Notes for Ian Bogost Persuasive Games: The Expressive Power of Video Games
Key concepts: advergame, affluenza, anti-advergame, constructionism, digital rhetoric, dissemination, effective expression, enthymeme, evental site, going meta, graphical logic, operational logics, persuasive games, play, procedural enthymeme, procedural literacy, procedural representation, procedural rhetoric, procedural trope, procedurality, process intensity, simulation fever, simulation gap, rhetoric, simulation fever, unit operations, vividness.
Related theorists: Althusser, Clark Abt, Badiou, Baudrillard, John Beck, Burke, Chris Crawford, Derrida, Jared Diamond, Dubner, B.J. Fogg, Gaede, Gee, John de Graaf, Gramsci, Charles Hill, Mark Johnson, Ralph Koster, Lacan, Laurel, Lakoff, Shuen-shing Lee, Steven Levitt, Manovich, Marx, Murray, Papert, Piaget, Dorothy Sayers, David Williamson Shaffer, Kurt Squire, Sutton-Smith, Turkle, Vygotsky, Mitchell Wage, Tony Walsh, Wardrip-Fruin, Weizenbaum, Judith Williamson, Zizek.
Preface
(viii)
Videogames are considered inconsequential because they are perceived
to serve no cultural or social function save distraction at best,
moral baseness at worst.
(viii) But creative progress on the part
of the development community and critical progress on the part of the
academic and journalistic community require a deeper knowledge of the
way videogames work—precisely how they do whatever it is we would
have them do to count as expressive cultural artifacts.
Procedural rhetoric defined as persuasion through rule-based representations and interactions.
(ix) I call this new form procedural rhetoric, the art of persuasion through rule-based representations and interactions rather than the spoken word, writing, images, or moving pictures. . . . While “ordinary” software like word processors and photo editing applications are often used to create expressive artifacts, those completed artifacts do not usually rely on the computer in order to bear meaning. Videogames are computational artifacts that have cultural meaning as computational artifacts.
Crucial to note that Bogost focuses on human oriented rhetorical domains, whereas the path I steer is right into the inner workings of machines with the rhetorical outcome of instilling programming as problem solving and even a way of conducting humanities research. I am taking seriously the lead suggested by von Neumann, Hayles, and others to study our thinking machines to facilitate studying ourselves. Also important to replicate depth of multipurposive criticism and reflexively guided production of programmed machines.
(ix) I believe that this power is not equivalent to the content
of videogames, as the serious games community claims. Rather, this
power lies in the very way videogames mount claims through procedural
rhetorics. . . . From this vantage point, in the following chapters I
interrogate three domains in which videogame persuasion has already
taken form and still has great promise: politics, advertising, and
learning.
(x) The research that produced this book is twofold. On
the one hand, I am an academic videogame researcher; I play games,
research their histories and influences, and record my subsequent
claims about their meaning. On the other hand, I am a videogame
designer; I make games designed to have an impact in the three
domains that are the subject of this book. The videogames studio I
cofounded, Persuasive Games, shares its title with this book, and I
intend this work to reflect both theoretical and game design goals.
1
Procedural Rhetoric
Software studies could go off and document the PLATO computer education system, which illustrates procedural rhetoric by simulating tenure acquisition.
(1) In 1975, Owen Gaede created
Tenure,
a simulation of the first year of secondary school teaching, for the
PLATO computer education system.
(2) Tenure
outlines
the process
by
which high schools really run, and it makes a convincing argument
that personal politics indelibly mark the learning experience.
Procedural rhetoric practices persuade through computational processes, separating it ontically from other media.
(2-3) I suggest the name procedural rhetoric for the new type of persuasive and expressive practice at work in artifacts like Tenure. Procedurality refers to a way of creating, explaining, or understanding processes. And processes define the way things work: the methods, techniques, and logics that drive the operation of systems, from mechanical systems like engines to organizational systems like high schools to conceptual systems like religious faith. Rhetoric refers to effective and persuasive expression. Procedural rhetoric, then, is a practice of persuading through processes and computational processes in particular.
Procedurality
(4) Procedural
systems generate behaviors based on rule-based models; they are
machines capable of producing many outcomes, each conforming to the
same overall guidelines. Procedurality is the principal value of the
computer, which creates meaning through the interaction of
algorithms. . . . This ability to execute a series of rules
fundamentally separates computers from other media.
Symbol manipulation at the heart of procedural expression due to human bias for rhetorical operations. Interesting boundaries created for unacknowledged domains of machine operations that may also entail unit operations functionally equivalent to symbolic persuasion. Yet the subject area intersects viable approaches to classes of machine operations undifferentiated with specifically human rhetorical phenomena, namely unit operations in general; Bogost's own interest in platform studies exemplifies this adjacent area of study.
(5) For my purposes, procedural
expression must entail symbol manipulation, the construction and
interpretation of a symbolic system that governs human thought or
action.
(7) While we often think that rules always limit behavior,
the imposition of constraints also creates expression.
(7) We
think of computers as frustrating, limiting, and simplistic not
because they execute processes, but because they are frequently
programmed to execute simplistic processes. And the choice to program
only a simplistic process for customer relations exposes yet another
set of processes, such as corporate information technology operations
or the constraints of finances or expertise that impose buying
off-the-shelf software solutions instead of building custom
solutions.
(7-8) I have given the name unit operations
to
processes of the most general kind, whether implemented in material,
cultural, or representational form.
(8) In these cases, asking how
does this work?
Requires
taking a set of cultural systems apart to see what logics motivate
their human actors.
Would Diamond's procedural historical approach be like Freakonomics? Of course.
(8)
A notable example comes from microbiologist Jared
Diamond's
Pulitzer Prize-winning book Guns,
Germs, and Steel,
an alternative approach to understanding history. Instead of
recording the events of human history, Diamond looks at
configurations of material conditions like geography and natural
resources and asks how they produce structural, political, and social
outcomes.
(8) Steven D. Levitt's
work on microeconomics also exposes processes.
(9) Procedural
representation explains processes with
other processes.
Procedural representation is a form of symbolic expression that uses
processes rather than language.
(9-10) Human behavior is one mode
of procedural expression. . . . But human behavior is a challenging
medium to muster for arbitrary expression. It is difficult to coerce
even a small group of people to execute a particular process again
and again, without rest and without incentive.
Before computers scant material conditions for experiments with procedural expression, for example, variable enactments of Plato's Symposium or repetitions of Kennedy's assassination. Important to distinguish tool use of computer programs and expressive, inscriptive practices like Eliza or the Turing imitation game.
(10) Murray cites Joseph
Weizenbaum's Eliza
program
as an early example of this kind of procedural expression.
(11) No
matter their content, these computer programs use processes for
expression rather than utility. As an inscriptive practice,
procedurality is not limited to tool-making.
Procedurality versus the Procedural Programming Paradigm
Procedurality understood as authoring processes, not a programming style like object-oriented; still invites examination of procedural programming in terms of basic stored program architecture.
(12) Procedural programming is a paradigmatic extension of the notion of procedure as subroutine. As a programming method, procedural programming became privileged over unstructured programming, in which all code exists in a single continuous block. . . . Strong proponents of the more recent paradigm of object-oriented programming may shudder at my liberal use of the term procedural, but I am not referring to the programming paradigm. . . . Rather, I understand procedurality as the fundamental notion of authoring processes.
Procedural Figures, Forms, and Genres
Wardrip-Fruin operational logics are set of standardized unit operations such as graphic logics packaged as game engine and textual logics as natural language parsers.
(13) Noah Wardrip-Fruin has used the term operational logics to refer to the standardized or formalized unit operations that take on common roles in multiple procedural representations. He identifies two operational logics that are particularly common, graphical logics and textual logics. . . . In the videogame industry, sets of graphical logics are often packaged together as a game engine, a software toolkit used to create a variety of additional games.
Procedural tropes include natural language processing, text parsers, and models of user interaction: crucial to Bogosts thinking is their commensurability with forms of literary and artistic expression supporting the trope analogy.
(13)
Wardrip-Fruin also cites textual logics as a common procedural
trope.
NLP, mentioned above, is an example of a textual logic, as are the
text parsers inherent in Z-machine text adventure games and
interactive fiction, such as Zork.
(13)
Outside of videogames, procedural tropes often take the form of
common models of user interaction.
(14) Taken together, we can
think of game engines, frameworks, and other common groupings of
procedural tropes as commensurate with forms of literary or artistic
expression, such as the sonnet, the short story, or the feature
film.
(14-15) The inscription of procedural representations on the
computer takes place in code. . . . The systems impose constraints,
but they are not subject to the caprice of direct human action.
Rhetoric
Example of Socrates trial for ideal of efficient causation in ancient rhetoric can be extended with favorite Cicero example; enthymeme and example are other rhetorical figures.
(15) Rhetoric in ancient Greece—and
by extension classical rhetoric in general—meant public speaking
for civic purposes. . . . Spoken words attempt to convert listeners
to a particular opinion, usually one that will influence direct and
immediate action, such as the fateful vote of Socrates' jury.
(16-17)
Socrates' negative opinion of textbook rhetoric notwithstanding (see
below), the Phaedrus offers
evidence of the method by which fifth-century Greeks thought oratory
could be best composed.
(18) The adept rhetorician does not merely
follow a list of instructions for composing an oratory (technical
rhetoric), nor does he merely parrot the style or words of an expert
(sophistic rhetoric), but rather he musters reason to discover the
available means of persuasion in any particular case (philosophical
rhetoric). This variety of rhetoric implies an understanding of both
the reasons to persuade (the final cause) and the tools available to
achieve that end (the efficient cause), including propositions,
evidence, styles, and devices.
Interesting to apply philosophical rhetoric to the problem of learning how computers work for philosophers of computing leading to pmrek; it will lead from oratory to other practices, notably working code, just as Bogost seeks to include procedurality.
Importance of enthymeme and example as rhetorical figures that will be applied to new media.
(19) The enthymeme and the example offer instances of a broad variety of rhetorical figures developed by and since Aristotle. Like procedural figures, rhetorical figures define the possibility space for rhetorical practice. . . . Combining these with the structural framework of introduction, statement, proof, and epilogue, Aristotle offers a complete process for constructing oratory.
Rhetoric Beyond Oratory
(19)
Rhetoric in writing, painting, sculpture, and other media do not
necessarily make the same direct appeals to persuasion as oratory.
Rhetoric thus also came to refer to effective expression,
that is, writing, speech, or art that both accomplishes the goals of
the author and absorbs the reader or viewer.
(21) Rhetoric becomes
a means to facilitate identification and to “bridge the conditions
of estrangement that are natural and inevitable.”
For
Burke rhetoric extends to all forms of human symbolic systems.
(21)
Following the tradition of oral and written rhetoric, he maintains
language as central, but [Kenneth] Burke's
understanding of humans as creators and consumers of symbolic systems
expands rhetoric to include nonverbal domains.
Visual Rhetoric
(21) Visual
communication cannot simply adopt the figures and forms of oral and
written expression, so a new form of rhetoric must be created to
accommodate these media forms. Helmers
and Hill argue that visual rhetoric is particularly essential
in the face of globalization and mass media.
(22) According to
Hill, images are more “vivid” than text or speech, and therefore
they are more easily manipulated toward visceral responses.
(22)
J. Anthony Blair argues that visual rhetoric needs a theory of visual
argument to escape this trap.
(23) Randall A. Lake and Barbara A.
Pickering offer several tropes for visual argument and refutation,
including substitution, in which an image is replaced in part of a
frame with connotatively different ones, and transformation, in which
an image is “recontextualized in a new visual frame, such that its
polarity is modified or reversed through association with different
images.”
(24) Kevin Michael DeLuca attempts to address visual
argument through the concept of “image event,” a kind of visual
documentation of a rhetorical strategy.
As example of studies of visual rhetoric demonstrate, for any media, determine how it inscribes symbols to determine its rhetorical potential. Compare to Hayles MSA.
(24) The very notion of a visual rhetoric reinforces the idea that rhetoric is a general field of inquiry, applicable to multiple media and modes of inscription. To address the possibilities of a new medium as a type of rhetoric, we must identify how inscription works in that medium, and then how arguments can be constructed through those modes of inscription.
Digital Rhetoric
Criticizes digital rhetorics that abstract materialities of specific forms of computing.
