[arg_discuss] Defining ARG's

[Christy Dena]

Here is an outline of the differences between 'pervasive games' and ARGs
that Jane McGonigal put out in 2003:

<quote>
IMMERSIVE VS. PERVASIVE
Given the immersive genre's reliance on digital networks, we should ask:
Could the dramatic modes of immersion and collective play associated with
the Beast and its successors be achieved by other kinds of networked games?
I would like to consider briefly the genre of mobile, pervasive gaming in
order to argue that the effects I have described are so far unique to
immersive games.

Immersive entertainment, a primarily American phenomenon, is often elided
with the pervasive gaming models that are currently popular in Europe and
Asia. Pervasive entertainment, which combines Web fictions and multiplayer
communities with mobile texting and global positioning technology, includes
the annual worldwide Nokia Game and Supafly and BotFighters, produced by
Swedish game company It's Alive. Despite the functional similarities between
the two genres, however, the structure and rhetoric of European and Asian
models of pervasive entertainment are fundamentally at odds with the
immersive and collective goals of games like the Beast.

Consider, for example, the mobile and massively-multiplayer Nokia Game,
which in November 2002 was played by more than a million people in 25
countries. Although the adventure-themed Nokia Game claims in press releases
to "investigate the borders between fiction and reality," it also promotes
itself with the slogan: "In reality it's a game" [35]. On one level, this
statement emphasizes the location-based aspects of pervasive entertainment.
The Nokia Game, like the Beast, is played "in reality," that is, in
everyday, real environments with players' ordinary, everyday tools. On
another level, however, this slogan also firmly positions the Nokia Game
experience as a game; consider the paraphrase, "Really, it's a game." As
opposed to the Beast, there is no real effort to disguise the game's
gameness. This is especially evident in the design of the digital documents
associated with the Nokia Game, most of which prominently feature the Nokia
logo, a link to "The Nokia Game" home page (with explicit objectives, rules
and prizes clearly stated) and legal disclaimers. All of this peripheral
information serves as a constant reminder that a game is being played.

Another barrier to player immersion in the Nokia Game is its reliance on
mini-flash games to advance plot and player status. These games, played on
cell phones or the Web, have a symbolic diegetic meaning - for instance, a
player manipulates an avatar through a flash environment to earn game world
points that translate into game currency, or a player investigates a mystery
by clicking on different parts of a 360-degree, traversable photographic
image to "grab" objects and reveal pop-up information. This kind of symbolic
interface clearly demarcates game from reality. The difference in player
experience in the pervasive gaming vs. immersive entertainment can be summed
up as the difference between interacting with a signifier (the Nokia Game)
and its signified (the Beast).

But what about the multi-player component of pervasive games? Does it
produce immersive-like collectives? While many cooperative Web communities
assemble annually around the Nokia Game to share hints, tips and archive
game files, ultimately the collective activity is limited both by the design
and rewards of the game. Unlike the Beast, there is no reason an individual
couldn't play the entire Nokia Game from start to finish, interacting but
not collaborating with other players. Its scope in terms of the skills, time
commitment and personal resources required are limited enough to make
feasible a team of one. Meanwhile, with high-value prizes like expensive
integrated digital equipment at stake, incentive for cooperation is
inherently limited.
</quote>

McGonigal, J. (2003) ''This Is Not a Game': Immersive Aesthetics and
Collective Play' presented at MelbourneDAC:  the 5th International Digital
Arts and Culture Conference, RMIT, Melbourne, Australia, May 19 - 23,
published at School of Applied Communication, RMIT [Online] Available at:
http://hypertext.rmit.edu.au/dac/papers/McGonigal.pdf . PowerPoint available
at: www.avantgame.com.

Cheers,
Christy



-----Original Message-----
From: arg_discuss-bounces at igda.org [mailto:arg_discuss-bounces at igda.org] On
Behalf Of Clay Chiment
Sent: Friday, 21 July 2006 2:49 AM
To: Discussion list of the IGDA ARG SIG
Subject: Re: [arg_discuss] Defining ARG's

Heyla all!

I was going through a box yesterday and found an interesting article on 
"what is a game?".  It was written some time ago (as in 30+ years ago) by a 
college student who was creating a D&D style game.  The game was designed 
to be played in the dormitory where he lived, it was being played when I 
lived there (~10 years ago), and it is apparently still being played 
today.  Anyway, the "what is a game" article seemed relevant to our ongoing 
discussion of "what is an ARG?" (at least tangentially) so I thought I'd 
share part of it...it's a tad dated (remember it's 30+ years old, written 
by a college student) but interesting none-the-less.  And of course, if one 
of you happens to be the grown up version of the college student who wrote 
this article, let me know...I'll mail you a copy for your folio.  :)

Clay Chiment

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 From the Game of the Gods:

What is a game after all?

To understand the question, we must first come to terms with the fact that 
all things have the potential of achieving game-like status, and that 
therefore those games we play within this grand and encompassing game can 
be as varied and diverse and yet as undeniably linked by common elements as 
are the people of this planet.  Some games are based entirely on luck.  An 
automaton could play these games.  They may be a waste of time.  Some games 
are made up of a dense and solid strategy construct.  These games, though 
interesting from a purely mathematical viewpoint, are also easily mastered 
by the appropriate program.  Other games are too short and simple.  These 
are often brief and without stimulation.  There is no experience 
here.  Still other games are much too complicated with rules governing even 
the simplest occurrence with laws more complex that those that govern our 
true reality.  These never-ending sagas are not games.  They are separate 
lives.

<snip>

It is not that game playing is bad.  Quite the contrary, game playing is 
good.  But a game should have certain qualities.  It should reflect 
reality, though exude an originality that is both curious and 
interesting.  It should posses a simple and smooth running system of 
mechanics that functions as the clockwork governing the evolution of a 
multitude of complex and unpredictable situations.  As in life skill and 
luck should both play certain factors in the events that take place.  In 
short, the game should be as simple and complicated and complete in itself 
as our reality appears to be.  For what is a game after all if not an 
opportunity to escape temporarily to an alternate world?  It is a place to 
exercise the useful skills of decision making and problem solving in an 
environment that challenges the individual in untraditional ways.  The game 
is a place where the individual can safely practice teamwork and 
camaraderie and also harmlessly act out anger and aggressions and 
occasionally even deceit and deception if one may so have the desire.  In 
this way the game is an intellectual, creative, and social outlet whether 
we are aware of it or not.

These are appropriately high standards for a game, and some may fairly 
argue that it is taking game playing a little too seriously.  After all, we 
have nearly missed the most important quality a game must posses: It's 
gotta be fun.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


_______________________________________________
ARG_Discuss mailing list
ARG_Discuss at igda.org
http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/arg_discuss