|
Despite nurturing a myriad of iconic
symbols, Egyptian mythology has enjoyed little celebration in the gaming world.
Mario stomped on a Sphinx's head or two in the Game Boy's bizarre rendition of
the Mario universe, and Lara Croft
has excavated Egyptian ruins a few times over. Capcom's overhead shooter Legendary Wings allowed players to
transform into a flaming Phoenix,
and mummies are an old stand-in in horror-themed game camp. Still, the impact
of Egyptian lore on video games seems miniscule whenc ompared to the widespread
influences of its Norse and Greek counterparts. But is it?
The dismemberment of Osiris, though not an
event from Assassin's Creed's compelling plot line, is nonetheless essential to
it. This is due to the influence of an Egyptian myth on the video game medium.
This myth has become a gaming archetype, and its implementation can be traced
across all genres and generations of interactive entertainment.
The importance of acknowledging this
archetype is that it often benefits the design and storytelling of the games it
is implemented in. These benefits include a more directed player experience, a
better cohesion of gameplay and narrative, and a heightened possibility of establishing
a game's own mythology, i.e., a world the player identifies with and cares
about.
The
Benefits of Myth Writing
Video games and collecting things go hand
in hand, and the Isis and Osiris archetype is an archetype about collecting. In
the myth, Osiris, the supreme, benevolent Egyptian god and also the king of Egypt,
is murdered by his brother Set -- who also just happens to the Egyptian god of
supreme evil -- and Set usurps the throne.
Dismayed by Osiris's necrophilic ability to
produce an heir after his death, Set cuts Osiris's corpse into many pieces and scatters
them across Egypt.
Isis, Osiris's loving wife (and also a fertility goddess) then begins her quest
to retrieve these pieces. Upon her quest's completion, Osiris is resurrected,
as he is also a god of resurrection and the afterlife. Osiris returns to aid in
vanquishing Set and evil from the kingdom. Echoes of this myth can be heard not
just in today's religions, but also in video games, where it could be argued
that their influence resounds even more strongly.
The idea of gathering scattered pieces in
order to rectify or avert some malevolence has permeated video game lore. A rudimentary
example can be found in the "Rivet" board of Nintendo's arcade
classic Donkey Kong. Here, we find Jumpman (or Mario, if you like) playing the
archetypal role of Isis
as he traverses the board, collecting the eight rivets which connect the
girders.

Donkey Kong's
"Rivet" board demonstrates a precocious knowledge of the Isis and
Osiris archetype.
These rivets are the metaphorical pieces of
Osiris's body, and upon their removal, the girders collapse, toppling Donkey
Kong, who has taken on the role of Set in the scenario, and restoring
tranquility to the construction site. This is comparable to Set's downfall, and
the return of the rightful heir to Egypt
after the pieces of Osiris's body had been reunited.
The benefits of the incorporated archetype
are manifold. One, a more directed player experience is offered. On previous
boards, players can choose less risky routes, but the necessity of collecting
rivets directs the player through difficult paths while still allowing for
freedom in how the player chooses to navigate the board. In this instance, the
archetype assists in fundamental game design, enabling a balance to be struck
between what a game requires of a player and how a player chooses to accomplish
the requirement.
Two, there is a strong sense of cohesion
between narrative and gameplay in Donkey
Kong. The story is a direct consequence ofthe player's actions. Simply, the
player collects the pieces, and Jumpman removes the rivets to defeat Donkey
Kong. In broader words, as the player fulfills elements of the archetype, the archetype
naturally imparts the narrative of the myth. An archetype can function as the
intersection point of story and gameplay, a common ground which both sides are
built upon. This concept can be expressed simply in a hypothetical syllogism:
Gameplay = Archetype.
Narrative = Archetype.
Therefore, Gameplay = Narrative.
The benefit of having unified gameplay and
narrative is that the player becomes an active participant in the game's world
rather than a passive observer of it, which leads to a more satisfactory experience.
Three, there is a heightened possibility of
establishing a game's own mythology and creating a world that the player cares about.
Archetypes have an underlying connection to the architecture of consciousness, and
tend to strike a chord with people on a fundamental level. They convey unspoken
and sometimes ineffable ideas. Requiring a player to complete an archetype can
help the game connect with the player at the same fundamental level.
This connection gives players satisfaction beyond
that of narrative simply overlaying gameplay. Donkey Kong's success ultimately lies not only in its fun gameplay
nor in its pioneering narrative, but in how it melds these components into a game
that is more than the sum of its parts.
|
Adds new meaning to "Have a nice day, Dear."
