Category: Research

Shadow of the Colossus: The Hamlet of Videogames

This is my final game log post in FMS 321 for my games. I could not be happier given the research I found for Shadow of the Colossus. Nick Fortugno wrote Losing Your Grip: Futility and Dramatic Necessity in Shadow of the Colossus which describes exactly what I discussed in the last Shadow of the … Continue reading Shadow of the Colossus: The Hamlet of Videogames →

This is my final game log post in FMS 321 for my games. I could not be happier given the research I found for Shadow of the Colossus. Nick Fortugno wrote Losing Your Grip: Futility and Dramatic Necessity in Shadow of the Colossus which describes exactly what I discussed in the last Shadow of the Colossus log entry. Using his material, I will discuss his writing and how my experience may or may not verify his findings.

Fortugno opens with a discussion of Hamlet and its relevance in discussing videogames which means I already like where he takes his analysis. He expresses interest in agency in videogames, a topic that interest me as well. He asks, “is it true that agency invalidates the possibility of dramatic necessity? Isn’t it possible that agency in an interactive narrative can be used to create the tension between expectation and inevitable outcome?” This question blew my mind. And this applies not only to Shadow of the Colossus, but for a large majority of videogames.

As he builds up to futile interactivity, a topic I would like to address later, he hits a few points I covered in the last post. One was the tragic story of Shadow of the Colossus. After looking into the ending of the game, this game seems quite tragic for Wander. His devotion to saving the maiden, Mono, forces him to commit forbidden acts that transform his being. Though he does not die, he becomes a horned baby, echoing the cursed existence of Ico and the horned children from ICO.

“The player can control the character and is set to an implied or stated objective that appears accomplishable.  However, the scene is designed so that the goal is impossible to achieve,” according to Fortugno’s idea of futile interactivity. In tackling agency in videogames, Fortugno has described what essentially drives the tragic elements in Shadow of the Colossus and other games. They present false agency, but they cannot avoid their destiny.

It has been a joy reading about tragedy in Shadow of the Colossus. Most people describe it as an epic game where you fight monsters and try to rescue the “Damsel in Distress.” And if Anita Sarkeesian did not use Shadow of the Colossus in her videos, she missed a great chance. I do not disagree with her here. But I digress. With Fortugno’s futile interactivity in mind, a more comprehensive analysis of videogame mechanics and narrative cause a strong emotional reaction with the protagonist. The player is not watching the struggle of the protagonist, but is taking part in it and learning the inescapability of their circumstance. It speaks to what videogames can do regarding emotions and empathy, and Ian Bogost would probably support me on that.

Check out Fortugno’s piece!

http://press.etc.cmu.edu/content/shadow-colossus-nick-fortugno

Training Noobz into Hardcore Gamers

This game log is the final log for Knights of Pen and Paper. As such, I am required to have found research on the game. It should be noted, for example, that Knights of Pen and Paper is playable on the PC (Personal Computer), a fact that was unknown to me. However, Knights of Pen … Continue reading Training Noobz into Hardcore Gamers →

This game log is the final log for Knights of Pen and Paper. As such, I am required to have found research on the game. It should be noted, for example, that Knights of Pen and Paper is playable on the PC (Personal Computer), a fact that was unknown to me. However, Knights of Pen and Paper has not attracted the critical eye of the academic. This log will analyze the game through a casual-academic perspective, investigating its mechanics and narrative for deeper meaning.

By analyzing the mechanics of the game, I will be able to determine the nature of Knights of Pen and Paper. After reviewing my previous logs, I noticed that I have looked at this game through the lens of a “hardcore gamer,” if I may call myself that. In Jesper Juul’s Chapter 2 of A Casual Revolution, Juul describes casual games as containing five elements: fiction, usability, interruptibility, difficulty and punishment, and juiciness. To me, Knights of Pen and Paper fulfills these categories. The game is set in fiction, it has a usable game design (it’s simply clicking!), you can stop and resume whenever you like, the game requires a level of strategy and the player is punished for failing (losing gold or time), and the positive feedback from clicking on attacks is disproportionately high considering the action in the game.