(25) Digital rhetoric
typically
abstracts the computer as a consideration, focusing on the text and
image content a machine might host and the communities of practice in
which that content is created and used. . . . But for scholars of
digital rhetoric, to “function in digital spaces” often means
mistaking subordinate properties of the computer for primary ones. .
. . But [Laura J.] Gurak does not intend interactivity
to
refer to the machines ability to facilitate the manipulation of
processes.
(26) What is missing is a digital rhetoric that
addresses the unique properties of computation, like procedurality,
to found a new rhetorical practice.
Manovich replaces rhetoric with database logic, but fails to appreciate process intensity and favors hypertext over its supporting programmed systems.
(26)
This challenge is aggravated by the fact that rhetoric itself does
not currently enjoy favor among critics of digital media. In one
highly visible example, new media artist and theorist Lev Manovich
has
argued that digital media may sound a death knell or rhetoric.
(27)
While hypertexts themselves exhibit low process
intensity,
the systems that allow authorship and readership of web pages exhibit
high process intensity.
(27-28) More plainly put, Manovich ignores
the software systems that make it possible for hyperlinks to work in
the first place, instead of making loose and technically inaccurate
appeals to computer hardware as exotic metaphors rather than as
material systems.
Procedural Rhetoric
Does reaching this insight that procedural rhetoric is programmed call for focus on programming? Not merely scholarship that foregrounds code, but scholarship conducted in free, open source software project communities. See refinement on page 62 that seems to steer away from working code.
(28-29) Procedural rhetoric is a general name for the practice of authoring arguments through processes. . . . In computation, those rules are authored in code through the practice of programming.
Exemplar of procedural rhetoric is The McDonalds Videogame, whereas Grlpower Retouch and Freaky Flakes do not exhibit procedural rhetorics despite being provocative, must address vividness and dialectic; compare to active versus critical learning for Gee, and critical code.
(29)
Procedural rhetorics afford a new and promising way to make
claims about how things work.
Consider a particularly sophisticated example of a procedural
rhetoric at work in a game. The
McDonald's Videogame
is
a critique of McDonald's business practices by Italian social critic
collective Molleindustria.
(31) The
McDonald's Videogame
mounts
a procedural rhetoric about the necessity of corruption in the global
fast food business, and the overwhelming temptation of greed, which
leads to more corruption.
(31-32) G!rlpower
Retouch unpacks
a process, the process of retouching photos for maximum beauty. It
uses sequences of images combined with written text to explain each
step. . . . However, Retouch
does
not deploy a procedural rhetoric, since it does not use
representational processes to explain the actual processes used in
photo retouching.
(33) The argument Freaky Flakes
mounts
is more procedural than Retouch,
but only incrementally so. The user recombines elements to configure
a cereal box, but he chooses from a very small selection of
individual configurations. . . . Most importantly, Freaky
Flakes fails
to integrate the process of designing a cereal box with the
supermarket where children might actually encounter it.
(34)
Procedural rhetoric must address two issues that arise from these
discussions: first, what is the relationship between procedural
representation and vividness? Second, what is the relationship
between procedural representation and dialectic?
Procedurality belongs between actual experience and moving images with sound on Hills vividness continuum from most to least vivid information, and they mount propositions with internal consistency of program execution; seems linked to ideal of living writing in antiquity as best rhetorical mechanism.
(35)
These capacities would suggest that procedurality is more vivid than
moving images with sound, and thus earns the second spot on the
[Hill's] continuum, directly under actual experience. . . . Given
this caveat, procedural representation seems equally prone to the
increased persuasive properties Hill attributes to vividness.
(36)
For one part, procedural rhetorics do mount propositions: each unit
operation in a procedural representation is a claim about how part of
the system it represents does, should, or could function. The
McDonald's Videogame
makes
claims about the business practices required to run a successful
global fast-food empire. . . . These propositions are every bit as
logical as verbal arguments—in fact, internal consistency is often
assured in computational arguments, since microprocessors and not
human agents are in charge of their consistent execution.
Dialectics have broad media ecology: distinguish between ability to raise procedural objections by altering game play and emergence of dialectical reasoning about the subject whose proceduralities are represented in the videogame; example of The Grocery Game, which allows modification of rules of shopping by automating otherwise too costly behaviors for saving money with coupons and timed bulk purchases at particular grocery stores, and peripherally criticism of game mechanics in message boards substitutes for modifying code.
(37)
What about raising objections? One might argue that many
computational systems do not allow the user to raise procedural
objections—that
is, the player of a videogame is usually not allowed to change the
rules of play.
(37) For another part, all artifacts subject to
dissemination need to facilitate direct argument with the rhetorical
author; in fact, even verbal arguments usually do not facilitate the
open discourse of the Athenian assembly. Instead, they invite other,
subsequent forms of discourse, in which interlocutors can engage,
consider, and respond in turn, either via the same medium or a
different one. Dialectics, in other words, function in a broader
media ecology than Blair
and
Turkle
allow.
(38)
Consider an example of a procedural representation that addresses
both of these concerns. The
Grocery Game is
a website that gives subscribers access to a special grocery list,
sorted by grocery store and U.S. location. . . . The
Grocery Game
addresses
this issue by automating the research necessary to produce lists of
common products that maximize weekly coupon and in-store specials for
a given week, while encouraging larger purchases of basics to last
many weeks.
(39-40) While the game does not provide the user with
direct access to the search algorithms that generate its lists, so
that a user could wage these objections in code, it does provide a
flourishing community of conversation. . . . The community discourse
at the game's message boards are not always related to objections to
its underlying procedural rhetoric, but the availability of this
forum facilitates active reconfiguration of the game's rules and
goals.
Interactivity
(40)
Interactivity
is an entrenched notion in studies
of digital media. Janey Murry rightly calls the term “vague”
despite its “pervasive use.”
(42-43) Another way to understand
the role of interactivity in procedural rhetoric is through the
concept of play.
The weak coupling between model and experience in Balance
of the Planet does
not arise from a poverty of procedural representation. Rather, it
arises from the awkward way that representation is exposed to the
player. . . . I suggest adopting Katie Salen and Eric Zimmerman's
useful, abstract definition of the term: “play is the free space of
movement within a more rigid structure.” Understood in this sense,
play refers to the possibility space created by processes themselves.
. . . This is really what we do when we play
videogames:
we explore the possibility space its rules afford by manipulating the
game's controls.
Procedural enthymemes complete the claim by playing the game, which may include listening; thus by procedural rhetoric games exercise often clever and unexpected biases in our actions, which when uncovered and critically engaged potentially inspiring radical change (Badiou event, and so on).
(43)
In the context of procedural rhetoric, it is useful to consider
interactivity in relation to the Aristotelian enthymeme. The
enthymeme, we will remember, is the technique in which a proposition
in a syllogism is omitted; the listener (in the case of oratory) is
expected to fill in the missing proposition and complete the
claim.
(43-44) Another way to think about the simulation gap is in
relation to rhetoric. A procedural model like a videogame could be
seen as a system of nested enthymemes, individual procedural claims
that the player literally completes through interaction. . . .
Ironically, Chris Crawford
[designer
of Balance
of the Planet]
himself has offered a definition of interactivity that addresses this
very problem: “I choose to define it in terms of a conversation: a
cyclic process in which two actors alternately listen, think and
speak. The quality of the interaction depends on the quality of each
of the subtasks (listening, thinking, and speaking).
Videogames
(44)
For one part, videogames are among the most procedural of
computational artifacts. All software runs code, but videogames tend
to run more code, and also to do more with code. Recalling Crawford's
term, videogames tend to offer more process intensity than other
computational media.
(45) For another part, videogames are
generally a more expressive subgenre of computational media than
other types, for example, productivity software. . . . But videogames
are uniquely, consciously, and principally crafted as expressions. As
such, they represent excellent candidates for rhetorical
speech—persuasion and expression are inexorably linked.
(45) For
yet another part, videogames are often interactive in the particular
way I described above; they require user action to complete their
procedural representations. As such, they provide particularly
promising opportunities for the procedural translation of rhetorical
devices like enthymeme. . . . Sid Meier, designer of Civilization,
has argued that gameplay is “a series of interesting choices.”
(46)
Procedural representation models only some subset of a source system,
in order to draw attention to that portion as the subject of the
representation. Interactivity follows suit: the total number and
credibility of user actions is not necessarily important; rather, the
relevance of the interaction in the context of the representational
goals of the system is paramount.
(46) In my previous book, Unit
Operations,
I argued for a comparative understanding of procedural expression,
using the concept of unit operations to define the elements of
procedural representation common across media. In this book, I argue
for a similar understanding with respect to rhetoric. . . . Despite
my preference for videogames, I should stress that I intend the
reader to see procedural
rhetoric as
a domain much broader than that of videogames, encompassing any
medium—computational or not—that accomplishes its inscription via
processes.
Persuasive Games
Distinguish between persuasive games, persuasion to continue playing, and rhetorics of play: unusual Atari VCS Tax Avoiders game exemplary.
(46)
I give the name persuasive
games to
videogames that mount procedural rhetorics effectively.
(47)
Partial reinforcement is certainly a type of persuasion, but the
persuasion is entirely self-referential: its goal is to cause the
player to continue playing, and in so doing to increase coin drop. .
. . Instead, I am interested in videogames that make arguments about
the way systems work in the material world. These games strive to
alter or affect player opinion outside of the game, not merely to
cause him to continue playing.
(47) As arcade games suggest, there
are reasons to leverage videogames for goals orthogonal to those of
procedural expression. The increasing popularity of and media
attention paid to videogames means that merely producing and
distributing a videogame may have its own persuasive effect.
(48)
Videogames created with a more genuine interest in expression and
persuasion may still underplay procedurality in favor of visual
images.
(49) The tenuous coupling between visual appearance and
procedural rhetoric also hinders videogames that seek to make
persuasive statements about issues in the material world, but fail to
adopt effective procedural representations for those issues.
(51)
A more successful procedural rhetoric can be found in the 1982 title
Tax
Avoiders,
an unusual game for the Atari Video Computer System (popularly known
as the Atari VCS or Atari 2600).
(52) Tax
Avoiders mounts
an interesting and relatively complex procedural rhetoric about tax
avoidance strategies. . . . These metaphors of locomotion correspond
quite well to the abstract processes of work, investment, and
taxation.
(52) Finally, I would like to make a distinction between
persuasive games, procedural rhetoric, and the rhetoric of play. . .
. Sutton-Smith's
project is a general one, focused on the cultural role of play, not
the culturally embodied practice of playing specific games. He
identifies seven rhetorics of play, including play as process, fate,
power, identity, the imaginary, the self, and frivolity, each of
which orchestrates play in different ways and for different ends
under the same ostensible name (hence the ambiguity).
(53) I am
discussing the rhetorical function of procedural expression in the
tradition of representation rather than the tradition of play. This
said, Sutton-Smith's rhetorics may prove useful in contextualizing
procedural rhetorics among the values of play. This is not an effort
I will attempt here, but which Salen and Zimmerman attempt in their
text on game design, Rules
of Play.
. . . Without realizing it, Salen and Zimmerman helpfully clarify the
difference between Sutton-Smith's rhetorics
of play—the
global, cultural roles for exploring themes like ownership and
property—and the procedural
rhetoric of a game—the
local argument The
Landlord's Game makes
about taxation and property ownership.
Persuasive
Games versus Serious Games
(55)
[Clark] Abt
offers
a definition of serious games: “We are concerned with serious
games in
the sense that these games have an explicit and carefully thought-out
educational purpose and are not intended to be played primarily for
amusement.” Abt quickly admits that this does not mean that serious
games “are not, or should not be entertaining,” but the message
is clear: serious games are created under the direct influence and
guidance of external institutional goals.
(55) Since then, Woodrow
has founded and funded the Serious Games Initiative, an ad hoc
networking and knowledge sharing group with a thriving
membership.
(57) Serious games are videogames created to support
the existing and established interests of political, corporate, and
social institutions. To apply this principle to the industry domains
of the Serious Games Summit proves a simple task.
Serious games designed for educational purposes but may not interrogate institutions and worldviews.
(57-58) Such goals do not represent the full potential of persuasive games. If persuasive games are videogames that mount meaningful procedural rhetorics, and if procedural rhetorics facilitate dialectical interrogation of process-based claims about how real-world processes do, could, or should work, then persuasive games can also make claims that speak past or against the fixed worldviews of institutions like governments or corporations. This objection—which bears some resemblance to Socrates' opposition to sophistic and technical rhetoric in the fifth century BCE—suggests that persuasive games might also interrogate those institutions themselves, recommending corrective and alternatives.
