|
Force Feedback
In such cases, the player
still does not feel the texture of the
road or the brush of the grasses when he plays, but only the cold plastic of
the controller. Unlike painting and sculpture (which forbid touch) and music
(which cannot accommodate it), video games require user
participation.
Even though image and sound comprise much of their raw output,
touch is an undeniable factor of gameplay.
Force feedback, motion simulation,
and vibration have been built into expensive flight and military training
simulators for decades.
By the 1980s, some of this technology made its way into
the arcade. 1988's driving sim Hard Drivin' featured
force feedback steering, which resisted player rotation at higher speeds and
rumbled on collision.
Tactile computer interfaces,
or haptics, became a consumer industry by the early 1990s, with companies like Immersion developing cheaper, simpler sensors and
motors that allowed such devices to be integrated into objects other than the
expensive, awkward gloves and vests of dedicated virtual reality labs.
Thanks to the Nintendo 64
Rumble Pak add-on, we usually call haptic feedback in video games "rumble."
Rumble allows games to create tactile sensations in addition to visual and
aural ones. Cars can now seem to bump with the changing texture of asphalt,
gravel, dirt.
Technically, rumble in
contemporary game systems is more or less all alike: motors spin one or more
unevenly molded weights in a housing within the body of a controller.
But
despite the simplicity of rumble, its effects are quite varied: the pulse of a
heartbeat signifies health and instills fear in Silent
Hill; a tackle in Madden NFL registers
physically as well as visually; the tremor of a gunshot in Call
of Duty alerts the player to unseen dangers from behind
or above; the vibration of the steering wheel in Gran
Turismo communicates the force of cornering around a hairpin at speed.
The
subtle signal of a motor signals the cursor entering a button in the Wii
Sports menu screen; a jolt to the hand in MVP Baseball
alerts the player to an opponent stealing base; a spin of the the rumble pak in
The Legend of Zelda: The Ocarina of Time
signifies the loose feel beneath Link's feet when a treasure is buried beneath
the ground he stands upon.
In general, the use of rumble
is of two kinds: the first (as the name of the company that licenses the
technology suggests) is increased immersion.
Rumble is supposed to make the player feel more a part of the game in titles
like Madden or Silent Hill. The
second is better feedback. In Wii
Sports and Ocarina of Time,
rumble helps the player orient himself toward certain interface or gameplay
goals.
Despite the utility of rumble
in these cases, there is something missing. Rumble infrequently communicates
texture in the way that paint, food, or even 3D bump mapping does: the texture
always has purpose, never just aesthetics.
Put differently, rumble is an
instrumental kind of texturing: it makes the environment tactile only to allow
the user to make better progress within it. Even 3D rendered texture is not so
brazen about its focus on function: one can comfortably look in simple
admiration at the walls and floorboards of a room in Half-Life
2.
|
This is the texture that comes from the way every interaction around the player reacts, the little details that accumulate to provide the game's "feel".
In games like grand theft auto it's the feel of the cars, how their weight affects their acceleration, how walking through a crowd slows down your character, and how everyone notices your character and reacts to it. It can even be the feel of the menu and buttons, how long it takes for each new screen to pop up in a game that relies on those (strategy games, RPGs).
I see that texture is there visually, aurally and tactically but very few people talk about gameplay as having texture, even though the best games have gameplay that is as carefully crafted as any painting.
Shadhar -- You're right, these are great examples. I'd probably stuff them into the category of "texture as effect" here. Anyway, thanks for the suggestions.
It's an interesting question because I've played some hack and slash games that have absolutely terrible feel-of-play and some that have amazingly good feel, but it's hard to figure out what makes it so...
Ernest Adams notes that most tactile feedback (through rumblepaks etc) is associated with game events and not the game environment. There are after market devices (such as the Novint Falcon) which promise to address the haptic sterility of game-space, but videogames are still predominatly audio-visual experiences. What I find interesting about haptic potential in games is the ability to code information haptically - imagine a RTS game where the tactile feedback gave you data about your opponents base instead of little health bars above the buildings, or
I wrote about texture in my last thesis chapter but have since removed it from the draft. I use 'texture' in a very different sense to Ian's use of the term, but there are related areas. The main area of commonality between the texture of Bogost and the way I describe it is in relation to what Ian writes is "as if they were layered through time". I use layering as a way of describing the "procedurality" of digital texts (Murray 1997) in terms of reception