I remember when my dad brought our first computer home. Using MS DOS I was able to hook up some killer games of space invaders. It got old so quick! Before the Internet we were not able to interact with other people through gaming (only if we went to the arcade and physically challenged someone). It is so easy now to sit down at our computers get into a gunfight with someone in Sri Lanka.
Today I am actually going to Best Buy to purchase an XBOX 360 and Halo 3 and receive the best gaming experience possible. I will be in contact with millions of peope that are interacting with me in an online world. Video games have been one of my favorite activities and I usually had the latest and greatest systems, but never had any online play. My games would get boring and I would get tired of playing, but with the availability of the online multiplayer I can't seem to put the controller down. Now I see why we call them computer nerds.
In his book, Glassner talks about "resources" or "commodities" in which people compete for and achieve victories. The xbox 360 has a hard drive that saves games and stats. People can view eachother's capabilities before playing the game, therefore creating a more level playing field for everyone. In the 7th chapter, "Gameplay," Glassner overviews the "teammate error and self error." If someone harms a teammate the server has the ability to kick them out, or punish them by deducting points which is the authority figure for the online domain. Actions like cheating, cursing, and being offensive any other way will result in a punishment. So at least it won't be like a bunch of bad-mouthing truckers on CB radios.
In part 4 of Glassner's book, "Merging Stories and Games" he emphasizes on the need of good storylines to accompany the games. The best story is on that can be shaped and rediculed by those who participate and changed for the better. If someone tells us a story, it's the final word. What happened in that story stays in that story until we tell it with our own spin on things, and gaming can do that. The antagonist and protagonist of gaming stories are defined by the different people that play. Thats where the interactive part comes in. We play in different scenarios everytime, with different people everytime. It is a way to not only succeed in the game, but to succeed in actually winning against a real person. In a way, it brings a story to life.
Whenever people plug into any online world, they can put their own voice in the story. If there was an internet domain that was totally blank and users were to be put in it; they would develop the room themselves. They would interact with eachother, form a setting from eachothers likes and dislikes, and ultimately "live a second life" if they wanted to.
Are the games becoming too addicting? Last night I spent 4 or 5 hours playing Xbox Live. For some reason I just could not put the controller down. In Nevada, two parents were arrested for neglecting their kids because they were gaming too much. I know that may be a little rediculous, but like I said; I didn't put the controller down ALL NIGHT!
Monday, September 24, 2007
Sunday, September 9, 2007
Culture Converging? Oh My!
I remember when my dad bought our first computer. This was way before the mouse was associated with a computer. Using F1, 2, 3, 4, and so on, we navigated our way through the two or three programs that our MS DOS computer had. We knew nothing of the world wide web and the capabilities we would have from sitting in our favorite chair. I sure as heck didn't think I'd be asking my first girlfriend to go steady with me without even leaving my house.
There are so many different ways that technology is advancing; through new "black boxes" which are making every task in our lives easier. Instead of going to the post office, I send an email. Whenever I pay a bill, I do it online. Whenever I have a question, I actually answer it using my phone for Wikipedia. All this is made possible through my black boxes; they are everywhere and they do it all for us.
Usually I consider myself what Jenkins calls "Zappers." I have no sympathy for media, everything I see or do has to hold my attention perfectly or else I will "zap" it. When it comes to surfing online I don't go to certain websites, I click on anything and everything that catches my eye. And I think that the reason why media is converging. Every producer is thinking of new ways to get right in front of the consumer. Technology is there for that.
How easy is it for us to stay in our comfort zones while still being connected to the world. People need interaction with others as a way to stay sane. When I said I asked my first girlfriend to go steady with me I used the peer to peer network AOL Instant Messenger. I didn't stutter and my words were perfectly chosen. I was able to put so much of myself out there without risking to get hurt because it was easier not being in front of that person. The internet does not discriminate on distances between.
The thing that bothers me about media converging is that it may affect the responsibility that people have; to be outgoing and not waiting for things to come to them. But I think that is actually the problem. Deep down we all want the world to come to us and I think that media convergence is exacerbating this. Where is our assertiveness? I think the only thing wrong with the convergence is it is making us lazy, but isn't that the point? To not have to do anything and still have it all?
There are so many different ways that technology is advancing; through new "black boxes" which are making every task in our lives easier. Instead of going to the post office, I send an email. Whenever I pay a bill, I do it online. Whenever I have a question, I actually answer it using my phone for Wikipedia. All this is made possible through my black boxes; they are everywhere and they do it all for us.
Usually I consider myself what Jenkins calls "Zappers." I have no sympathy for media, everything I see or do has to hold my attention perfectly or else I will "zap" it. When it comes to surfing online I don't go to certain websites, I click on anything and everything that catches my eye. And I think that the reason why media is converging. Every producer is thinking of new ways to get right in front of the consumer. Technology is there for that.
How easy is it for us to stay in our comfort zones while still being connected to the world. People need interaction with others as a way to stay sane. When I said I asked my first girlfriend to go steady with me I used the peer to peer network AOL Instant Messenger. I didn't stutter and my words were perfectly chosen. I was able to put so much of myself out there without risking to get hurt because it was easier not being in front of that person. The internet does not discriminate on distances between.
The thing that bothers me about media converging is that it may affect the responsibility that people have; to be outgoing and not waiting for things to come to them. But I think that is actually the problem. Deep down we all want the world to come to us and I think that media convergence is exacerbating this. Where is our assertiveness? I think the only thing wrong with the convergence is it is making us lazy, but isn't that the point? To not have to do anything and still have it all?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)