I think Knights of Pen and Paper can be considered a casual game. Though some might argue that this leans closer to hard core, the game welcomes players, naïve and experienced, to join and learn about nerd culture. It’s narrative covers topics from fantasy to sci-fi as the TV Tropes link can show below. What made the game seem more relevant for inexperienced players is the final battle with Mom. Granted, I only made it to “A Journey’s End,” but I found a video with this ending: “WOWOWOWOW! GAME IS OVER, GG WP! Congratulations, you beat the game! You’re a hardcore player!” Suddenly the narrative tells the player that they are a hardcore player, which strikes me as something odd for a casual game to claim. But this indisputably recognizes how this casual game introduces themes, motifs, tropes, concepts from a variety of games (tabletop and videogames alike) and rewards the player of any skill level after defeating the Final Boss (Mom) by giving them the title “Hardcore Player.”

It should be safe to say that this game acts as a tutorial for people who want to play games in general. Knights of Pen and Paper uses a simple clicking mechanic to introduce a variety of ideas using humor and “dumbed-down” explanations to bring players to a common understanding. And as for the nature of the game, I think the amount of grinding (repetitive monster-fighting in this case) alone is enough to welcome noobz (new players or newbies) to the world of the hardcore gamer.

Check these out!

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/VideoGame/KnightsOfPenAndPaper

http://www.brighthand.com/review/knights-of-pen-paper-review-the-pen-is-mightier-than-the-sword/

Understanding ICO: Davidson’s Analysis or Andrew’s Evaluation?

After doing research on ICO, Interactivity in Ico: Initial Involvement, Immersion, Investment by Drew Davidson caught my attention. Besides the fact that he types Ico and not ICO, Davidson’s study of the game revolves around initial involvement, immersion, and investment in the game’s narrative and mechanics. Davidson describes initial involvement as, “literally, the start of … Continue reading Understanding ICO: Davidson’s Analysis or Andrew’s Evaluation? →

After doing research on ICO, Interactivity in Ico: Initial Involvement, Immersion, Investment by Drew Davidson caught my attention. Besides the fact that he types Ico and not ICO, Davidson’s study of the game revolves around initial involvement, immersion, and investment in the game’s narrative and mechanics. Davidson describes initial involvement as, “literally, the start of the game.” Everything cinematic before the player assumes control of Ico is part of the initial involvement. This, for non-gamers, is Davidson’s academic description of a tutorial. After assuming control of Ico and protecting and walking with Yorda the first time, the tutorial or initial involvement ends.

The immersion occurs after the tutorial is finished, allowing the player to explore the environment and solve the puzzles ICO presented. This is where I begin to disagree with Davidson. Immersion and later investment is not something that should be described chronologically. As a person who studies performance, I think Davidson misses the point of the mechanics available during the initial involvement. The relationship between Ico and Yorda starts with their first successful escape. Granted these describe stages for the player’s dedication to the game, but that would be assuming that after the initial involvement that the player decides to quit (which is still likely).

I cannot say it is necessarily wrong to analyze ICO this way, but I think the emphasis on the game-like qualities undermines what ICO attempts to express artistically. With the narrative presented, it would seem more appropriate to analyze the game as if it were a film or some form of literature. The study has opened my eyes to how the investment or, “[satisfaction from] completion of the game,” plays a key role in ICO’s success, but I want to defend this game’s emotional expression.

In summary, ICO has been a pleasure to play. I use Davidson’s writing here to show how I think the study of games should be flexible depending on the game itself. As I mentioned in my second post for ICO, I respect Anita Sarkeesian’s feminist critique, and although I disagreed with her use of this game, her analysis seems more fitting than Davidson’s. And as a side note, I learned that some versions of ICO have multiplayer capabilities for someone to control Yorda, making her active and therefore more empowered than she is originally portrayed. ICO has shown me that games with compelling narratives demand adequate analysis of the story and visuals as well as its mechanics which ultimately enhance the emotions expressed.

 

Check out Davidson’s Analysis: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=958723