Game Studies Blog.
What is virtual reality and what should it be?
With the advanced technology that exists today, anyone is able to put a virtual reality headset on and essentially be placed, convincingly, into another world. The headset acts as a means to further ‘lose’ oneself in a world someone else has presented to the player, and escape from reality temporarily. Whilst the conception of the world’s first reality headset was way back in the 1960’s (2), the demand for virtual reality headsets has only just become common. The true definition of virtual reality itself is not entirely definitive in what it actually is; as the definition may have more depth to it and not be as simple to define as if it was black and white, but rather having many shades of grey. Even so, before defining what virtual reality is, one must know what virtual reality isn’t. What the difference between reality and virtual reality is; whether the medium is limited to available medias and whether interactivity is essential to defining virtual reality, or not. Firstly, when discussing virtual reality, some individuals may say that virtual reality is “a window on an alternate reality” (3) or even a ‘term that is used to describe a three-dimensional computer-generated environment”(1). However, virtual reality isn’t merely just an image on a screen, close to the viewer’s sight. Virtual reality can be broken down into two words with different meanings. The first word there is, virtual, which means ‘being on or simulated on a computer’(6) and then there is reality, ‘The state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them.’(5) When combining these two definitions, it can easily be speculated that virtual reality means an emulation of life, with its truthful and realistic aspects that make it a reality, the only difference being that it’s reality in itself. Although what makes virtual reality, virtual reality, is not its ability to simulate life and the realism that defines reality; but rather its ability to convincingly appear realistic in it’s own right. If taken into consideration, it is evident that virtual reality is not reality, but rather an alternative reality within reality itself. If we see virtual reality as an alternative reality within reality itself, does it limit itself to only allow for unrealistic, but immersive environments, if we follow that definition and disregard the need to base it off reality itself? Not necessarily. Virtual reality can also be based of reality itself and still be immersive. Indeed the object is for the subject to become immersed within the virtual reality. One may question what is the purpose of simulating life on a computer, if they experience reality themselves without it. But the matter of fact is, virtual reality can be used as a tool, rather than be used for entertainment. An example of how virtual reality is used effectively can include surgeons, pilots, or any other important roles where experience is required extensively before the first attempt. With VR, students in training can practice surgery in a safe environment and learn from this with no risk. (7) While the ability to seemingly convince the player or student particularly in this case, it’s not necessarily an essential need, but can rather assist the purpose virtual reality is being used for in this scenario. Thus, virtual reality isn’t only limited to unreal realities and can be both realistic and unrealistic as long as they can make the user/player believe as if they are in that environment and forget about the surrounding environment. Additionally, virtual reality is not only limited to games. It can be used as a tool and provide training, training that can essentially ‘help supplement these real-world experiences’ (7). The medium of virtual reality is not only limited to one media, it can be applied to another that’s within ‘the entertainment industry’(3); particularly film. Despite film and video not being a prominent media, it still attempts to use virtual reality to immerse the viewer. Unfortunately, this cannot effectively convince the viewer that they are in a whole new reality; as some senses may not be included. For example, there’s touch, smell, taste, etc. and additionally the fact that the user has no control of the film further deprives the connection between the viewer and the film’s virtual reality, which it’s trying to present. Whereas computer gaming enhances the person’s virtual reality experience through the addition of a virtual reality headset, controllers that sense where the player’s hands are, and other extensive controllers, such as a walk pad that allows the player to control where their characters walk by walking. Gaming provides a platform for a more distinctive, interactive experience compared to film. Therefore, virtual reality is limited to an extent based on the media. Different types of media provide separate amounts of interactivity, which define whether the environment in the virtual space is convincing enough to become an alternative reality. The greater the interactivity, the greater the alternate reality experience. While the definition varies between individuals, due to perceptions and beliefs, if we consider virtual reality as whole, it is evident that what defines virtual reality, is based on it being a ‘creation of a virtual environment’(1); an environment with a reality that can either be based on our reality itself , or its own alternative reality. Virtual reality is virtual reality regardless of whether it’s a realistic or alternative reality that would be considered inaccurate. ‘Virtual reality is not film making’ (4); That being said, virtual reality is limited to interactive medias; particularly gaming and training. In conclusion, virtual reality should also be able to immerse the individual and convey a reality that is convincing enough, with the assistance of stimulating the player’s senses, (particularly touch) and giving the player options that affect the outcome within the environment to help achieve this. This is what virtual reality is and should be. References/Research:
Adults deserve to be entitled to see what they want to see right? It's even written in documentation that Australians should be able to view what ever media they like to. But why make a law to prevent them from legally obtaining said material all because it's considered too graphical for distribution in Australia? That's just un-'straylian if you ask me.