This is too much fun! Yay!
John, I feel quite embarrassed about that error_ I don’t quite know what I was thinking. I wanted a simple illustration showing how an archetype can help to integrate story and gameplay, but that definitely wasn’t it. I DO know my logical arguments, but, I’m about 10 years out of practice, and it shows. I believe this would be a Fallacy of Common Consequence. Still, even if my logic was correct, I don’t think it would prove what I intended it to… so lesson learned: don’t stick logical proofs in places they have no business, especially when they are hastily formulated.
As to the comments regarding the relationship between video game collection quests and the Isis and Osiris myth, it was not my intention to claim that the Osiris myth was in any way the “source” of the collection quests. Sorry if I came across that way. I structured my essay as if the myth was the ultimate form of the archetype, but actually the Isis and Osiris myth , in my mind, sits on an even plain beside the Donkey Kong myth and all the others mentioned. Saying that the Osiris myth is the origin of the archetype is putting the cart before the horse. What I meant to say is that the collection archetype is the source of the Osiris myth AND these various games. That I keep comparing games to the Osiris myth is for the sake of cohesion and a point of reference, and I think it’s interesting. I could have very well dropped the Osiris myth from the essay entirely and went with “the Donkey Kong myth,” or something similar.
There's also a cross-over with Campbell's monomyth going on. "Collecting" would be a variation of the "Road of Trials" from many myths. The parallels with video games are obvious, but one element that I've found lacking in many games is an answer to the question 'why?' or 'what is the value of these tasks to the player?' With mythology the value of hearing or telling the story was meant to be a kind of spiritual elixir; reinforcing the society's vision of the cosmos and their place in it; or giving individual guidance through the trials of life. Most games aim for 'fun' or 'addicting' and leave it at that.
I'd agree that there is a lot of room to examine the meaningful value of games and looking at them in the context of older wisdom is a good place to start!
The idea of a Hero's Quest has mostly been neglected by present day society, but still exists, and I feel one reason video games are so popular is that they simulate the Hero's Quest/Road of Trials. Ideally, a player enters into a game world, gradually learns the rules of the world, and emerges from the world as its master. This covers the departure, initiation, and return of the monomyth, and I believe this is why I get that quasi-magical sensation at the ending of a game, even when said ending is filled with trite, predictable, cliched things.
Some games get this right on accident through sheer imitation, or through the very nature of games. As you say though, it would be interesting to see game developers look more closely at the Road of Trials, even to go so far as to implement all or most of the steps of the monomyth. I don't like the idea of the never-ending, 'addicting' game, not because they serve some nefarious purpose_ I like many addicting things :)_ but that they can easily lose their social value, which imo is the value offered by the game's narrative structure, such as the monomyth. Despite that, I DO believe there are values in MMOs not found in other types of games, for example morality.
RE: Chan Chun Phang - I like that puzzle with Simon's Quest (it also finds its reversal in Zelda II where the Moblins need Link's blood to resurrect Gannon). Here, it looks like Set has been defeated and split into parts, but his evil influence still exists in the world (or perhaps Set is Osiris, who is also a god of evil). In order to dispel the evil (in Simon's case, a curse resulting from a vampire bite), Set must be resurrected and then destroyed again (the whole is greater than the sum of the parts). Likewise, it could also be a take on evil manipulation (Isis does not know that she is resurrecting Set instead of Osiris). Collecting Dracula's parts was used again in Symphony of the Night and Harmony of Dissonance.
To play around with this more, Isis is a female character; the act of collecting is also considered 'feminine' (women tend to like collecting). In the Osiris myth then, we have a feminine character resurrecting a positive male power to defeat a negative male power. Just how much of a role does gender or gender representation play in collecting?
>Gameplay = Archetype.
>Narrative = Archetype.
>Therefore, Gameplay = Narrative.
>Consider this one:
>Joe is a man.
>Jack is a man.
>Therefore, Joe = Jack
The first two proposals of the counter assumes that the author's '=' was meant to denote the proposition 'is a'. However, those operators are not the same thing. Worse, the third proposal of the counter switches denotation of '=' to identity and conflates the appearance of incongruity.
In the text above this was referred to as a hypothetical syllogism. It might have been called a metaphoric syllogism, given the meta nature of the proposal. I also wonder if there's a more formal relation that would directly express the deduction (instead of '=', it might be 'follows the well known form of'.
While I believe there is sincere merit in the argument presented in Jason's article, collecting items has been a facet of the gaming experience from nearly it's inception and provides a welcome outlet for the easily bored (or somewhat obsessive) gamers out there.