Connect notion of serious to underlying system structure to critical code studies.
Badiou terms situation, multiplicity, count-as-one, state, and event form basis of seriousness underlying structure of a system.
(58) The notion of the serious as the underlying structure of a system is particularly compatible with the concept of procedurality. Procedural representation depicts how something does, could, or should work: the way we understand a social or material practice to function. I connect this idea to contemporary philosopher Alain Badiou's notion of the situation, a “structured presentation” of a multiplicity, a particular ontological arrangement. Badiou applies transfinite set theory to philosophy, understanding being to mean being a member of. The gesture of including a concept in a situation is akin to the set-theoretical notion of belonging, which Badiou names the count-as-one. I have previously correlated the count-as-one with the unit operation, the gesture of conceiving of a particular process as an encapsulated concept. Badiou further understands situations to have a state, the logic by which the elements in a situation are counted as one—or the reasons why the structure is organized the way it is. It is the state that is commensurate with “seriousness” as the nature of a thing, the reasons that make it what it is. Badiou further articulates a concept called the event, which offers a chance to disrupt the state of a situation and reinvent it, wholly anew, under a different organizing logic.
Prefers persuasive games over serious so as not to exclude highly crafted commercial examples.
(59) Despite the possibility of rescuing serious games under the definition I have just offered, I do not want to preserve the name. Instead, I would like to advance persusasive games as an alternative whose promise lies in the possibility of using procedural rhetoric to support or challenge our understanding of the way things in the world do or should work. . . . The concept of serious games as a counter movement apart from and against the commercial videogame industry eliminates a wide variety of games from persuasive speech. It is a foolish gesture that wrongly undermines the expressive power of videogames in general, and highly crafted, widely appealing commercial games in particular.
Persuasive
Games versus Persuasive Technology
(59)
Since the late 1990s, Stanford University experimental psychologist
B.J. Fogg
has
been advancing a concept he calls captology.
. . . Fogg's research has produced a book entitled Persuasive
Technology: Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do.
(60)
However, further interrogation shows that captology is not
fundamentally concerned with altering the user's fundamental
conception of how real-world processes work. Rather, it is primarily
intended to craft new technological constraints that impose
conceptual or behavioral change in users.
(60-61) Perhaps these
tools [reduction, tunneling, tailoring, suggestion, self-monitoring,
surveillance, conditioning] offer valid ways of using technology to
alter behavior. But not one of them deploys rhetoric; instead, all of
Fogg's techniques use technology to alter actions or beliefs without
engaging users in a discourse about the behavior itself or the logics
that would recommend such actions or beliefs.
Persuasive technology tools of captology are not critical deployments of rhetoric; foreground psychological manipulation, not dialectical user responses.
(61-62) More strongly, captology appears to rely only one psychological, not dialectical user responses. . . . In the nearly three hundred pages of Persuasive Technology, Fogg devotes only a half-page sidebar to the subject of rhetoric, dismissively labeled “A Brief History of Persuasion Studies.” . . . A better name for Fogg's work would perhaps be manipulation technology.
Black
and White Boxes
(62)
If computational expression is fundamentally procedural, and if
computational procedural expression is crafted through code, then
what is the role of code in the practice and analysis of procedural
rhetoric?
Understanding code supplements, not essential to studying procedural rhetoric of videogames; address from top down through procedural literacy rather than bottom up through code literacy. Is procedural literacy similar to an engineering design orientation of the overall system?
(62-63)
Code is not usually available in compiled software like videogames.
Software subsystems are closely held trade secrets, and one simply
cannot “open up” The
Sims or
Grand Theft
Auto III to
look at the cod running beneath. . . . To watch a program's effects
and extrapolate potential approaches or problems (in the case of
testing) in its code is called black-box
analysis.
Such analysis makes assumptions about the actual operation of the
software system, assumptions that may or may not be true. To watch a
program's effects and identify actual approaches or problems in its
code is called white-box
analysis
(or sometimes, glass-box
analysis).
Such analysis observes the effects of the system with a partial or
complete knowledge of the underlying code that produces those
effects. . . . Publicly documented hardware and software
specifications, software development kits, and decompiled videogame
ROMs all offer possible ways of studying the software itself. Such
study can shed important light on the material basis for videogame
experiences. An
understanding of code supplements procedural interpretation.
In
particular, a procedural rhetorician should strive to understand the
affordances of the materials from which a procedural argument is
formed.
(63-64) Turkle's real beef is not with Sim
City,
but with the players; they do not know how to play the game
critically. Understanding the simulation at the level of code does
not necessarily solve this problem. . . . Rather than addressing this
problem from the bottom up through code literacy, we need to address
it from the top down through procedural literacy, a topic I will
return to in chapter 9. Part of that practice is learning to read
processes as a critic. This means playing a videogame or using
procedural system with an eye toward identifying and interpreting the
rules that drive that system. Such activity is analogous to that of
the literary critic interpreting a novel or the film critic reviewing
a film—demanding access to a computer program's code might be akin
to asking for direct access to an author's or filmmaker's expressive
intentions. Despite the flaws of twentieth-century critical theory,
one notion worth keeping is that of dissemination,
the irreversible movement of the text away from the act of
authorship.
Persuasive
Games and Procedural Rhetoric
(64)
In the three sections that follow, I will consider approaches to and
examples of procedural rhetorics in three domains, namely, politics,
advertising, and education. I have chosen these fields for several
reasons. For one part, they are areas I know something about—I have
worked professionally in all these areas, I have done academic
research and writing in all these areas, and I have created
videogames in all these areas. For another part, these represent
typical domains for discussions of rhetoric and persuasion in
general, and thus are low-handing fruit for procedural rhetoric and
persuasive games. For yet another part, they offer clear goals and
referents in the material world.
Politics
2
Political
Processes
(67)
BioChemFX
is
a first-responder training tool designed to simulate bioterror
attacks on urban environments.
(71) Whom do you save? BioChemFX
can
predict the flow of the gas, but we need a different simulation to
convert an understanding of the physical world into a set of values
that drive impossible decisions.
Ideology
(71)
One of the clearest examples of political doctrine's direct impact on
a social ill was the Irish potato famine of 1845 to 1850.
(72) The
purity of British adherence to laissez-faire economics at that time
offers a fungible example of how philosophies can act as logics for
political thought and action. In this case, laissez-faire offered a
logic for reasoning about social and political problems. . . . These
rules of political behavior are an example of a procedural system
that underwrites political, economic, and daily practice. Of course,
a computer is not enforcing these rules; rather, they are driven by
social, cultural, and political convention.
Overview of ideology including Marx, Gramsci, Althusser, Zizek, Badiou.
(72)
Hidden procedural systems that drive social, political, or cultural
behavior are often called ideology.
(73)
For Marx,
ideology entails the delusion that ideas are material; in particular,
the petite bourgeoisie sees itself (has an idea
of
itself) as universal.
(73-74) Gramsci's
notion of hegemony
characterizes
the ability of stronger social classes to impose a worldview on
subordinate ones, so that the latter see that worldview as natural. .
. . For Altuhusser,
ideology exists “in an apparatus, and its practice.” The subject
is crafted according to the roles the ISAs have already created for
him; Althusser calls this process interpellation.
. . . Ideology remains material for Zizek,
but this material reality is distorted and malignant.
(74) Alain
Badiou calls the logic that dictates a situation's organization a
state,
or “that by means of which the structure of a situation . . . is
counted as one.” . . . The possibility of restructuring a situation
depends on the void, or null set, which leaves open the possibility
of reconfiguring the situation. For Badiou, this takes place through
an event,
which also founds subjectivity.
(74-75) Videogames are
particularly useful tools for visualizing the logics that make up a
worldview (following Gramsci), the ideological distortions in
political situations (following Zizek), or the state of such
situations (following Badiou).
Ware
and Peace
(75)
In 2002, the U.S. Army released an unprecedented government-funded
first-person shooter (FPS) game. America's
Army: Operations
was
conceived and openly publicized as an army recruiting and
communications tool, one crafted “to recreate the U.S. Army for the
benefit of young civilians.” The game represented a major step for
the military-entertainment complex; it was created on the
then-current Unreal 2 engine, a costly professional-grade game
engine, and released for free on the army's website.
(76) These
constraints seek to create an accurate representation of procedure
and policy for army engagement, rather than a fictional universe for
casual tete-a-tete combat.
(76) America's
Army enforces
the U.S. Army's strict rules of engagement (ROE), which preclude the
brouhaha of typical squad-based fighting games.
(76) But the game
also ties ROE and chain of command directly to the moral imperative
of the U.S. Army.
Proceduralizing Army value system with game honor mechanics.
(77)
The correlation of honor with the performance of arbitrary and
politically decontextualized missions offers particular insight into
the social reality of the U.S. Army. . . . The average citizen's lack
of familiarity with the specific actions that warrant a ribbon or
medal ensure that these designations signify the soldier's abstract
worth rather than his individual achievements. America's
Army's
honor mechanic successfully proceduralizes this value system.
(77)
But in America's
Army,
each team always takes on the role of U.S. Army soldiers—the
players never directly pilot the opposing, enemy team.
(78) This
line of thinking accurately represents contemporary U.S. attitudes
about military conflict. Our perspective is not only right, but there
is no explanation for the opposition's behavior save wickedness. . .
. The possibility of legitimate grievance on the part of the enemy—or
even a coherent historical circumstance that underwrites opposing
action—is ruled out of army conflicts.
(78) The game's goal of
sensory verisimilitude sets an expectation for political
verisimilitude—and indeed the ideology of the enemy accurately
represents the United States' one-sided perspective on matters of
global conflict.
(79) Playing America's
Army offers
an unusually fungible perspective on the “state” of U.S. foreign
conflict, to use Badiou's term on both its ontological and political
registers.
(80) Whereas America's
Army is
an action game, A
Force More Powerful
focuses
on strategy, particularly models of training, fund-raising, and
organization necessary to create and administer civil
disobedience.
(80) Despite efforts to characterize general,
abstract methods for nonviolent action, one might wonder if a
generalized model for political overthrow is even possible. A
Force More Powerful
characterizes
revolt independent of historical, cultural, and regional
specificity.
(82) Videogames like America's
Army and
A
Force More Powerful
accentuate
the incompleteness and complexity of political situations. While
these games offer basic holistic models that attempt to explain
intricate political situations through a single logic, other
procedural arguments attempt to highlight the causal or associative
connections between seemingly atomic issues.
(83) Antiwargame
makes
a number of interrelated claims about the nature of the post-9/11
political and social environment, each claim simple and direct.
First, business and the military are indistinguishable.
(84)
Together, the game's rules form a systemic claim about the logic of
the war on terrorism, namely that the purported reasons for
war—security and freedom—are false. Unlike other pacifist
arguments, the Antiwargame's
opposition to war is not based on antiviolence; rather, it opposes
war by claiming that a broken logic drives post-9/11 conflicts.
The
Rhetoric of Failure
(84-85)
Once the player completes these rule-based syllogisms, Antiwargame
offers
a procedural representation of how its authors perceive U.S. foreign
policy to be broken.
(85) I want to suggest that such games
operate by a common procedural rhetoric, the rhetoric of failure.
Tragedy in games tends to find its procedural representation in this
trope.
(87) Lee suggests that games like Kabul
Kaboom and
New
York Defender
“are
meant to morph the player from an in-gaming loser into an off-gaming
thinker (I lose therefore I think).” . . . Videogames that deploy
rhetorics of failure make a subtly different statement than those
that are simply unwinnable, or that actively enforce player
loss.
(89) Thus the procedural rhetoric of the winnable Madrid
is
more subtle than a straightforward rhetoric of failure: reverence and
memory fade, and we must use precision and diligence to keep them
alive. However, such a strategy is worthwhile and can lead to overall
social change.
Skinning
Politics, Simulating Politics
(91)
But all of the games follow a common procedural rhetoric: elections
are won by electioneering, not by politics.
(92) Otherwise put,
election simulators assume political stasis: politicians seek to find
the properly shaped tabs to suit the slots in popular opinion.
(92)
That is to say, the game is not a simulator of
political policy.
Rather, it is a simulation of political strategy,
which has nothing to do with policy.
(93) The
Howard Dean for Iowa Game
simulated
grassroots outreach, arguing for local, individual action as the
primary mode of campaign support. . . . Here the procedural rhetoric
argues for a particular type of campaign activity as most likely to
maintain ongoing support for the candidate.