so yeah, Australia's 'refused classification' does treat us grown adults like kids, but I don't blame them. Imagine how strong the fight would be for a politician if they proposed the idea of making the refused classification less harsh in judgment and allow for more overrated films, games, etc. It wouldn't be a particularly easy political fight to win considering how politically correct of a country we are. However, disregarding that I still believe that the (RC) treats adults like kids even more so. In order for us to obtain a game that has been refused classification, (such as Hotline Miami 2 for example) we would have to obtain it legally via pirating because of the laws preventing it from being distributed in Australia. Which is just stupid and rather risky as pirated games generally potentially contain malware and viruses within them and possibly be more harming than it would be for the game to be released within Australia and have "people potentially become more violent." as i've talked over before, video games don't cause violence. Additionally damaging the developer as they get no revenue from piracy. But this doesn't entirely mean censorship isn't a bad thing, some games can be over the top at times and end up not being any of a better game than it could be without said graphic images. But the current guidelines for Australia's refused classification is just extremely mellow and doesn't allow for adults to play the games that they want. Jake Carter - 1/09/2017 Video addiction is not entirely a bad thing, is something I used to tell myself a lot when I was playing lots of video games excessively. However, I believe that everything can be enjoyed within moderation. There is always a point where it's too far. What is considered too far is really up to what anyone else believes it should be. But that doesn't particularly apply as due to when a person becomes addicted, their general sense can become blurred and uncertain; but certain in what they must do to get what makes them happy.
While gaming addiction isn't entirely severe in comparison to other addictions such as drugs, alcohol, etc. It still suffers from a similar stigmatization as the word addiction is included. However, as mentioned before things can be enjoyed in moderation, in this case. Alcohol. It's great for when you're out with your mates, or at a social gathering. But there is a point to where it can become harmful to you, and/or others. But this doesn't mean that you shouldn't drink it, it only means you should take it in moderation. So how can this apply to video game addiction, well firstly when someone becomes addicted to a video game they may end up spending far more hours on specific games in hopes of fulfilling their need to release dopamine. The chemical our brain makes when we do something that feels good. However with constant releasing of this chemical its effect can run out and have little to none affect. Which in turn, deprives the experience we get from playing video games. With moderation this wouldn't be an issue. With this desire to get that dopamine kick again the player would have to crunch more hours into the game, and with this addition of hours spent playing video games it can have devastating physical effects to them. This can include such injuries as strain to the eyes after staring at the screen, Repetitive strain injuries (RSI), Spine problems if sitting in an incorrect position, etc. So all-in-all, As long as a player knows their limits, and play a safe amount of hours they can avoid all of these injuries and have a great time playing games like you're supposed to! Jake Carter - 19/08/2017 This area within video games is a rather sensitive area and generally sparks controversy; but that is within reason. This can be very distinct within some games, some others not as much. The reason to why gender is considered a sensitive subject is due to the fact that women can be over sexualised within video games and fall under the roll of being the 'damsel in distress'. However, this doesn't mean it's the case all the time.
