment and creating social awareness for tough government decisions that must be made. I couldn’t decide between this game and Energyville but I chose Climate Challenge because it seems more complex, and is aimed at a higher age group 18+ who are eligible for voting! 

Climate Challenge is available on the BBC website under the Science & Nature: Hot Topics link that I have provided above in the hyperlinked game title. I chose this game because I am really interested in the environment, and how our future depends on aggressive environmental policies. Specifically this game provides the ‘public opinion’ on certain policies as well as the environmental, economic, good, water, and energy effects. Clearly people care about the environment, but people also care (maybe too much) about themselves. To radically change/stop global warming this mindset must change also and I think that this game attempts to tackle the stubborn. 

This game was created/developed by Red Redemption LTD and supported by the BBC as well as provided with scientific advice from Oxford University. Red Redemption’s slogan is “Learning by Playing” which I think fits the criteria for a serious games developer. They have won various awards for the development and release of various environmentally aware computer games. They also have a Facebook group!!!! Also also have just become authorized developers for Nintendo DS. 

The game itself is a single-player mode where you are making the choices of the President of Europe. Environmental choices include resident, local, industry, trade, and international and are effected by public opinion/approval, and economic, food, water, energy and pollution goal restrictions. Every few years you meet with delegates from around the world to strategize and help subsidize others for their energy goals while making promises yourself to lower CO2 emissions. You are given ten turns (each turn is a decade) spanning from 2000 to 2100. Every turn you are responsible for choosing a specific number of policies available from the different selections (local, industry, etc.). Hovering over policies shows public opinion (good & bad) as well as it explains the impact of each choice. There are also small bar graphs that visually depict the impact it will have on the economy, food, etc. Its very user friendly but mature and gives very interesting and most importantly necessary and relevant information to the player. This information is not just valuable for the game itself but for understanding real life decisions for environmental policy making. Also, throughout the game there are newspaper articles that show what the public liked/didn’t like and your own approval rate. Some natural disasters occur as well that you must select spending rates for that effect your budget for the following turn. 

COMM 3P96

Hey, I already introduced myself in this blog, but here we go again! My name is Carissa and I am a Communications: Media, Culture & Society stream major in my second year of study. I am not a hardcore gamer, but I have dabbled in PC and video games. I would probably label myself as a gamer before I was in university. High school spare got me acquainted with Counterstrike & Halo and in grade school I played large amounts of Runescape and Neopets. I also love Pogo.com’s ‘Poppit’ game with balloons. Also, I just found out you can buy many games for your iPod which sounds exciting. Mostly I would say I play computer games if at all. I don’t really have a favourite game but I did realllly love Neopet’s Meerca Chase, as well as Poppit. Actually I just remembered this game you can download called Tank Wars and its SO awesome. You can play it against someone if you’re on the same network. Super cool. I feel like since University started I play hardly any games at all because if I’m not working, schooling, or sleeping I am out doing other social things. Gaming just doesn’t seem to fit into my schedule. Even Guitar Hero which my brother and sister were obsessed with when it first came out never really got me hooked. 

I think discussing gaming and virtual worlds is very important because it is always SO negatively criticized. People who do make time in their schedule for gaming are often looked down on for no clear reason. Even by people who don’t consider themselves gamers can be gamers, like Prof Tracy has mentioned. My mom plays Mahjong and Freecell/or Spider Solitaire for hours every night, yet is concerned when my brother plays Runescape or WoW or whatever goes on for consecutive hours. What makes these gaming styles different or one more or less acceptable than another? I do not know. Maybe by the end of this course I will find out. I also think it is important because the offline world and the online world are connected (obviously) and therefore the offline world can be affected by the online one, as well as visa-versa. 

Serious Games. 

I checked out FloodSim  because I thought WHOA- politicians, emergency planners, and rescue workers could use this game for preparing for an emergency. What better way than to make a emergency plan then to see the effects of major flooding in a virtual world. Similarly a game like this increased awareness AND forces people to critically think about actions necessary after a major disaster. 

Peacemaker: Lots of people are confused about conflicts dating back for decades such as between Israel & Palestine. Who is right? Who is wrong? Both, neither? This game allows for an unbiased medium to evaluate, explore and manipulate such conflict. 

Food Force is an interesting way to contribute to third world hunger issues from your very own home. It not only has the game but also many links telling players how to help, what to do, how to get involved, etc. 

I find all of these serious games extremely interesting. They seem able to ‘help’ or encourage thought for many serious issues. I had no idea that serious gaming was so big and easy to access. I am interested in knowing how much do these games actually help the issue.