(94) Specimens like
Bush
vs. Kerry Boxing
and
White
House Joust are
not political videogames. If anything, they are poor simulations of
political videogames. These games apply a political skin to existing
procedural mechanics, without attempting to transfer those mechanics
into rhetoric supporting a political argument. These graphical
logics may
or may not make visual arguments about the world, but clearly they do
not make procedural ones.
(97) But we must distinguish the
rhetorical use of videogames for politics and the inscription of
procedural rhetorics in videogames about politics. Darfur
Is Dying
proceduralizes
the experience of the Darfuri villagers at a particular moment in the
crisis, abstracting the historical dilemmas that partially explain
such a terrible outcome.
Political
Processes
(98)
The interrelated structure of political issues suggests that
procedural rhetorics may offer more promising methods for exposing
political ideology than verbal rhetorics. . . . despite the promise
of videogames for representing political thought, proceduralizing
politics is hard work, and work that is largely unexplored in
commercial videogames.
(98) Procedural rhetorics in political
videogames make claims about the particular interrelations between
political processes, why they work, why they don't work, or how
society might benefit by changing the rules.
3
Ideological
Frames
(99-100)
Cognitive linguists George Lakoff
and
Mark Johnson
propose
that metaphor is central to human understanding. . . . Turning to
politics explicitly, Lakoff argues that the most important
consideration in political discourse is not how politicians respond
to the “facts” of the external world, but how they conceptualize
or “frame” that world in their discourse about it.
(100-101)
Frames or contexts are not merely theoretical structures for
intellectual navel-gazing; they are operational models that are
actively influencing public policy.
Political
Videogames
(101-102)
Chris Crawford's 1985 classic Balance
of Power is
often cited as the first political game in which diplomacy outweighed
brute force. . . . Instead of manipulating the physical environment
itself, as the player does in Sim
Earth,
in Balance
of the Planet
the
player manipulates social responses to environmental
conditions.
(103) Despite the interesting promise of embedding
graphs and statistics into a satirical action game, Bushgame
does
not mount a procedural rhetoric. Instead, it peppers a traditional
action game with written and visual rhetorics, in the form of pop-up
text and graphs about the problems with Bush's leadership.
(103)
As videogames become part of endorsed political speech, they will
become more tightly integrated with existing strategies for political
discourse.
(103) Understanding political rhetoric in videogames
intended to carry ideological bias requires a theory of framing as a
procedural rather than a verbal strategy.
Reinforcement
(105)
Tax
Invaders extends
the verbal metaphor of “taxation as theft” to the tangible
plane.
(105) In another example of procedural
enthymeme,
the player completes the game's argument by firing projectiles that
defend the nation from Kerry's potential tax plans.
(106) But Tax
Invaders frames
the metaphors of its rhetoric as embodied activities, not as words or
images. Bush (and the player) fire projectiles at the tax hikes,
representing the metaphor of taxation as enemy threat.
(106) Thus,
while Tax
Invaders does
little to represent actual tax policy, it frames taxation in a way
that reinforces a conservative position.
(107) There is perhaps no
more effective metaphor for theft than alien invasion.
Rules of the game Tax Invaders construct unit operation for conservative frame on taxation; use of procedural enthymeme.
(108) Tax Invaders constructs a unit operation for the conservative frame on taxation itself. Whereas verbal rhetoric invokes the frame (or context, to use Luntz's word) without acknowledging that it even exists let alone structures the rhetoric, procedural rhetoric depicts the frame in tangible form, in the rules of the game.
Contestation
(109)
In French artist Martin Le Chevallier's installation game Vigilance
1.0,
players seek out deviants on surveillance-screen-like sections of an
urban environment.
(110) By forcing the player to see the
consequences of the metaphor of vigilance as comprehensive
regulation, the game challenges
the
ideological frame it initially represents. The game's purpose is not
to promote surveillance nor moral purity, but to call such values
into question by turning the apparently upstanding player into one of
the depraved whom he is charged to eliminate.
(111) The notion of
equivalence between actions and their consequences evokes another
metaphor for political thought, what Lakoff calls “keeping the
moral books.” In Lakoff's view, we conceptualize well-being as
wealth. Changes to our well-being are thus akin to gains and
losses.
(111) In one version of procedural fairness, the failure
to account for improprieties puts the books out of balance. Vigilance
allows
the player to experiment within this frame.
(112) As the player
identifies more and more deviants, the game slowly but progressively
changes its focus from balancing the society's moral books to
questioning procedural fairness as a legitimate strategy for running
the society in the first place.
Implication
(113)
San
Andreas added
a new dynamic to the core GTA gameplay: the player-character must eat
to maintain his stamina and strength. However, the only nourishment
in the game comes from fast food restaurants.
(114-115) The
tension between personal responsibility and social forces is related
to another of Lakoff's metaphors for political thought, what he calls
“moral strength.” . . . Lakoff argues that moral strength is a
fundamentally conservative political frame that stands in contrast to
the liberal equivalent, empathy and nurturance.
(115) Under this
interpretation, San
Andreas's
enforcement of fast food eating serves to expose the social forces
that drive the poor and working-class residents of the inner city to
consume fast food habitually. The game even allows the player to reap
the health detriments of a fast food diet in the form of lost stamina
and diminished respect.
(116) While major technology challenges
impede the development of credible character interactions in an
environment as large scale as San Andreas and its surrounds, the game
makes no effort to alter character behavior based on race, social
standing, or location.
(117) Lakoff argues that the conservative
frame for crime is an extension of the “strict father” model of
seeing the world. . . . Unlike the strict father, the nurturing
parent believes that support and assistance help people thrive, and
that people who need help deserve to be helped.
(117) Any morally
upstanding young man would find a legitimate job and earn his way off
the street without resorting to criminality. But interestingly, the
game turns this frame in on itself. To succeed in the mission-based
story of San
Andreas,
the player effectively builds a sizable, if illegitimate, business of
thug activities—based on a staple of drive-by shootings and armed
robbery.
(118) He [CJ] acts with a similar underlying value
structure as the conservative, but uses lawless rather than lawful
material production as his medium.
Designing Procedural Frames
Games still unterritorialized by ideology, yet have been part of political discourse all along.
(120) But unlike consumers of film, television, books, and other linear media, videogame players are accustomed to analyzing the interaction of proceduralized logics as a part of the play experience. Whereas particular political interests have effectively colonized some media—liberals and documentary film, conservatives and talk radio, for example—videogames remain indefinite about their political bent. This situation underscores both a promise and a threat. . . . Although it is first an analysis of political discourse, George Lakoff's Moral Politics could equally be described as a scathing critique of the failure of liberal political discourse. Perhaps today it seems optimistic to claim that videogames might offer the most salient locus for discussions of how we think about political problems. But in time, and perhaps not much of it, we will wonder why it took so long to realize that games have been a part of public political discourse all along.
4
Digital
Democracy
(122)
In a commentary affirming “that the internet has become an
essential medium of American politics,” analyst Michael Cornfield
outlines five online campaigning innovations that came out of the
Dean campaign: news-pegged fundraising appeals, “meetups” and
other net-organized gatherings, blogging, online referenda,
decentralized decision making.
(123) One notable omission from
Cornfield's list of innovations is social software.
Imagine in a virtual reality game setting, to propose alternate forms of democracy, political action, and consumer engagement to explore philosophical question of how would a generation of casual programmers alter engagements with procedurality.
(124) However, all of these techniques also have another common property: they rely on computer technology solely for its ability to change and accelerate dissemination, not for its ability to change representation. In short, what political technology lacks is a meaningful engagement with procedurality.
Videogram
Histories
(125)
As software systems, these games can be seen as historiographies,
representing history with rules of interaction rather than patterns
of writing. . . . Educational technologist and games-and-learning
theorist Kurt Squire
has
shown that Civilization
offers
students a better understanding of world history, especially the
relationship between physical, cultural, and political geography and
history. The historical representation of Civilization
bears
a striking resemblance to that of Diamond's Guns,
Germs, and Steel.
(126)
While videogame-based recreations of historical events like D-Day and
Pearl Harbor have been common for the last two decades, recent
videogames have taken on more specific moments in history, fashioning
themselves after another newly politicized medium, the documentary
film.
(128) Although the subject matter itself is comparable to
documentaries and news broadcasts, to understand what the games are
saying about these historical events we need to ask how the player
interacts with procedural rules to create patterns of historical and
social meaning.
Use of voice commands as procedural rhetoric in Waco Resurrection; consider ideas like Macy Conferences game that traverses a long but specific topic for videogames based on specific moments in history, fashioned after documentary film.
(128-129)
Waco
Resurrection's
most
salient feature is not the representation of the Branch Davidians'
Waco compound—a simple feat of 3D modeling—but the use of voice
commands as a primary input method. By obliging the player to utter
Koresh's messianic interpretations of the book of revelation, the
player is forcibly immersed in the logic of a religious cult. . . .
On further review, Waco
Resurrection
suggests
that the 1993 Waco event exemplifies an entire system of contemporary
American religious expression and extremism. But unlike the
“authorized” religious fervor of, say, fundamentalist
Christianity, fanaticism of the Branch Davidian sort is illegitimate,
unsupported, and in fact in need of government intervention and
dismantling.
(129) 9-11
Survivor's
procedural expression arises principally from the interplay between
spawn locations in the building and obstacles the player might face
while trying to escape.
(130) 9-11
Survivor invites
us to empathize with the victims of the WTC attacks, but more so it
invites us to reflect on all the potential traps and escapes in our
workplaces, homes, shopping malls, and public spaces—to consider
our changed relationship with such spaces since 9/11.
(134) By
writing an account of history as a procedural system, Diamond gives
us access to a system for making sense of individual historical
moments and personalities. Even though they appear to represent or
re-create historical events, games like JFK
Reloaded and
Waco
Resurrection
server
much the same purpose: they represent the material, social, and
cultural conditions that underlie historical events. Given the
opportunities that historical videogames espouse, it should be
possible to construct videogames that facilitate the player's
understanding of contemporary political processes and issues.
Procedural
Rhetoric in Digital Democracy
(135)
In December 2003, Gonzalo Frasca and I co-designed the first
videogame endorsed by a U.S. presidential candidate. The
Howard Dean for Iowa Game
was
commissioned by Dean for America to help fence-sitter supporters
understand the process and power of grassroots outreach.
(136) The
game mounts two procedural rhetorics to address the campaign's
challenge. The first represents the logic of grassroots
outreach.
(137) The second procedural rhetoric is a simplified
representation of the kinds of real-world action supporters could
perform once connected to a local group.
(139) The procedural
rhetoric in support of grassroots outreach was sound, but it
inadvertently exposed the underlying ideology of the campaign, one
that would eventually cause it to unravel. The failure to put
coherent political rhetoric in the hands of its army of supporters
was the Dean campaign's Achilles' heel. Dean had political views, but
nobody knew anything about them, so they invented their own
impressions of him.
(141) To communicate the rhetoric of
interrelations, Take
Back Illinois
maintains
a set of scores for each subgame and uses those scores as inputs for
settings in other games. For example, higher performance in the
educational reform subgame increases the efficiency of job training
centers in the economic development game. The parameterized
interaction between simulation models serves as a rudimentary
procedural rhetoric for the interrelationship of these issues in
particular, and other issues by extension.
(142) To play the game
successfully, the player is forced to acknowledge the campaign's
position on the issues it represents—for example, it is impossible
to win the medical malpractice subgame without reducing maximum
noneconomic damages for malpractice lawsuits (although reducing them
beyond reason decreases the likelihood of faults). The procedural
rhetoric is a compressed version of the campaign's policy position.
Playing Politics
Summary argument is that videogames, rather than the Internet medium as an abstraction, offer culturally and procedurally relevant subject matters for communicating political rhetorical ideas.
(143) The Internet's affordances for rapid updates and ad hoc access have opened new frontiers for the dissemination of information and the creation of communities. But the ad hoc assemblage of routers and computers that make up the Internet cannot necessarily provide meaningful subject matter upon which to focus that attention. To hold up the Internet as the apotheosis of technology-enabled campaigning ignores the procedural power of computers, discounting the very core of what makes computation a meaningful medium for expression. As a culturally relevant, procedurally replete medium, videogames offer a promising way to foreground the complexities of political issues for the layperson.
