July 15, 2007 -
GP favorite, Georgia Tech prof Ian Bogost, who contributes issue-oriented games to the New York Times, has a new book out, Persuasive Games: The Expressive Power of Videogames.Author Bogost describes his new work:
The book is about how videogames make arguments. I offer a theory of rhetoric for games, then I discuss a great many examples from commercial and non-commercial games, focusing on the areas of politics, advertising and learning. The book should be of interest and use for academics, designers, policy makers, marketers, educators, and general readers interested in the culture of videogames.
Bogost has more info on the book here.
GP: By the way, we now know that Ian has 11 consoles hooked up. Beats me by a few. Tell us, Ian - which systems have ya got?
Comments
Do you get click-thru credit on Amazon any more? Or is that against the not-for-profit rules for tax-exempt status for the ECA? Let me know!
Much, much more accessible and less academic than Unit Operations. You'll like it more :)
Does this book build on your "Unit Operations' critiquing method, or is that more of an 'academic island' in contrast to your more accessible Serious Games work? Or a bridge between the two, perhaps?
Maybe I'll give this a read to answer my own questions, but I have to admit I don't know if I have the stomach for reading another academic mind-flay like Unit Operations.
Thanks,
~Jeff McHale
~~the1jeffy
Actually I think it's fine, it gave me a good entry into talking about the difference between my book and straight-up serious games stuff.
@Gameboy
Since I don't actually embrace the idea of "serious" or "not serious" games, it's hard to answer your question directly. What I propose instead in the book is that videogames can make arguments, and when they do, they do it differently than writing or speech or images; they do it by modeling ideas rather than describing them.
In the case of the games you've listed, there are some that are very low on argument (say, Mortal Kombat), and some that might be higher (say, KOTOR). I actually have a whole section on the simulation of morality in the book. Straight emergence doesn't necessarily guarantee a sophisticated argument... for example, Bioshock with all its emergent gameplay and customization doesn't so much make an argument about biotechnology or stem-cell research as it does point to such a debate. That said, procedurality -- saying things with behaviors authored in code rather than skins or text -- is at the heart of the kind of rhetoric I describe in the book.
Have, but not hooked up right now: SNES, Genesis, Xbox, PSone, N64, GameCube
Also, DS, PSP, GBA, GBC
PC, of course.
I'm curious as to what you consider "serious games". What qualities makes it serious? Popularity? Story? Some complex formula which only a rocket scientist would understand?
Which of these are serious in your view, if any.
Final Fantasy (take your pick)
Halo
Gears of War
Mario
Bioshock
Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic
God of War
Mortal Kombat
You don't have to comment of all of them, and feel free to add anything you wish.
PS3, PS2J, Wii, GC, Xbox 360, NES, N64, TurboGrafx 16, Dreamcast, Intellivision, Atari VCS (2600)
When the article was written it may have been slightly different consoles, I finally put away the Xbox when it was clear that backward-compat was good enough for me, and I swapped the PS2 for a PS3. I keep the GC connected despite the Wii's x-compatibility because I can't stand having the wavebird dongles sticking out from the thing.
Then there are the handhelds, but I didn't count those.
I am hopeful folks in this community will be interested enough to read it and decide for themselves!
@GoodRobotUs
One of the things I tried very very hard to do in the book was to show that the commercial industry has actually been making games like this for years, but they are largely overlooked or forgotten. It's less true in politics than in, say, advertising (I go all the way back to mid-70s cabinets on that subject), but it's there. And we don't give contemporary games enough credit as sophisticated arguments either. Some of my favorite parts of the book are about Grand Theft Auto and Animal Crossing, for example.
There is an irony of the title of your post here, and it's that the book actually contains a fairly strong critique of the concept of "serious games," particularly the tendency of some SG proponents to isolate their games from the commercial industry. It's true that I have supported and continue to participate in the serious games community, but I think it has a lot to learn.
So for GP readers who may think this is "just" a serious games book, there's much more to it!