|
Gaming and Dynamic Real-time Hermeneutics |
|
|
|
Written by Ninox
|
|
Tuesday, 15 August 2006 |
As I read through conference papers and books I
occasionally strike concepts that strike me as preposterous on the
first read and surprisingly interesting on the second.
Thus it was the
other day while reading Espen Aarseth’s paper on Playing Research: Methodological Approaches to Game Analysis that I came across the idea that we as gamers are practising dynamic real-time hermeneutics.
After my first jargon-resistant reaction, when yes I
needed to look up hermeneutics (which the Shorter Oxford defines as the
branch of knowledge that deals with theories of interpretation), I
began to think that there was something interesting about this after
all. So what is dynamic real-time hermeneutics as far as gamers are
concerned? Put simply, interpreting the game as you play it, in an
active and changing way.
Espen Aarseth, a influential computer games
researcher at the University of Copenhagen, notes that progressing in a
computer game is a learning experience in which you have to experiment
with different methods and stratagems. He went on to point out that
playing games, unlike traditional media, “requires analysis practised as performance with direct feedback from the system” and this is what he observes as a dynamic real-time hermeneutics.
This means that in order to play the game you must
analyse the game and in order to analyse the game you must play the
game and while this is happening the game gives you feedback that helps
you analyse and play the game. In essence the game evaluates your
performance. Play badly and die, play well and live. As Aarseth
observes:
“Game analysis is not just a critical/theoretical
practice: gamers do it all the time ”
The hermeneutic circle then becomes the range of
sources that proliferate around videogames. Official web-site,
walkthroughs, reviews and fan sites become part of the loop. Your very
own TOG forums is thus shown to be part of the hermeneutic circle.
While Aarseth was not using the word hermeneutics in
the sense of a specific theory of interpretation (and ignores the
baggage this one word obtains from philosophy) I like to think we all
have our own theory of gaming. We all have ideas on how we should play
each game, what entails cheating, which tactics are better than others,
what classes rock and what stinks in games. We all have our own
interpretation not only of each game but of games in general.
Beyond a nice piece of jargonising (the next time
someone asks why you play videogames try answering: dynamic real-time
hermeneutical research) what attracted me to the concept was the twin
corollary that games researchers must be gamers and that gamers are
researchers. Yet it seems to also say that both gamers and game
researchers are evaluated by the very thing we play. Who else finds
being judged by an inanimate program weird?
Espen Aarseth. Playing Research: Methodological approaches to game analysis, RMIT Melbourne, MelbourneDAC 2003. Page 5 - 6.
http://hypertext.rmit.edu.au/dac/papers/Aarseth.pdf
Discuss this article here.
|
| |
|
Last Updated ( Wednesday, 16 August 2006 )
|
