Documentary, A Place
for Games?
Last week, Sharon gave us an
interesting lecture on documentary and challenged the concept of whether games
can be documentary or not. She told us that Tracy Fullerton quotes that games
could be a way of “putting the player in the path of
history”; this is especially relevant to wars game such as the
infamous Call of Duty franchise, Medal of Honour series and Battlefield
games.
Sharon then went on to telling us about
Michael Renov’s (Professor, Vice Dean of Academic
Affairs, USC) “Theorising Documentary” where he defines it as:
• To record, reveal of
preserve.
• To persuade or
promote.
• To analyse or
interrogate.
• To express.
We are then shown a quote from “Playing the Past: History and Nostalgia in Video Games” (Fullerton, T. 2008) who states that…
‘The technological cycles that have driven the game industry to date all seem to move toward a point of convergence at which photorealistic visuals and
We are then shown a quote from “Playing the Past: History and Nostalgia in Video Games” (Fullerton, T. 2008) who states that…
‘The technological cycles that have driven the game industry to date all seem to move toward a point of convergence at which photorealistic visuals and
painstakingly
accurate simulations will meet.’
This is especially true of war games
that are being released within this generation of consoles and PC’s, striving
for the realistic graphics to do justice to the scarily realistic gameplay and
simulations of war.
Historical Context:
Social Realism
Social Realism, otherwise known as
“socio-realism”, was an art movement referring to the creative works of
painters, film makers, photographers and print makers who produced work that
was intended to draw in people attention to the everyday conditions of the
working classes and the poor.
An example that Sharon gave us to
consider regarding social realism was an influential piece of TV cinema called
“Cathy Come Home”; a thought provoking piece of film intended to cause drama
and controversy concerning the state of homeless parents at that time.
Documentary through
Direct Cinema
Sharon then spoke about how the use of
film and cinema to spread documentary was used, incorporating “innovations in
recording and sound technology to make film intended to represent reality in
new ways”. In other words, we were considering how the powerful medium of film
began to be a popular outlet for documentary and with new technologies
available, film makers were able to realistically document and portray their
subjects.
Albert and David Maysles were brothers
who made documentary films together as a production team. Their work includes Salesman
(1968) and Grey Gardens (1976).
Grey Gardens was a documentary
following the everyday lives of two reclusive socialites, a mother and daughter
who shared the name Edith Beale. They lived at Grey Gardens, a run down mansion
in New York.
The Maysles stated that “the
more personal [a film] is, the more it tells everyone’s story”.
Sharon then proposed the question:
Does the interactivity
of games offer an opportunity to take the ideas expressed by the Maysles
further and personalise content to produce universally relevant ‘documentary’
experiences?
I believe it does yes. Interactivity
with games is crucial for a deep, emotional and meaningful connection between
the player and the story of the game; just as the Maysles film Grey Gardens
pushes emotions between the viewer and the characters. If a games narrative is
incredibly personal then the player will feel more of a connection to it and
begin to find elements which relate to it being their own personal story.
Persuasive Gaming:
Political and Social Perspectives
We also had a lecture from Kim
regarding another angle at which we could consider the contextual studies
brief. She began talking to us about the procedural rhetoric in games saying
that “video games offer a particularly rich embodiment of procedural rhetoric”.
Ian Bogost defines procedural rhetoric as follows:
“I suggest the name
procedural rhetoric for the practice of using processes persuasively, just as
verbal rhetoric is the practice of using oratory persuasively and visual
rhetoric is the practice of using images persuasively. Procedural rhetoric is a
general name for the practice of authoring arguments through processes.
Following the classical model, procedural rhetoric entails persuasion—to change
opinion or action. Following the contemporary model, procedural rhetoric
entails expression—to convey ideas effectively. Procedural rhetoric is a
subdomain of procedural authorship; its arguments are made not through the
construction of words or images, but through the authorship of rules of
behaviour, the construction of dynamic models. In computation, those rules are
authored in code, through the practice of programming.”
In other words, Ian Bogost suggests
that procedural rhetoric is a strategic method of persuasion told not through
words or imagery but through rules and regulations that are there to guide the
person to a specific conclusion. In video games, for example, procedural
rhetoric is used to guide the player through the game.