Advertising
5
Advertising
Logic
(149) As Baudrillard
suggests, “consumption is a
system of meaning, like language.” While it is dubious to think of
buying in and of itself as automatically meaningful self-expression,
indeed this is the very mechanism advertisers have come to rely upon.
In the face of this hyperconsumerism, many economists have given up
entirely on the distinction between needs and wants.
(150)
Essentially, consumers have become aware that advertisers market to
get them to buy, not to answer to their needs.
(151) This new
realization is really knowledge of the procedural rhetoric of
mass-market television advertising: networks create content designed
to appeal to segments of the population, then sell interruptions in
the broadcast for advertisement designed for the group.
(152) Now
that consumers have decoded the logic of the advertising network,
marketers are marrying permission marketing to strategically chosen
frames. Marketing has shifted away from a focus on the procedural
rhetoric of media technologies—integrating ads into rules of
network programming formats. Instead, advertisers focus on the
procedural rhetoric of the frames themselves—integrating ads into
rules of consumers' perceived cultural station.
(152) Many early
boutique agencies peddling Web-based advergames claim
“credit” for coining the term, but a formal definition of
“advergame” is commonly traced to a 2001 whitepaper by Jane Chen
and Matthew Ringel, analysts at interactive agency <kpe>.
(153)
Contrary to Baudrillard's suggestion that the procession of simulacra
always deepens the illusion of depth, perhaps the dissonance between
the virtual and the real Disneylands actually exposes a similar
dissonance between Disneyland and the real world. In the medium of
videogames, advertising's pervasiveness might lead to its critique.
Three Types of Advertising
(153)
More abstractly, a persuasion game is a game in which an interested
player discloses information to another player, who has to make a
decision that affects the payoff of the disclosing player. There are
three important types of advertising that can participate in such
persuasion games: demonstrative,
illustrative, and
associative
advertising.
(153)
Demonstrative advertising provides direct information.
(154)
Illustrative advertising communicates indirect information.
(154)
Associative advertising communicates indirect information, focusing
specifically on the intangibles of a product.
(156-158)
Associative advertising is related to a recent trend known as
“lifestyle marketing.” Lifestyle marketing starts from the
seemingly innocuous goal of running advertising to address niche
rather than mass markets; however, lifestyle marketing and its
associative tools depend largely on new techniques for data-gathering
to help identify consumers as a member of this or that “segment.”
. . . But once marketers identify segments that prove particularly
lucrative or easy to reach, lifestyle marketing becomes a process of
advertising the lifestyle itself, rather than using the lifestyle as
a medium for making a case for specific products.
The
Current State of Advertising Games
(158)
Of the three, associative games are most prevalent, but demonstrative
games dovetail most closely with the procedural properties of the
videogame medium.
(160) The use of Mountain Dew products as
power-ups could be construed as an effective simulation of the
caffeine jolt the soft drink provides, a gesture in the direction of
demonstrative advertising. However, this technique does not
principally seek to demonstrate the tangible benefits of the product.
Instead, it elevates the product (or more precisely, the product's
packaging) as a token of positive, but anonymous value. We might call
this gesture a kind of in-game object fetishism; the player seeks the
Mountain Dew because it and it alone has magical power in the game
world.
(161) Advertising in videogames can be traced back at least
twenty-five years, since the first film/game tie-ins Tron
and
E.T.
and
the early branded games Kool-Aid
Man,
all of which made their appearance in 1982. But examples like
Mountain
Dew Skateboarding and
the Nike slam-dunk game suggest that contemporary interest in
advertising games has been driven by a broader interest in videogames
as a gateway to a particular consumer than by the unique properties
of the medium as a new form of marketplace discourse.
(163-164)
The contemporary approach to advertising games relies on the game
experience as an end in itself rather than as a bridge to activities
in the material world, making these advertisements simulations in
Baudrillard's sense of the word—copies with no original, fantasies
for a world that doesn't exist.
Advertising
Rhetorics
(165)
The logic of the advertising industry—its own procedural
structure—privileges the media buy. This logic helps explain
advertisers' use of the abstract concept of “creative”: creative
is advertising content that can be placed in bought media
slots.
(165-166) Dynamic in-game advertising focuses on the
liveness that Internet-connected devices afford: the ability to serve
ads dynamically into those games. . . . The focus of all three
companies [Massive, Double Fusion, IGA Partners] is to create an
advertising network in commercial videogames equivalent to that of
television. . . . In particular, in-game advertising seeks to extend
the reach of existing
advertising
units—especially two-dimensional images and motion graphics—into
videogames.
(166) The incongruence of placed ads doesn't seem to
faze the in-game ad network providers. The very idea that a furtive
spy would stop for a Diet Sprite, or that a cyborg assassin from
30,000 years in the future might enjoy a present-day matinee, does
not strike these advertisers as absurd. In fact, the networks justify
in-game ads with claims that they enhance the realism of
videogames.
(167) In this [University of London] study, 14 percent
of participants agreed that ads enhanced the gaming experience,
compared to the 50 percent in the Double Fusion-Nielsen study.
Although there is no direct evidence for collusion, in light of such
conflicting evidence, sponsored studies could be understood to have
rhetorical rather than scientific ends. They are ads for in-game ads.
From
Visual to Procedural Rhetoric in Advertising
(169)
Currently, advertisers are applying existing rhetorics to the
videogame medium, despite the latter's fundamental focus on
procedurality. Advertising has always focused on the visual.
(170)
More importantly, the entire practice of advertising has focused
almost exclusively on the inscription of two-dimensional surfaces. .
. . Advertisers have enjoyed enormous success adapting new surfaces
for advertising.
(170) Clever though it may be, the tendency to
find and inscribe every surface in our world with advertising moves
advertising further and further into the illustrative and associative
domains.
(171) All of these signals would suggest the rapid and
inevitable colonization of videogames by advertisers, save one major
problem: unlike television commercials, magazine ads, outdoor
billboards, shopping bags, or even t-shirts, videogames are not
fundamentally characterized by their ability to carry images, but by
their capacity for operationalizing rules.
6
Licensing
and Product Placement
(174)
I want to suggest that videogames offer a mode of engagement with
products and services that can activate critical perspectives on
consumption. But to do so, advertising must reconnect with the
fundamental property of videogames, procedurality.
Licensing
(175)
We can think of licenses not as intellectual property in the
abstract, but as a network of products that interpret the license in
some way. From this perspective, all licensed products always serve
as advertisements for each additional node in the network of
products. . . . This procedural rendering of a license has the
potential to open the property to interrogation and critique on the
part of the player.
(177) The procedural rhetoric of teamwork
undermines this position, drawing attention to the system of
affiliations, skills, and abilities that contribute to Harry's
success. In so doing, the videogames built on the Harry Potter
license might return the player to the material world with a
reinforced understanding of the relationship between the characters
shorthanded in the license's title.
(179) Electronic Arts'
revision of the rules was necessary to make quidditch playable as a
videogame, but the adaptation also draws attention to the incongruity
of the rules of the fictional sport. . . . Quidditch
World Cup
exposes
the rhetoric of individualism inherent to the sport, offering a
perspective on the fictional world of Harry Potter that is
unavailable in the books or the films.
(181) The game [SeaWorld
Tycoon]
proceduralizes the logic of running a theme park, and by virtue of
their license Sea World admits the roles played by park layout,
inflated prices, and other common factors of location-based
entertainment design in their business model.
(181) Engaging
players with these procedural rhetorics exposes the material
realities of SeaWorld's operations.
(182) From John Deere's
perspective, the advertising is directed not so much toward farmers,
but toward nonfarmers, who might alter their conceptual (or even
personal) relationship with farmers and farm equipment in response to
simulated experiences with the equipment and the tasks that equipment
facilitates.
(184) Food
Force could
be seen to serve the same function as licensed games like SeaWorld
Adventure Park Tycoon
and
John
Deere American Farmer:
all these games mount procedural rhetorics of legitimacy. The games
argue that the occupations they represent are valid ones, worthy of
both respect and pursuit. Effectively, Food
Force is
really just United
Nations Humanitarian Tycoon.
(184)
While tycoon games are largely relegated to the less glamorous
station of second-shelf retail placement in the United States,
Japanese licensed advergames have gone mainstream.
(185) Rather
than leveraging a brand name to legitimate the vocation for which it
is metonymic, Yoshinoya
mounts
a procedural rhetoric about the values of the franchise, constraining
player action toward conduct consistent with that service value. In
so doing, the game makes demonstrative claims about the service the
player might experience as a customer of Yoshinoya. These claims are
triggered by a role inversion; rather than occupying the familiar
role of customer, the player is thrust behind the counter, forced to
tend to dozens of simultaneous versions of himself as patron.
(186)
Yoshinoya
presents
the player with the fundamental logic of its store operations:
quickly and correctly server a small permutation of dishes as rapidly
as possible.
(187) The differences between Curry
House CoCo Ichibanya
and
Yoshinoya's
procedural rhetorics are numerous. Where Yoshinoya
abstracts
food preparation and service into a single button-press, CoCo
Ichibanya models
preparation in considerable detail.
(187-188) As videogames, these
two are fun and unusual specimens whose novelty and absurdity make up
much of their charm. . . . Either way, the games advance their
invitations to the real-world versions of their represented
restaurants through procedural rhetorics, rule-based embodiments of
their respective licensors' service claims.
Product
Placement
(189)
The modern birth of product placement as a deliberate marketing
strategy is usually traced to the 1982 Steven Spielberg film E.T.,
one of the original sources of film-to-videogame licensing.
(190)
I want to suggest that product placement offers a perspective on a
socially productive kind of advertising, one that begins to
reintroduce a property long missing from advertising and necessary
for its connection to procedurality, namely context.
Claim that videogame product placement invites critical perspective.
(191) In short, the fictional abstraction of entertainment properties
invites a critical perspective on placed products more so than does
other advertising.
(195) Publisher Ubisoft struck a deal with
mobile handset manufacturer Sony Ericsson to include two of the
latter's mobile phones in the game, the P900 PDA phone and the T637
camera phone. The two devices were integrated into the gameplay in
such a way as to require the player to use them frequently and
meaningfully during play.
(195) Ubisoft effectively created a
simulation of the product in the videogame, one that acts more like a
hands-on demo than a mere mimicry of its exterior chrome.
(196)
This is a sure sign of a procedural rhetoric at work in an in-game
product: it makes claims about what the product does, and it
contextualizes that functional value in a transferable social
situation.
(197) The need to explicitly and meaningfully
operationalize products in games marks two decisive breaks with the
traditional logics of advertising. First, it completely dismantles
the media buy. Context and code-level integration are required for
videogame product placements, efforts that require specificity at the
design and technical levels.
(197) Second, videogame product
placement undermines advertisers' obsession with the image. The
visual inscription of surfaces is a nonstarter in videogames, whose
expressive power comes from procedural representation.
7
Advergames
(199)
With The
Sims off
the ad market, few other popular, commercial games depict everyday
household situations—the only sensible context for
consumer-oriented packaged goods, which constitute a great deal of
consumer advertising messages.
Advergames simulate products and services.
(200)
But I understand advergame
to
refer to any game created specifically to host a procedural rhetoric
about the claims of a product or service. More succinctly put,
advergames are simulations of products and services.
(200) The
first film-to-game adaptation was 1976's Death
Race,
a controversial arcade game based on the 1975 film of the same name.
But the earliest game I have found with authorized branding in
support of a product is the 1976 arcade game Datsun
280 Zzzap,
a pseudo-3D driving game of the same style as Atari's more popular
Night
Driver.
Logical rather than moralisitc system promoted by game procedural rhetoric like Tooth Protectors.
(203)
What Johnson & Johnson accomplishes with Tooth
Protectors is
to prompt the player—in this era probably a child—to consider
dental care as a logical system rather than a moralistic one. Like
toilet training and looking both ways before crossing the street,
dental hygiene is typically imposed on children as an issue of
righteousness: if you do it you are a good kid, and if you don't you
are a bad kid. Tooth
Protectors
disrupts
this opaque and doctrinal relationship and replaces it with a
rationalistic one, expressed via the game's procedural
rhetoric.
(205) In mid-2005, knife, scissor, and gardening tool
company Fiskars released an advergame and promotion called Fiskars
Prune to Win.
The premise is simple: the player must trim a continuously growing
summer backyard to keep it from going wild.
(205) The game is a
means of reconciliation between the brand's claim that all the tools
are needed (a claim the game's scoring system strictly enforces), and
the likelihood that a real customer will choose one or two of the
most applicable tools given a set of options.