While feminism is a good movement, sometimes the people that support it (feminists) can go over the top and blatantly throw around words such as 'sexist', 'misogynist ', etc. They can find that video games can be a great target due to the history of video games having cases of strong sexism towards women, whether it be in degrading roles as the role of a hooker in Grand Theft Auto, or even have lowered game play mechanic stats, or have provocative and questionable clothing which seems to serve as fan service. Personally I don't find this to be a common trait and a large focus as I see it as nothing more than a video game, but it's within basic decency to not degrade someone because of their gender. Sure it may follow a 'design' where the slimmer woman may have lower health and faster agility compared to the over dosed on steriods looking guy in a fighting game for example. But say if the woman is rather strong it her stats shouldn't be depleted because of this. Fan service however is very prominent within gaming as women are often placed in rather revealing clothing, where as men would have full armour most of the time in comparison. This may include Quiet in metal gear solid, some of the girls from street figther, etc. While it does make the character match their gender and make it clearly distinctive, designers shouldn't have to rely on sexuality so much due to the gender of gamers being close to equal of both boys and girls. Jake Carter - 17/08/2017 For as long as video games have been around, there is most certainly going to be a wide variety of genres for those games. One in particular; the violent genre. There have been very few violent games when gaming first came around, however one noticeable classic game that is known for its violence is ‘DOOM’. With the rising popularity when it was still new, it has caused hysteria among parents, Christians, and other ‘mature’ figures. These people believed that video games tend to make people violent and that there is a correlation between the two; however, as a gamer myself it’s clear to say that this is highly inaccurate and is only just made from fear mongering. Fortunately, as time has gone on games have been given more room and flexibility to what they can contain. It’s not a whole lot, but it’s still an improvement.
Now if we take the parents and other non-gamers into consideration from the past and when they believed that video game caused violence. We immediately think of some examples where it’s speculated but not confirmed. For instance, the columbine shooters; They played a lot of violent games and have done violent acts. It’s because of the game right? Absolutely not, It’s because those shooters were mentally unstable, not included with other students and friend groups, and often picked on by the ‘jocks’, etc. Not because they played violent games. (Said info can be found in a documentary about what caused the whole incident.) However, if we used the exact same logic that violent video games cause violence, the same should be said for other mediums such as film and tv. Or even that other genre of video games cause behaviour changes in the player. But just because a player plays surgeon simulator it makes them a surgeon, or if they play Garfield Kart, they’re a fat orange cat racing in a kart. So the argument where violent video games cause violent behaviour is just absurd and inaccurate, but easy to be mistaken due to events that happened coincidently at the same time violent video games where recently popularised. Not that the time of releasing for games has any importance as humans have been inherently violent as far back as we can remember. In conclusion, violence in video games don’t have an effect on people. But their mental stability and other factors have influence; and video games don’t define the player. Jake Carter - 3/08/2017 This is a rather interesting discussion when it comes to computer gaming as video game genres aren't always accurate when defining a game, and this is why. When people think of a game's genre they think about its game play mechanics. Rather than what the game actually is. For example, you hear about game genres as moba, mmorpg, fps, etc. Rather than say, medieval, fantasy, futuristic, romantic, etc. Now this can affect a games success as for people who aren't into shooting games for example may not enjoy doom, but they may enjoy a game such as portal, it technically can be defined as a "first person shooter puzzle game" however a more suitable genre for this game could "mysterious puzzle escape with plot twists" even only by changing the way we say the genre it makes the game even more appealing than it already was. Furthermore, while video game genres should be different, people may believe it should still include the same way games are divided into their respective genres based on their game play mechanics. While I would agree that it should be part of the genre, I disagree that it should be the only definitive about its genre. An example of this could be related to team fortress 2 and overwatch. They're both team based first person shooters, but have their defining differences. Their genres could both include fps, team based, and online, but for overwatch it could include futuristic heroes, and team fortress 2 could have cartoon mercenaries. In conclusion video games genres shouldn't be defined by the game play mechanics but rather the style and overall aesthetic of the game along with the mechanics partly, as without this players may miss the chance to play a game that they could have built a strong interest in.
Jake Carter - 18/07/2017 Ever since computer gaming started to take off late pre 2k there has been a strong desire to add a story into games as the technology started to be able to allow a game to have stories much easier. However is a storyline essential to a game's success? Or can a game survive without one in this time of gaming?
