|
|
08.. 09.. 10.. 11..
[ 11.14.02 ] ------------------------------------------------------------------
So as of last week, my project has completely changed trajectories. It is about abstraction, but not
just visual abstraction... its more about abstracting interactions.
I have realized that I am interested in how new video game interactions come to be. Most often new
video game interactions have come about as a result of abstractions or approximations of experiences/
gestures that occur in the real world. A game designer's job is to selectively choose what phenomona to
represent within an experience and then figure out how to represent it successfully.
Like Chris C says: "A game is an artistically simplified representation of a phenomenon....The game designer
simplifies deliberately in order to focus the player’s attention on those factors the designer judges to be
important.
Other quotes:
Simulation severely restricts the game designer's scope, because things have to start following the laws of
physics and be vaguely believable.
If the designer in an attempt to achieve a greater degree of reality, decides to include too many unnecessary
and dull details, the game will likely become tedious to play.
side note (Do advances in technology and interactive devices leave less room for this process? Obviously with
limited graphics and limited interactive devices back in '82 when CC wrote that, designers were challenged
to be creative with the constraints of the technology... ).
I stressed new in the last paragraph, because most often interactions in video games are simply
borrowed from previous games. Game interactions are constantly be borrowed and tweaked to fit into
different contexts.
Great, so I've figured out my topic a week before my paper is due. Now I need to figure out what the fuck
to research.
Questions for Golan about how to broaden research:
- Should I look into more general human computer interaction and how interactions are
approximated/abstracted in other computing contexts, i.e. look into the desktop metaphor... blah, blah,
blah...? One's goal is efficiency, the other is entertainment/engagement...
- Should I look into how interactions are borrowed/recontextualized from video game to video game? i.e.
should I make a map of old school games and try to find overlapping interactions.
- Should I look into representation and abstraction in other art forms to compare? Movies based on
real life stories,
- Should I look into how other content translates across media? Books to movies, movies to books,
movies to games....
- is this relevant?
Graphical Interaction and the Emergence of Abstraction
[ 11.05.02 ] ------------------------------------------------------------------
So, after an initial surge of excitement and energy about my project, I've found it difficult to make any concrete
progress conceptually. This is in part due to a shift in focus to the technical aspects of my project, but
perhaps more importantly, due to a certain way of thinking about how my project should proceed conceptually. I think
that I expected to sharpen my focus about what exactly about the topic of abstraction in games I was interested in
too quickly. I think I became overly concerned with having a "hypothesis" or a startling new revelation about
the topic. Because of this mindset, I have forgotten that for any interesting discoveries to
take place it needs to be driven by exploration and play. I think I need to take a more open approach to my project
in general and let the ideas come from creating and playing rather than research (especially since there ain't all
that much useful written directly on my topic)... or perhaps its just considering creating and playing
as part of my research.
SO, I went back to my website and looked at what I orignally wrote as my concept statement, and I think
I feel more comfortable with that one than the abstract I wrote in my proposal paper. Its a little more open. I think
I think there is definitely something to the kinesthetic stuff, and would definitely like to work it in to my
project, but I think I was trying too hard to make a statement. There are many types of games. How would I explain
the popularity of a game like Myst? That's not too kinethetic. I think I need to be more precise and less
concerned with "making a statement." Maybe its not that the kinesthetic is more important that the visual, but simply
that kinesthetic design in games hasn't been explored as fully as I think it could be, and there is a missed
opportunity there (think recent popularity of Dance Dance Revolution).
ORIGINAL STATEMENT
I think that the most interesting moments in gaming occur in games that can transport the user to exist in a game
space who's logics are furthest from simulation. I hope to explore how these these abstract games are both created
and defined in the digital realm. I plan on exploring abstraction in games from a few different design perspectives
in an attempt to encourage a broader conception of abstraction in games and game design; one that more fully takes
into account the affordances and limitations of computation in the creation of game spaces.
|
|
[ Development Journal ]