(207) In at least
one circumstance, high production value alone can
serve
as demonstrative advertising.
(209) The game [Escape]
not only musters a procedural rhetoric of burdensome coercion, but it
actually turns that rhetoric inside out, encasing the game inside the
very experience that reveals it.
(210) Volvo
Drive for Life
takes
a different tack. By simulating the safety features and then removing
them from the experience, players can approximate the actual
correlation Volvo claims between its mechanical innovations and
actual improved safety. . . . Volvo
Drive for Life
deploys
a procedural rhetoric about mechanical consequence, arguing that
features like roll stability and front-end collision dampening
provide materially demonstrable safeguards.
(211) Judith
Williamson
has
related this perception of needs to the production of a gap in ads:
“we are invited to insert ourselves into this 'cut-out' space; and
thus reenact our entry into the Symbolic.” By the Symbolic,
Williamson refers to the entry into language that psychoanalyst
Jacques Lacan
claims
to be an endemic part of the formation of the subject. Advertisements
give the illusion of freedom, but then implicate their viewers in
foregone conclusions. . . . Interestingly, Williamson's gap bears
striking resemblance to the rhetorical figure of the enthymeme, the
syllogism that omits one of its premises.
(212) Dodge
Stow 'n Go Challenge
was
well conceived in principle: use a videogame to simulate the Stow 'n
Go seating in a more meaningful way.
Simulation fever, ideally challenging experimentation with a product, with procedural enthymeme as space between the game rules and the player subjectivity.
(214) The procedural rhetoric of Xtreme Errands suggests that the Commander's affordances for flexible seating and storage couple usefully with certain family routines. . . . This time, the space between the game's rules and the player's subjectivity is a procedural enthymeme, or what I have called a simulation gap. Engagement with this gap creates a situation of crisis, a simulation fever. Advergames that acknowledge this condition represent significant social progress in advertising: playing the game challenges the potential consumer to experiment with the ways he might use a product if he owned it.
Soft
Drinks and Beer
(216)
However, one demonstrative message does emerge from the game: the
preparation method for Kool-Aid itself. . . . Like unpacking the
strategic operation of theme parks with SeaWorld
Adventure Parks Tycoon,
Kool-Aid
Man exposes
the operation of preparing Kool-Aid, including an admission that it
is near equal parts sugar and water. While this fact alone isn't
going to change dietary habits, it does open the door to discussions
about the role of sugar in contemporary packaged foods.
(217)
Thus, we could think of generic advergames like Nordic
Christmas as
procedural manifestations of the enjoyment that the product produces,
or more properly that it facilitates. Like alcohol, Coca-Cola
presents itself as a social lubricant that produces enjoyment rather
than uninhibitedness. . . . The advertising has become the product,
providing the actual enjoyment suggested by the product's
demonstrative claims.
(217) Missing from the Coke games is any
representation of “refreshment,” the other value common in
Coca-Cola advertising.
(219) The original version of the game
[Tapper]
featured prominent Budweiser branding on the wall of the bar, on the
draught mugs, and on cans during an interlude bonus game. . . . The
customers are parodies of the drunken barhopper—the folly of their
inebriation is rendered procedurally as a thoughtless, almost
zombie-like progression toward the tap.
(220) Budweiser, the bar
proprietor that hosts the game, and Bally/Midway all cash in on the
joke.
Analysis of Tapper procedural rhetoric defamiliarizes process of consumption.
(220)
Tapper
defamiliarizes
the process of consumption, both through its procedural
representation and through the distortion of the bartender the player
controls. This defamiliarization opens a simulation gap that invites
interrogation of the player's alcohol-consumption practices
themselves. Budweiser's endorsement of this concern is a much less
visible social service than adding please
drink responsibly
in
small print on their ads, but perhaps it is a much more meaningful
one. Some might object that drunken bar patrons are not capable of
such self-reflection, but failure to control Tapper's
virtual bartender due to player inebriation might very well alert the
player to his own diminishing faculties, a gross-motor signal no less
effective than stumbling on the way to the toilet or falling off a
barstool.
(222) J2O
is not just about tempering an evening's overindulgence; it is about
tempering the very lifestyle of alcoholic overindulgence.
(222) By
casting their product's tangible benefits in a procedural
representation of a situation of great reservation, the advertisement
challenges the player to interrogate the degree to which he really
needs the mixers, the pints, and indeed the very J2O
that the product advertises. . . . Unlike ideological apparatuses
which, in Judith Williamson's words, “offer you a unity with the
sign, a unity which can only be imaginary,” advergames like these
muster an uncertain subjective space that do not necessarily violate
individual identity.
Anti-Advergames
(223)
For one part, anti-advergames advertise against a company. . . . For
another part, anti-advergames work against the practice of
advertising in games itself.
(224) As an example of the latter
type, critic Tony Walsh
offered
a set of adbusting strategies for vegetarians, eco-activists, and
other disgruntled users of The
Sims Online
McDonald's
kiosks.
(225-226) Other videogames have used the procedural
affordances of the medium for the explicit purpose of rejoining
specific corporations. . . . By forcing the player to interact with
Coca-Cola, the game [Coke
Is It!]
produces an absurd perversion of the original works of interactive
fiction, highlighting the inappropriateness of Coca-Cola's invasion
of the media and the material world.
(226) My studio created
Disaffected!,
an anti-advergame about the FedEx Kinko's copy store. The game was
conceived as a parody of the frustrating experience of patronizing
such a store.
(228) While the complaint letter attempts to
persuade the reader that the writer was wronged and deserves
recompense, the anti-advergame attempts to persuade the player that
the corporation is inoperative and must not be supported.
(229)
Rather than deploying antitestimonial (e.g., publishing an account of
a bad experience on a public website), anti-advergames deploy
antidemonstratives. . . . Anti-advergames suggest an alternative to
the precious form of procedural rhetoric I called the rhetoric of
failure.
(229) Putting the player in the shoes of the employees
rather than the customers changes the register of the discourse.
While the verbal rhetoric necessarily focuses on self-interest and
personal gain, the procedural rhetoric transfers the argument into
one of corporate policy and, by extension, politics. The first-hand
experience of the simulation of work enforces the rules of malcontent
that produce individual customer service woes.
(230)
Anti-advergames thus have much in common with political games: they
expose the logic of corporate and governmental structures and invite
players to question them. . . . By offering a space for discourse
about the use or value of a product, these advertisements encourage
critical consumption: the reasoned and conscious interrogation of
individual wants and needs, rather than manipulated subservience to
corporate ones.
Learning
8
Procedural
Literacy
(233)
Reinforcement theory privileges stimulus-response learning arranged
in steps to ratchet up a student's abilities.
(234) With Jean
Piaget,
the understanding of learning became more connected to theories of
mind, correcting the immoderate scientism of behaviorism. . . .
Social constructionism includes approaches like the Soviet activity
theory that descended from Vygotsky's
own contributions, as well as situated learning theory, which focuses
on “learning by doing.”
(234-235) Seymour Papert's
version of Piagetian constructivism, which he called constructionism,
focuses on the active creation of things in the material world.
Theories of education fall within behaviorism and constructionism, and their worldviews are transferred into videogames.
(235)
At the risk of oversimplification, most contemporary understandings
of (formal) education fall largely in either the behaviorist or the
constructionist theory of education.
(235) Despite contemporary
education's propensity toward behaviorist education, the commonest
form of constructivist learning comes from the first classroom many
of us experience: kindergarten.
(235) Similarly, Italian educator
Maria Montessori encouraged a child-centered that focused first on
the senses, then on the intellect.
(236) If behaviorism relies on
an empirical, scientific worldview—that of a singular, knowable
universe of concepts—then a behaviorist model of educational
videogames transfers that universe onto the game world. . . . In
short, videogames teach their content, and that content transfers to
real-world experience.
(237) The behaviorist-influenced content
perspective opens up a Pandora's Box of media effects arguments. If
videogames teach their content, and if that content ought to be
negatively reinforced, then exposure to such games positively
reinforces negative content.
(238) The risk that a videogame could
teach the right things to the wrong people is a grave concern in
behaviorist circles.
(238-239) Behaviorist approaches to games
foreclose what I have previously called the simulation
gap,
the breach between the game's procedural representation of a topic
and the player's interpretation of it.
(239) [Lego] Mindstorms are
primarily intended to teach computer programming and creative,
expressive construction.
Performance before competence learning in Mindstorms and Microsoft Flight Simulator.
(239)
From this perspective, videogames teach abstract principles that
service general problem-solving skills and learning values. Returning
to our previous examples, a constructivist might understand Microsoft
Flight Simulator
as
a game that teaches professional knowledge through “performance
before competence,” a concept of pedagogical apprenticeship. Such
an attitude might very well catalyze interest in aeronautics, but
more generally it encourages the learner to experiment within
knowledge domains freely, without fear of incompetence due to
incomplete mastery.
(240) Sim
City could
be understood as a game that teaches about complexity and other
approaches to the general operation of dynamic processes, such as
systems theory and autopoietics. Through engagement with the game,
players learn to reflect on the natural or artificial design of
systems in the material world.
Going meta technique offered by many videogames, whereas others foreclose the simulation gap.
(240)
John Beck
and
Mitchell Wade
have
called this abstract technique in videogames “going meta,” or
“taking a step back from the immediate situation, analyzing the
choices and the odds, and finding the right strategy.”
(241)
Videogames do not just offer situated meaning and embodied
experiences of real and imagined worlds and relationships; they offer
meaning and experiences of particular
worlds
and particular
relationships.
. . . The underlying models of a videogame found a particular
procedural rhetoric about its chosen subjects.
(243) Or, as
[Ralph] Koster
puts
it, “the bare mechanics of the game do not determine its semantic
freight.”
(243) The semiotic domain of all first-person shooters
might be similar due to the genre's common procedural model (unit
operations for movement, projectiles, stealth, etc.), but the meaning
of individual first-person shooters vary based on the way those
processes are used rhetorically.
Procedural literacy addresses suggestion by Gee to reconcile subject-specificity and abstraction.
(244) More importantly, Gee's suggestions imply the need for a new understanding of educational games that reconciles subject-specificity and abstraction. As a means of entry into such a project, I propose a new understanding of procedural literacy.
From
Programming to Culture
(244)
By the early 1980s, programming began to gain recognition not only as
a kind of professional training but also as a kind of literacy in its
own right. This new trend has been called procedural
learning.
Short history of procedural learning from Logo to RAPUNSEL rejected because programming emphasis excludes built in procedurality of videogames experienced by merely playing them: making procedural literacy initiated by Mateas specific and emphasizing situated cultural aspects of technical mastery, not just dynamic systems.
(244-245) RAPUNSEL follows on the heels of numerous reports suggesting that the United States is falling behind other nations in science and engineering. . . . More broadly, I want to suggest that procedural literacy entails the ability to reconfigure concepts and rules to understand and processes, not just on the computer, but in general. The high degree of procedural representation in videogames suggests them as a natural medium for procedural learning. . . . [quoting Mateas] By procedural literacy I mean the ability to read and write processes, to engage procedural representation and aesthetics, to understand the interplay between the culturally-embedded practice of human meaning-making and technically-mediated processes. Mateas's definition couples procedural reputation to culture and aesthetics, suggesting that procedural literacy is not just a practice of technical mastery, but one of technical-cultural mastery. I want to clarify a point left implicit in Mateas's position: procedural literacy should not be limited to the abstract ability to understand procedural representations of cultural values. Rather, it should use such an understanding to interrogate, critique, and use specific representations of specific real or imagined processes.
Worth revisiting studies on learning programming with wider scope in which play itself, and by extension ancillary behaviors to programming, have procedural learning functions.
(247)
But rather than suggesting that the exercise of Latin, or
mathematics, or history themselves strengthen the mind through
generic exercise, [Dorothy] Sayers'
proposes that the embedded logics of such subjects provide the tools
necessary to interrogate new, unfamiliar questions.
(247-248)
Despite the clarity of Sayers' proposal, modern adaptations of it
have decoupled the trivium from its subject-specific roots, following
the errors of constructivism. . . . Understanding the way a
traditional approach to literacy broke down the bond between
abstraction and subject-specificity will help us understand how to
avoid such a one in the domain of procedural literacy.