\n \nBefore defining the answer to this question its best to look at a sample of games. In this case let's take a look at one of the biggest well known games there are; call of duty. With this game I think it would be safe to say that people would play the games story mode as a tutorial before playing online, as generally the players spend of their time mostly in multiplayer online. However, regardless to how repetitive call of duty's plot may be its still a large success. \n \nHow about a game that's based on telling the player a story. One that they can control and affect them? Particularly the walking dead. This is another successful game with a high amount of popularity but not for its controls. But because of how the players actions affect the outcome of the story. In order for this game to have done effectively well it would have required an story with great detail and structure; as without it, the walking dead game would have done poorly. \n \nNow this only just scratches the surface as its only 2 games out of the other millions out their. However it can be concluded that the developers behind these two well known games know how their game should be and what they must do to achieve it. Call of duty's main interest is online play, so it focuses less on story where as the walking dead heavily relies on story telling. All in all, whether a storyline is included is dependent on the game that is being made, but is generally welcomed by gamers. Jake Carter - 11/07/2017 Among the gaming world there is a controversy regarding the graphical visual aspect in video games; this being whether games should use realistic graphics or be stylised. Both do have their pros and cons, where they do well, and do wrong, and also when they should be used.
The pros and cons of realism graphics is that it can be over-saturated and not bring anything new. Because the games look all the same, which increases the need to focus on game-play mechanics and the story, which sometimes isn't enough. However, realism textures can be used to give the game a different aesthetics to suit the genre of game. Say if the game was about some murder mystery along with dark themes, it's more suited to use realistic textures over stylised aesthetics as it can work along the game-play mechanics and story rather than having the story and game-play mechanics support the realism aesthetics alone. Though, realism can be suited at times. It does lose uniqueness where as stylised can make the game stand out from other games. Stylised Aesthetics are always generally unique in comparison with other games where as realism can blend in with other games. So to keep the game unique, it's generally better to have stylised. Overall, it may be said that both verisimilitude and stylised aesthetics have their strengths and weaknesses, and better suitability depending on the genre. Jake Carter - 04/07/2017 Both first person and third person based camera games do have amazing and somewhat okay games behind them; however, which is better for the game? This can be determined by figuring out what each perspective's strengths and weaknesses are, and confirming it with noticeable examples.
The main strength to using first person perspectives in game is how it can be immersive to the player. It essentially puts the player right into the character's shoes; and in turn, make the player feel as if they're in the game itself. This can be extremely beneficial if you're trying to get the player immersed rather than feel as if they're 'spectating'. However this doesn't mean the player can't be immersed in third person or using only first person would be beneficial. This can be proven with the type of game itself. The example being a first person platformer. It just simply wouldn't work well as a third person view would in comparison; The views that the first person perspective may be right in the player's face if they need to jump, climb, etc. which would just effect the immersion negatively where as the player would be able to watch and play with a third person camera with relative ease instead and not become disorientated trying to navigate platforms. All-in-all, both first person and third person do have their strengths. However generally speaking, the camera's perspective should heavily take the game's genre of game play into consideration, and how the perspective can do its best to immerse the player positively. 27/06/2017 - Jake Carter After the innovative years of pre 2k, there was a great improvement in computer games; whether it's in quality of game play mechanics, story telling, or graphics. However, there is one game that stood out from the rest which would soon be popularised and change how players see games based on its mechanics; that game is Mine craft by Mojang. Minecraft was unique at the time at its initial release and did things differently from other games rather than following the trend of building games for latest generation of hardware, mincecraft went a different direction as it decided to use pixel art for textures in game. This was so unique and was popularised it caused more games to start using pixel art in their games because of how it was heavily inspired. But the artwork itself is not what made the game popular, it's also the game play mechanics. Mincecraft brought a large interest in survival sandbox games to the computer gaming community and did something different. It focused on encouraging the player to be creative and start crafting, exploring, surviving, etc rather than getting straight in to the fight. Because of the popularity and significance of mincecraft, shortly after there was a large amount of games that started using pixel art and following the game play mechanics; one noticable example is the game terraria. While it has different aspects to the game with its 2d third person view and items in game, it's safe to say mincecraft had a significant impact on the game's creation. It's just interesting how minecraft made a significant change in computer gaming by doing something different to other game companies and managing to become so popular and influence other game developers to create create their games differently. Source: Played minecraft for >7 years. |
AboutHere is where I'll be submitting my blog pieces for my Game Studies class in Tri 2. Archives
September 2017
Categories |