“Questionable” Games
In this section of the lecture, Kim
spoke to use about a selection of so called “games” that depict shocking
historical acts such as terrorism and assassination. Examples of which are:
Super Columbine Massacre RPG Where players take on
the role of Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold and act out the massacre whilst
experiencing flashbacks relating to their past experiences in life (subtly
suggesting why they did the shootings).
9/11 Survivor Is a game where
players assume the roles of people trapped in the south towers of the world
trade centre when the 9/11 terrorist attacks happened.
JFK Reloaded is a game where the
player assumes control of Lee Harvey Oswald and literally re enacts the John F.
Kennedy assassination themselves.
video reference, credit goes to MrRice4life
video reference, credit goes to MrRice4life
In all these games you assume an active
role within a controversial subject. Many argue that these aren’t even games,
nor can they be defined as games due to their sensitive subject material and
historical references. For this reason they get a bad name and incredibly
negative press which is highly understandable.
As a homework task, Kim and Sharon
asked us to either pick a game from the ones spoken about or chose one of our
own and analyse/discuss the procedural rhetorical elements that is contains. I
decided to play a game of my own choice which was Portal 2.
(The following are all my own screen shots)
Procedural Rhetoric in
Portal 2?
I am hoping my understanding of
procedural rhetoric is strong enough and correct to verify my study of Portal 2
and the ways the game is using procedural rhetoric to guide the player through
the game.
My notes that I took from the CS
session regarding procedural rhetoric state that it is the process
of getting a player to progress through a game and that devs use forced
mechanics to aid this. So, for this assignment I decided to look
at Portal 2 and how the world and level design can influence the players
decision in order to progress. This is interesting because the story in Portal
2 isn’t *that* complicated and therefore there is no constant narrative drive,
as GLaDOS would suggest, it’s all about the science and test chambers ;)
So, the procedural rhetoric I have
focused on comes in the form of how the developers have subtly used
level design to persuade the player to progress and aid them with the decisions
when attempting to solve the various test chambers.
First of all, here is the list of
questions that I had to keep in mind when analysing the game:
• What are the rules of the system?
The rules of Portal 2 are that players
are physically unable to progress through the game unless they solve test
chambers. As I mentioned, the level design in Portal 2 is a visual aid of
procedural rhetoric, in many way, as it sub consciously helps the player make
their choices when trying to solve test chambers. Solving the chambers lets
them progress through the game.
At the beginning of test chambers
players are faced with a number and some small square icons which actually
portray the types of techniques needed in order to complete the test chamber.
The same small icons are repeated
throughout the level in order to try and persuade the player how to solve the
chamber.
These lighter cream coloured walls are
the only walls players can place portals. These are obviously very precisely
placed within the levels because they need to be in very specific places in
order for players to cleverly use their portals and progress. However, the
placement of these walls can also help trigger the player to think “hey, there,
I should try and put a portal there”; in other words, these walls can persuade
the player to play a specific way progress as a result.
• What claims about the world do these
rules make?
On a deeper level, Portal 2 teaches co
operation (when playing in co-op mode), problem solving and time management.
The game has an age rating of 12 so theoretically, fairly younger players can
pick up the game and play and have to possess these qualities in order to
progress through the game.
I have played Portal 2 in co op mode
before where players have quit out due to not being able to solve the test
chamber in less than 1 minute or I have left because the player simply wont
communicate with me well enough to progress through the game, despite having
the level design subtly persuading us.
• How do I respond to those claims?
Needing skills such as good problem
solving, thinking outside the box, time management and people skills to work in
co op for this game to be successful are correct but also interesting. I
personally love co op games and needing these qualities only adds to the thrill
of the game, the awesome feeling of successfully solving a test chamber is
great. I think that the procedural rhetoric is helpful in the game in terms of
persuading the players to think in certain ways or helping them make different
decisions when problem solving but I also think that these aren’t always needed
and sometimes you do just blank them out as a player and try to use your own
initiative to solve the chambers. However, it’s still trial and error a lot of
the time and Id consider that the level design itself is a forced mechanic by
the developers in order to help persuade the player to progress and reach
specific conclusions both in game and regarding narrative.
No comments:
Post a Comment