(249) Here,
Latin is revered as a structured mental exercise, not from its value
as a window into key components of Western culture, especially the
culture of ancient Rome and the medieval church. More appropriately,
Latin would be allowed to oscillate between its formal and cultural
registers; on the one hand, the language itself possesses formal
features of synthetic inflection, specific cultural output can be
consumed or created.
Do with electronics and programming early computers what Sayers did with Latin despite Bogost calling for a break from procedural literacy as programming.
(249) Computers constrain expression even more, through both hardware and design of programming language. One could easily replace the world Latin in Wise and Bauer's claim with the name of a computer programming language like Java or Smalltalk or C, effectively parodying the value of any subject for abstract goals alone. In many ways, programming and Oulipian writing offer even stronger evidence for the benefits of systematic training than Latin; after all, natural language is subject to human failing and misinterpretation.
Break with conceptions of procedural literacy as programming knowledge to return focus on specific areas of expertise.
(250)
But I want to suggest an important break from previous conceptions of
procedural literacy as programming.
(250)
It is precisely specific
areas of experience
that
have been expunged from our understanding of constructivist learning
and procedural literacy in particular; it is also the corrective for
the practice of divorcing subject-specificity from learning.
Procedural affordances of languages and operating systems, software in general; try to understand why Tanaka-Ishii chose Haskell and Java in this perspective.
(251)
Like the cultural and formal specificity of Latin versus Inuit or the
formal properties of C versus LISP, the procedural affordances of a
computer operating system matter:
they constrain and enable the kinds of computational activities that
are possible atop that operating system.
(252)
What does procedural literacy look like when it privileges the
representation of culture
as
much as that of dynamic systems?
Procedural History
(254)
In short, Diamond argues that the proximate causes of European
conquest via horses, guns, germs, and steel resulted from the
accidental ultimate causes of land fertility, geographic
distributions, and variety of plants and animals that occupied such
regions.
(254) Diamond describes a procedural system in which
political and social outcomes result from configurations of
constrained material conditions. This abstract system founds the
specific outcomes of history. . . . Such an approach to history asks
the learner to understand a sequence of events in relation to the
material logics that produce them.
(255) Other games couple the
procedural rhetoric of material accident to the actual progression of
lived history. In Europe
Universalis,
the player controls a European nation during the colonial period,
from 1492 to 1792.
Play itself develops procedural literacy, good for developing understanding history like Diamond on proximate causes of European conquest.
(255) All told, artifacts like Guns, Germs, and Steel, Civilization, and Europa Universalis suggest that procedural literacy means more than writing computer code; it also comes from interacting with procedural systems themselves, especially procedural systems that make strong ties between the processes in a model and a representational goal—those with strongly argued procedural rhetorics. Otherwise said, we can become procedurally literate through play itself.
Apply picking up specific cultural meanings to hacking older technologies and basic electronics.
(256) By providing a specific point of reference bound to human culture, the toys come equipped with specific cultural meaning as well as abstract processes for substitutions. . . . In so doing, they gain a richer understanding of the individual meanings of cultural markers through experimenting with their hypothetical recombination in circumstances outside their sphere of influence.
Procedural Rhetoric as Procedural
Literacy
(257) The
procedurally literate subject is one who recognizes both the specific
nature of a material concept and
the
abstract rules that underwrite that concept.
Difference between videogames and narrative media is using models like orrery versus descriptions.
(257-258)
To distinguish videogames from narrative media, Heather Chaplin and
Aaron Ruby argue that the former use models, whereas the latter use
descriptions. . . . Models that depict behavior, like an orrery,
facilitate experimentation, a more formal kind of procedural play
where the rules of the mechanical system constrain manipulation of
the device.
(258) Procedural literacy entails the ability to read
and write procedural rhetorics—to craft and understand arguments
mounted through unit operations represented in code. The type of
“reading” and “writing” that form procedural rhetorics asks
the following questions: What are the rules of the system? What is
the significance of these rules (over other rules)? What claims about
the world do these rules make? How do I respond to those
claims?
(259) [David Williamson] Shaffer
gives
the name epistemic
game to
“a process of simulation that preserves the connections between
knowing and doing central to the epistemic frame.”
Beyond epistemic games to critical practice: developing procedural literacy and awareness of biased perspectives of how things work through direct engagement.
(259)
While Shaffer is principally (but not exclusively) interested in
epistemic games as a pedagogical praxis for specific professional
situations, I am equally—if not more—interested in procedural
rhetoric as a critical practice.
(260)
videogame players develop procedural literacy through interacting
with the abstract models of specific real or imagined processes
presented in the games they play. Videogames teach biased
perspectives about how things work. And the way they teach such
perspectives is through procedural rhetorics, which players “read”
through direct engagement and criticism.
9
Values and Aspirations
(261)
Many further argue that private or public school choice will bring
market pressures to bear on a system that suffers due to lack of
competition.
NCLB procedural rhetoric generates social programs enacting conservative optimization for educational reform, being schooled versus educated; parents as complacent citizens manufactured by the bureaucratic market democracy.
(262)
NCLB assumes that the educational system is well conceived and
capable of functioning adequately; the problems emerge from rogue
schools and inadequate teachers. The legislation assumes that making
such groups “accountable” to the system will thus solve the
problem. NCLB identifies an important feature of educational
infrastructures. Classroom environments of all kinds . . . are not
disinterested, bias-free places. Each is part of a larger social,
political or corporate structure, or a combination of these.
(262)
We might summarize the distinction as one of being schooled
versus
educated.
Being schooled means becoming expert in the actual process of
schooling. . . . By contrast, being educated means becoming expert in
human improvement, so as to ratchet up in life itself.
(263) When
schooling takes place in corporations or other enterprises, we
usually call it training.
. . . Conversely, education
has
been tethered unfortunately to the chain of schooling and training.
“Education” derives from the Latin educere,
to lead out. “True” educational systems draw their participants
out of the very systems that support them by helping them see the
undesirable features of those systems.
Consumption
(264)
These arguments [by Laurel] trace a broader trend made most famous by
Louis Althusser,
who cited the education system as the most important example of
“ideological state apparatuses,” state institutions that function
specifically to reproduce the process of production.
Educational games operate general purpose rhetorics, but also can reveal social aspect, as demonstrated by tutor text Mansion Impossible.
(264)
In her Education Arcade talk, Laurel effectively echoes the
sentiments of critics like Gatto and Jackson: schools encourage
students to conform and identify valid knowledge so that they can
continue to ratchet up through the system. It promotes schooling,
not education.
Laurel points out that schools teach hierarchy and consumerism;
schools are necessary in order to release parents into the working
world, where they contribute to the gross domestic product while
taking on greater and greater debt that perpetuates their need to
conform in the role of complacent citizen.
(264) educational games
are procedural rhetorics to advance the function of conceptual or
material systems in general. . . . I understand educational games not
as videogames that end up being used in schools or workplaces, but as
games that use procedural rhetorics to spur consideration about the
aspects of the world they represent.
(264) Let's consider a simple
example. Mansion
Impossible is
a web-based videogame about real-estate investment.
(265) The game
also splits the town into neighborhoods of increasing value.
(266)
This gameplay mechanic is a unit operation for a much more complex
and conceptually abstract principle in real-estate investment:
investors should buy in areas they already know, and should make
acquisitions in neighborhoods that are convenient to them (near work,
near home, on the way to work, etc.).
(266) Of course, Mansion
Impossible is
also a bit esoteric, a web game among a noisy abundance of online
games. Commercial games also mount procedural rhetorics that explore
everyday practice.
Animal Cross simulates condition of debt and consumtion affluenza; design consequence forces asynchronous real time play, although system clock could be fooled.
(267)
Although the GameCube supports simultaneous play with up to four
players, Animal
Crossing only
allows one player at a time. . . . Animal
Crossing binds
the game world to the real world, synchronizing its date and time to
the console clock. . . . Since game time is linked to real time, a
player can conceptualize the game as a part of his daily life rather
than a split out of it.
(267) One of the most
challenging projects in the game is paying off the mortgage on one's
house. . . . Catching fish, hunting for fossils, finding insects, and
doing jobs for other townsfolk all produce income that can be used to
pay off mortgage debt—or to buy carpets, furniture, and objects to
decorate one's house.
(268) Animal
Crossing deploys
a procedural rhetoric about the repetition of mundane work as a
consequence of contemporary material property ideals.
(268) John
de Graaf and others have recently expanded the concept to cover the
feverish drive to acquire more and more debt and material property on
the part of all social classes.
(268)
Animal
Crossing mounts
a procedural rhetoric of debt and consumption that successfully
simulates the condition of affluenza.
(269) Animal
Crossing simulates
the social dynamics of a small town but sidesteps the material
obsession of keeping up with the Joneses. As such, the game servers
as a sandbox for experimenting with the ways one can recombine
personal wealth that is much more abstract than the economics of The
Sims.
Does not preclude coming up with new ways to critically play The Sims.
(270)
Tom Nook [of the game] is a kind of condensation of the corporate
bourgeoisie.
(271-272) Even as the HRA [Happy Room Academy] and
the basement encourage acquisition, the simplicity of rearrangement
in the videogame environment breeds increased deliberation about the
player's need for his virtual possessions. . . . We can think of
Animal
Crossing's
houses as simulations of Japanese gardens more than American
homes—they are perfect when nothing more can be taken out.
Need for virtual possessions exercised in Cow Clicker.
(272) The simulation of seasonal cycles creates a persistent, living
world that is always in flux. . . . The living outdoor world opposes
the dead indoors, where purchased products sit idle and
unchanging.
(272) HRA provides immediate feedback, a new letter
arriving each day. But the wishing well's opinion changes much more
slowly, taking weeks to alter its overall opinion of the town.
Multilevel AI game control by HCA letters and wishing well part of AC's procedural rhetoric, consumer trends and spirituality.
(273)
If the HRA is a unit operation for consumer trends, the wishing well
is a unit operation for spirituality.
(273) Donating to the museum
imposes a difficult decision on the player. . . . The museum forces
the player to balance personal material gain against communal gain. .
. . the animals might enjoy browsing the museum when the player logs
out.
(274) Animal
Crossing successfully
creates identity crises for the player between consumption and
introspection.
(274) The cross-platform tie-ins and licensed
products create a kind of tendril that applies torsion to the game's
rhetorics.
(275) Animal
Crossing can
be seen as a critique of contemporary consumer culture that attempts
to persuade the player to understand both the intoxication of
material acquisition and the subtle pleasures of abstention.
The
Values of Work
(275)
As John Stuart Mill, John Gatto, Brenda Laurel, and others observed,
schools are institutions that prepare young people to become
workers.
(276) By and large, most businesses run in a similar
fashion, with similar corporate hierarchies, policy practices, and
administrative requirements. These practices can be represented in
software. And videogames are becoming an increasingly popular way to
deliver corporate training.
Bogost game for Cold Stone Creamery trains workers to benefit corporation but does expose corporate business model.
(281)
Recalling Michael and Chen's claims that videogames afford new
training opportunities for skills unsuited to classroom or book
learning, Stone
City certainly
improves the difficult process of training portioning in a
traditional environment.
(281) Despite the relative novelty of a
videogame with an ice cream viscosity model, the training outcomes
described above return all benefits to the corporation, not to the
worker.
(281) For the “team member,” the real learning
benefits come in a different form: the level summaries. . . . The
game's procedural rhetoric exposes the corporate business model
itself—a model that does not directly benefit the worker, as is the
case in most low-wage food service jobs.
(282) The Cold Stone
Creamery team member and the Animal
Crossing resident
both interrogate procedural rhetorics about consumption. These
players interact with procedural arguments about the situations that
structure their daily lives, and engagement with those arguments
allows them to orient their actions and attitudes in conscious
support or opposition.
Morality and Faith
(283-284)
If we concede that videogames in the abstract have not been shown
convincingly to “turn an otherwise normal person into a killer,”
how does such a concession affect claims about the impact of
procedural rhetorics on “positive” real-world action like
politics, health, consumption, and the other topics I have tried to
address in this book? For procedural rhetorics to influence the world
beyond the boundaries of the television screen and the computer
monitor, clearly, we must admit that videogames facilitate actual
persuasion, not just simulated persuasion.
(285-286) But as a
simulation of morality, Shadow
and
its cousins enforce allegorical morality, one in which good and evil
are embodied in a material form and overloaded for moralistic effect.
Just as Grand
Theft Auto: San Andreas
avoids
specifying class relations between the player character and
individual NPCs, so Shadow
and
Fable
avoid
specifying moral relations between the player character and
individual gestures within the environment.
