|
We've all heard the debate enough to make our ears bleed: "We need to make games more mature as a medium and make society take them seriously."
So I won't beat that dead horse again. Instead, I'll begin a discourse on a real solution that I feel would work best for that problem. If you want games to continue to be mostly juvenile, that's fine by me, and you will want to quit reading now.
If not, chances you are like me, a gamer that is aging (aren't we all) but also maturing and wanting to see your medium of choice tackle life issues and situations that are becoming or already are more relevant to you.
So how should we do it? With better design of course...or not? Better design is only half the battle here. The real answer is investing in education and academia.
I had the good fortune of sitting in on a graduate class taught by Dr. de Souza e Silva at North Carolina State University as an undergraduate. I was actually part of the class, which covered games, and game design with a focus on mobile and hybrid reality games, until I had to drop that semester for irrelevant personal reasons.
Not long after the class had begun I realized it wasn't what I had thought it was. I just wanted something that was getting me closer to my goal of making games for a living. Instead, Dr. de Souza e Silva had instilled in me something altogether different: an appreciation for games, and knowledge of how they are made. "What? you mean I didn't already like games and know how they were made?" I did, at least I thought so too.
But the class, along with my continued reading of some of the textbooks (Salen & Zimmerman's Rules of Play) is building a better understanding, vocabulary and history of games than I would get by simply playing all the games that intersted me or came my way. I'm old enough to rememberplaying Atari, but I missed out on some of the games like Adventure, which was ground breaking in many ways.
Instead of reminiscing the good ol' school days, let me tie this anecdote back to the original point: Education and academic research will push the medium towards maturity and credibility. Consider if you will the "music appreciation" course offered in many a school, and the "film theory" class you always wanted to take. People who don't have much of any formal education know "that song has a good fast beat."
Well where the heck did they find that jargon? Beat? This kid must be a music major at Julliard! Ok, that's an exageration, but when do you see a high school grad that has limited interaction with games throwing around techincal jargon like "that character's walk cycle is off by a few frames?" Perhaps that same person said, well maybe the coders should have spent longer debugging the game?
Chances are that most people don't understand the inner workings of games (especially video games) like they do film and music and writing. I think the reason is simple: higher education doesn't research games and all education doesn't teach about games.
Obviously there are some places that do teach already, so don't get me wrong (remember my story?). But by and large we are missing out on teaching this. It would fit right into a "media literacy" curriculum that people like Henry Jenkins of MIT have already highly recommended.
I'm just a game designer, what can I do? A lot.
- The first step is be aware. Awareness actually helps things, even though it seems intangible in its results.
- From there you can go in many directions. In the U.S. we have a representative republic which means that officials are elected by citizens to serve the citizens' will. (Or perhaps the lobbyists' wills if you want to be cynical like me). You elect people who do what you want, and anyone that gets elected is obligated to listen to your requests and consider them. So tell your politicians that you want to see local public grade schools and colleges offer course in game theory, game appreciation, game design, etc.
- Another idea if you are too afraid to approach the people that you voted on, or simply don't have time: Give money to current programs or to start new ones. It takes money, too.
- If you have time, consider teaching one of those classes.
- Formal education just really not your thing? Many people are educated by other venues that are as cut and dry as Public Service Announcements, or as exciting as "behind the scenes" looks at games. Include a commentary with your game. Do a making of documentary DVD/BluRay to accompany the game.
- You are creative: be creative! I don't have to tell you the right way to do this, you may know plenty of great ideas on your own.
Let's get legit!
|
And for as much as formality and valid accreditation may turn the stomachs of those who prefer garage efforts and after-school-special creations, such structure is a big part of the solution required to get the target audience of local city councils and school boards to better support and take seriously video game development.
The games industry and its various groups of supporters basically have to ask themselves a few simple questions:
1 - How important is it that society recognizes video game development as a major, principled, life-altering, core career choice?
2 - How important is it that society recognizes the creators of video games for what they have accomplished?
3 - Are the accomplishments of video game creators as important and life-validating to the heads of the nations educational systems (both public AND private) as they are to the video game creators asking the question?
