Games, Seriously

The “crying test” is merely one in a spate of trends to legitimate games by comparing them to another medium and, by extension, to bestow the same legitimacy and validation of the more traditional form. For instance, the term documentary games is one adopted in an effort to legitimate and affiliate games, using the cultural currency of documentary in a process Tracy Fullerton calls “aspirational pre-naming” (3). This impulse seeks to distinguish its seriousness from mere entertainment.  


Likewise, game designer, Eric Zimmerman notes that the 
“commercial game industry is suffering from a peculiar case of cinema envy at the moment, trying to recreate the pleasures of another media.” 

This is nothing new. The image above is a screen shot of a footnote in Brenda Laurel's 1993 book, Computers as Theatre, in which she describes the ways in which math professors, in the early 1980's, distanced themselves from the word "game," opting instead for "simulation" as a way of describing game-like activities. Laurel notes that this was the case "in those days," as though that is no longer true.

On the other side of the coin, the trend of "gamefication" of everything from college courses to marketing, reflects the desire to affiliate with games as a trend, which, as Ian Bogost notes, is extremely problematic for many reasons, not least of which is the tendency to use it as a brand of sorts, which both trivializes and dismisses real game theory (Gamasutra, May 2011)

No doubt the urge to leverage the following four elements that Jane McGonigal touts as accompanying gameplay proves a powerful incentive, particularly to educational institutions concerned about retaining students. 
They are:
Urgent Optimism   |    Social Fabric      |   Blissful Productivity     |       Epic Meaning

NEXT