     |
 |
 |
 | | | | |
 |
|||
 |
||||||
 | | | | | | | |
 |
 |
||||
|
Master's Thesis: Gameplay: The Elements of Interaction AbstractThis article represents a body of research which was undertaken in partial fulfilment of a Master's Degree in 'Digital Games' at John Moores University, Liverpool (2001). Based largely on the work of previous authors, it attempts to analyse gameplay and its continued evolution in the light of technological advances. This is achieved by discussing the work of previous authors with the intention of formulating a general description. Once this has been established, a more in-depth analysis is developed by decomposing gameplay into its constituent parts.
In 1958, William A. Higinbotham - an engineer working at the Brookhaven National Laboratory, devised a simple two-player tennis game for visiting members of the public.
With the help of some friends, Russell set about creating a videogame, which would later be known as Spacewar. It used the PDP's array of console toggle switches as its control mechanism. There were four controls; rotate anti-clockwise, rotate clockwise, rocket thrust and fire torpedos. [Herz, 1997, p. 7] It was simple but it worked well as a game concept. Like Higinbotham, Russell doubted it's commercially viability due to the high cost of the PDP-1 and subsequently shelved it. However, unlike its tennis game predecessor, it was widely copied and distributed to the extent that anyone who had a PDP-1 was likely to have had a copy of Spacewar. This proved to be a defining moment in videogame history, heralding an era of rapid change in which significant improvements were made in both software and hardware technologies and, most important of all, the cost of electronics took a nosedive as integrated microchips replaced solid state circuitry. Today, game development is still in a constant state of flux - made all the more profound by the advent of new game consoles like the Playstation2, XBox and GameCube. Consequently, the definition of 'gameplay' is evolving at a pace that is directly proportional to the changes seen in both software and hardware technology. Today's game players are afforded a level of control that would have been viewed as almost impossible - perhaps even science fiction, only a few years ago because, back then, the technology wasn't up to it.
Above all else, video games manage interactivity in such a way as to make it enjoyable for the end-user. Chris Crawford, who has written a number of articles on the game development process comments,
The importance of interactivity, as Crawford suggests, is undeniable. However, when discussing interactivity within a game development context, it is important to clarify some semantic issues surrounding how it is to be interpreted. In a 1994 article, published in the British roleplaying journal "Interactive Fantasy", Greg Costikyan discusses the level of participation demanded by a game in comparison to other forms of media art. He suggests that:
Whilst it is true that TV and cinema audiences cannot control the outcome of the scenes they witness, one can suggest that they are not entirely passive throughout the experience. Films can induce a physical response in their audiences, (e.g. an adrenalin rush, a release of endorphins, the shedding of tears - either from induced sympathy or from sentimentality). Therefore one could argue that the audience is interacting with on-screen events at an emotional level. Video games also generate a strong physical connection to their audience. Sherry Turkle, in her 1984 book The Second Self: Computers And The Human Spirit, makes the observation that,
But videogames go one step further than traditional media art forms. In addition to emotional interaction, they offer control. The audience is given the power to actively change the outcome of on-screen events. Patricia
Marks Greenfield, in her book Mind and Media, devotes a chapter
to video games and recounts several interviews made with children
from the ages of eight to fourteen - who were asked about their
preferences to television or videogames.
The term 'active control' can lead to confusion however, when you take into account that the technology used to support television has numerous interactive components. For example, the TV Remote is an interactive device that can be used to exercise control over the channel being shown, in addition to the sound level and Teletext information. With the advent of digital cable and satellite multi-channel networks, the level of user participation in the programmes carried by these systems is certain to increase. One current 'buzzword', widely touted by cable TV networks is 'convergence', meaning: "The coming together of two or more disparate disciplines or technologies." One example would be the 'active news channels', where users can select specific headline news or even vote on the issues of the day. However,
we must be clear about one thing. Whilst the TV viewer can interact
with the technology via a remote handset, they cannot change the
outcome of the programme they're watching in real-time. At least
at the time of writing this article this appears to be the case. Based on the issues previously discussed here, perhaps a general description of gameplay can be formulated as: A set of basic elements, which - when implemented in an interactive environment, ensure that the end-user can make interesting choices, thus leading to a vicarious experience which is both memorable and fun. A
more in-depth, decompositional analysis of these basic elements
of gameplay follows.
|
||||||||||||||
Abstract
Education
|
|