Regardless of your answers, you ultimately need to respectfully discover what makes your target audience tick (just like marketing game products). Respectfully, because the solution is really all about them, society . . . not us, the game developers. The sooner we can acknowledge that WE have to show up to the mixer with a thick skin and not vice versa, the sooner some real traction can take hold.
Throwing up your hands, shaking your head, and exclaiming, "Well, its their loss. They are ignorant. They are just not ready," is not a productive alternative, however little or often it occurs. Find out what makes them tick, why it makes them tick, and introduce thoughtful material that makes the connection with them, their educational policies, and the changes you wish to see them make in favor of seriously legitimizing game development . . . in THEIR eyes, not ours.
In any event, I wrote an article last year on a loosely-related subject, taking aim at the quality of current technical schools that offer game development courseware, as well as how prepared their students are for entry into the games industry.
It is entitled "B3 Is Key: Better Training, Better Products, And Better Returns," and it is located at http://emscharf-the-genuine-article.blogspot.com/2008/10/b3-is-key-better-traini
ng-better.html.
Then why have game developers? If it's just about all of society, just let them make every design decision for you. I'm sure you wouldn't like that.
I think more appreciation will come in time. I think anyone under the age of 30 already appreciates video games. You don't need to convince people that video games are a worthwhile endeavor. By providing educational resources to those who want it, the intellectual value of video games will become apparent to even more people.
Education is certainly a good place to start, but in my experience it has mostly provided bubble intellectualism than practical hands on experience.
I have to agree that I would like to see more relevant and mature games, but I don’t think education will answer all our problems. Certainly it will help, but it will take demand from the public (and perhaps an initial jump into the unknown for a developer) to get things really started.
@Jake: Good call, I've got the vast majority of Valve's games. I really like the work they do and their commentary system was what I had in mind when mentioned some of that stuff. Right on!
@Eric: you bring up some great points as well, I'm going to check out that article you linked us to after this post. I especially like what you say about how we need to show up to the mixer with thick skin, I think that will garner a better respect for us.
@Anton: I acknowledge that education isn't everything here for the solution. The public seems like another key to the solution, but to me it seems elusive to just say "wait until they accept us." Maybe you or someone else reading this has an insight to that?
@An: She has Communication degrees from Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. She also worked as a senior researcher at UCLA. For anyone more interested in her, her courses, her research, etc, here's her website: http://www.souzaesilva.com/bio.htm I agree that Universities are likely to offer the courses if we have more people willing to teach, we need to figure out how to foster that.
@Dan: There are a few of those games on the market, yes. I feel there are not nearly enough, and they aren't high profile enough either. We need to start seeing some that are on the level of popularity as titles like GTA and Gears of War or Madden.
Okay, that's a bit of a hyperbole, but I still feel like many developers use their design knowledge to improve the "functionality" of their games rather exploiting it for thematic purposes. It's a lot like cinematography in film. On one hand you can use a certain filter to help make a scene easier to see (that would be a functional application of cinematography), and on the other hand you can use a filter to reflect the protagonist's emotions. Learning about the former might be important to someone that actually wants to make a movie, but for the rest of us the second case is much more interesting because it adds to a greater understanding of the work. Unfortunately, the second case is used so rarely used in our medium that if someone *were* to take a game appreciation class they'd see more missed opportunities than creative examples in today's games.
1. Perhaps a huge part of the problem is that our own filters are set to evaluate games as Narrative Entertainment like movies, rather than Participatory Sport. The basis for the game experience lies in the ability of the player to read the game, make plans and try them out. The narrative wraps that core experience in meaning for a deeper emotional impact, but that's bonus. A game like Tetris is a huge success without any narrative whatsoever. Video games partner the designer with the player in a way that allows a uniquely personal experience to unfold. And THATS what game appreciation should be about.
2. I agree that a second party such as academia is a wonderful adjunct to game development. Only separate un-biased party can see the situation from the outside and offer much needed observations from that perspective. And academia should be doing their work in partnership with game developers, so that each party can inform the other. The academic presentations I have attended found the researchers very happy to have a real game developer to discuss their findings with, and I found their discoveries to be both fascinating and enlightening. Even if you never take a class in game development, there are plenty of studies taking place on the subject of games and play that anyone can follow or read.
Great subject, thanks for the column.