(287) One can embrace
or reject America's
Army based
on political belief; one must play Deus
Ex differently
to accommodate multiple moral compasses.
(287) The two games offer
an instructive lesson on procedural rhetoric and morality. On the one
hand, videogames can represent ethical doubt through logics that
disrupt movement along one moral register with orthogonal movement
along another. On the other hand, videogames can represent ethical
positions through logics that enforce player behavior along a
particular moral register.
(287) It is surprising that the latter
strategy has not found more use in games conceived to support stable
moral systems, such as those of organized religion.
(289)
Interestingly, fifteen years after Wisdom Tree's original foray into
religious games, not much has changed.
(289) One of the more
remarkable attempts at procedural religion in a game is Left
Behind: Eternal Forces,
a real-time strategy game that integrates religious ritual into
gameplay.
Interesting to think of target markets for future games as the elderly, who do not need to learn how to live well but genuinely wish to be entertained.
(292) The absence of procedural rhetorics in religious games recalls the distinction between schooling and education. Just as schooling affirms the values of existing institutions rather than challenging old ideas with new ones, ethical and religious simulations affirm the existence of moral predicament and fiath as structures in the world. But they do little to disrupt existing moral and belief systems or to represent the function of desirable (or undesirable) systems rather than affirmations of the mere reality of morality and faith as concepts in the world. This subject remains an open territory for videogames of the future.
10
Exercise
(294)
To understand how games can change attitudes about physical fitness,
we must interrogate the procedural rhetorics in exergames, not just
the short-term outcomes of individual successes. To understand these
recent games, it is useful to explore physical input games from the
last several decades.
The
Prehistory of Exergaming
(295)
This physical engagement with the arcade cabinet has its origin in
pinball machines popular before and after World War II.
Pinball and upright videogames, as well as their location, involved more bodily movement than home consoles before explicitly designed exergames.
(295) Apart from less common cocktail-style arcade cabinets, gamers of the coinop era played in a fully upright position; playing a particularly successful round of even a standard space shooter like Galaxian might require a full half-hour of standing up and jostling the cabinet vigorously. . . . For kids and teens of the late 1970s and early '80s, playing videogames implied a brisk walk or ride to the local convenience store, mall, or arcade.
Running
(296)
Among the early exergames for Foot Craz and Power Pad, the vast
majority adapted the core game mechanic of Track
& Field,
replacing fingers with feet.
(298) Games that use the sprinting
rhetoric as their primary motivation for exercise simply borrow the
model “button-mashing for sprinting” and adapt it to the player's
feet.
(298) Although it is tempting to assume that such design is
rudimentary and a function of experimentation with new input devices,
even the most recent Olympic sports game, Athens
2004 for
PS2 (played with the dance pad), uses an identical procedural
rhetoric.
Agility
(300)
The most unusual of physical-input games to deploy procedural agility
is Street
Cop,
another NES Power Pad game. In Street
Cop,
the player takes the role of a police officer on the beat, looking
for crooks and hoodlums.
(303) Nothing prevents a player from
using a DDR-style dance pad as standard input for the PlayStation or
Xbox. The pad provides four-direction control, and at least two
button controls. Playing a game like Gran
Turismo on
the dance pad produces a sensation much like surfing.
Reflex
(303)
Games that require physical input based on time-sensitive responses
operationalize the rapid response, engendering a procedural rhetoric
of reflex.
Training
(305)
Unlike all the other games previously discussed, Dance
Aerobics did
not attempt to turn the input device into transparent window through
which the player interacts with the game. Instead, the game makes it
very clear that the Power Pad served as a measurement device for the
player's progress.
(305-306) But the game enforces precise sensor
presses as an extremely rudimentary unit operation for aerobic
training. . . . This kind of “soft” feedback is impossible in
Dance
Aerobics,
since the game can get only rudimentary feedback from the
player—digital sensor touches on the Power Pad.
(306) The game
could be construed to have a reflex rhetoric; the player is required
to touch specific sensors given a particular time horizon. But unlike
Video
Jogger or
Eggsplode,
Dance
Aerobics relies
on an external cultural referent rather than an abstract system to
structure its rules: the personal trainer.
(307) Despite the
massive innovations in computer technology during the twenty years
since Dance
Aerobics,
control inputs have remained largely the same: game consoles are
capable of detecting digital button pushes and, on more recent
consoles, levels of pressure on analog control sticks.
Now Wii controller and video tracking systems.
(309)
But games like Dance
Aerobics and
Yourself!
Fitness still
rely on a traditional rhetoric of personal exercise: the subject of
the exercise must muster internal motivation to begin, pursue, and
continue the exercise regimen. Both games attempt to improve the
player's success in individual aerobic sessions, and the latter
strives to encourage players toward regular exercise. Yet both also
assume traditional, somewhat tired methods of promoting physical
activity. Yourself!
Fitness recreates
the form of a personal trainer, rather than operationalizing what one
does.
(309)
A simple example of a generalized procedural trainer is Short
Order,
a game bundled with Eggsplode
for
the Power Pad. Short
Order is
a cross between the playground game hopscotch and the classic arcade
game Burgertime.
(310)
Dance Dance
Revolution,
the darling of exergaming with which I began this chapter, offers a
sophisticated example of a training rhetoric. To use Yourself!
Fitness effectively,
the player must already be self-motivated to start and continue a
fitness regimen. But DDR produces exercise as an emergent outcome of
play itself.
(311) Unlike Yourself!
Fitness,
in which Maya knows nothing about the player's actions, DDR generates
its verbal feedback procedurally based on the player's global energy
level and individual combo patterns.
(311) By providing succinct,
motivational feedback with each physical gesture, DDR grafts the
personal trainer directly onto the player's perception. One might
compare DDR to a lightweight heads-up display for joggers that would
project proper footfalls onto the pavement and then provide immediate
constructive feedback on th runner's pace and form.
(314) The
strength of games like DDR lies precisely in their ability to
engender physical activity through play without demanding the player
to adopt a complex understanding of fitness.
Limits
of the Living Room
(314)
An analysis would be incomplete without considering the environment
in which these games are played in the first place. . . . Thus the
living room is generally an inactive, static space with large, heavy
furniture dividing a large, open space into many smaller, closed
spaces.
(314) Each and every one of the exergames discussed here
requires considerable physical space for successful, safe play.
(315)
The infeasibility of such devices cannot be taken for granted in an
analysis of exergaming.
(315) Logistical and technical limitations
also stand in the way of exergame play.
(315) Playing these
exergames on a personal computer is possible, but fraught with equal
if not greater challenges.
(316) For better or worse, the large
majority of suburban U.S. homes with the time and money to afford
videogame consoles and exergaming software and hardware are simply
not designed to support it; physical exertion is something relegated
to the neighborhood sidewalk, the local gym, or, more commonly,
nowhere at all.
(316) Exergames reveal the incongruence of work
and exercise or leisure, and the prevalence of the ideological
structures that push us to work more and move less.
11
Purposes
of Persuasion
(317)
But precisely how do we know if and when a procedural “statement”
has persuaded someone?
(318-319) Videogames—especially serious
games—have been implicated in a similar logic of accountablility. .
. . Cult veneration is often characterized as daft or even dangerous,
even if those in the mainstream pursue similar activities with equal
zeal. Commercial games thus foreclose any judgment save that of the
market. And market numbers are literally counted and compared, just
like jury votes or ballots.
(319) Serious games impose a distinct
but similar strategy to determine their success. In the case of the
subject ares I have discussed in the previous chapters—politics,
advertising, and learning—each has its own logic that stands in for
the marketplace.
(320) If big business is measured by the amount
of money it brings in, and if the logics of institutions like
government and education take the place of capital in serious games,
then the latter must measure success by the amount of reinforcement a
game generates for a sponsoring institution.
Success measurement of serious games tied to market logic, too.
(321)
Citing Clark C. Abt's original 1970 notion of serious games, Michael
and Chen adopt the former's criteria for judging the “usefulness”
of such a game: active involvement and stimulation of all players;
sufficient realism to convey the essential truths of the simulation;
clarity of consequences and their causes both in rules and gameplay;
repeatability and reliability of the entire process. The first and
last criteria are the most telling. To be useful, a serious game must
stimulate and involve all
players,
not merely a subset of players. . . . In other words, the gameplay
session must maintain a tight coupling with the institution's
existing processes, so that its support of those processes is
ensured.
(322) Inevitably, serious games depend on accountability
to authorities.
Assessment
(323)
It is worth noting that assessment
has
another, related meaning: that of valuation in general and taxation
in particular.
(323) Assessment is thus fundamentally related to
material exchange and economic return.
(323) In most cases,
political, corporate, and educational institutions rely on one basic
form of assessment, derived directly from the estimation of monetary
value for taxation: numerical measurement. This goal motivates
Michael and Chen's recommendation that developers store the details
of players' every choice and action.
Numerical measurement at the heart of assessment.
(325) When applied to videogames, numerical assessment seeks to
account for player gestures, immediately and indelibly, in the
service of the sponsoring agency's known and predefined goals. . . .
When compared with other, known methods for achieving the same
result, one can determine the game's return on investment, the
relative cost benefit of achieving the desired results.
(325)
Likewise, in-game ad network Massive has partnered with metrics firm
Nielsen to create measurement tools for in-game ad placements.
(326)
Other games attempt to account for their success through
psychological or physiological metrics.
(326) But as I have
argued, procedural rhetorics can also challenge the situations that
contain them, exposing the logic of their operations and opening the
possibility for new configurations. Accounting for such results is
impossible from within the framework of the system a procedural
rhetoric hopes to question; the currency of such a system is no
longer valid. If we want to know how persuasive games persuade, we
need to find another model.
Deliberation
(327-328)
While many bloggers weighed in on their love, hate, or ambivalence
for the game [The
Howard Dean for Iowa Game],
others interrogated its rules and attempted to relate those rules to
the meaning of the campaign. . . . Such is the procedural rhetoric of
politics: one amasses supporters in support of nothing more than
support itself. Political justice becomes, in Alain Badiou's words,
“the harmonization of the interplay of interests.”
(329) The
real promise of Thomas's response to the game's argument would come
from discursive, not numerical analysis.
Such as this book and the discourse network it empowers, rhetoric mustering deliberation, for example Christian homily.
(329-330) There are precedents for styles of rhetoric that muster
deliberation as evidence of persuasion. Modes of Judeo-Christian
rhetoric outside of missionary sermon are less easily compared to the
classical modes of evidence. . . . Hermeneutics helps the parishioner
specify the general homiletic rule to his particular situation.
(330)
Unlike classical persuasion, homily enforces a set of constraints—one
would not be wrong to call them rules—that are intended to
structure thought and action for the object of the persuasion. Homily
itself is verbal, not procedural, but nevertheless a procedural
system founds its verbal rhetoric—in this case the system of belief
delineated in scripture.
(331) Badiou's notion of fidelity is
modeled after amorous relations, not religious faith. . . . The
gesture that establishes a situation, what Badiou calls the
count-as-one and which I have called a unit operation, sets the rules
for a fidelity. . . . Fidelity helps us understand the uniqueness of
Badiou's concept of the event; the event is not an isolated instance,
but rather is something that always subsumes its participants.
Badiou set-theoretical ontology to the rescue: fidelity, event, situation, subject, and especially the evental site, relating to simulation fever.
(331) Badiou reserves the name subject
for
beings transformed by an event into a relationship of fidelity. . . .
Within Badiou's vocabulary, we might then argue that procedural
rhetorics make claims about the structure of a situation, in the
hopes of inspiring a disruptive event. . . . Badiou articulates a
trace of this potential event within the configuration of a
situation, which be names the evental site.
(332)
The evental site takes on special status in relation to the
situation. It is the place where “radical innovation” emerges.
Actually changing the situation requires an event, but motivated
recognition of the situation's structure can take place at the
evental site. Procedural rhetorics couple particularly well with
Badiou's set-theoretical ontology.
(332) Persuasive games expose
the logic of situations in an attempt to draw players' attention to
an evental site and encourage them to problematize the
situation.
(332-333) Previously, I have argued that videogames
represent in the gap between procedural representation and individual
subjectivity. The disparity between the simulation and the player's
understanding of the source system it models creates a crisis in the
player; I named this crisis simulation
fever,
a madness through which an interrogation of the rules that drive both
systems begins.
(333) Procedural rhetoric also produces simulation
fever. . . . Persuasion is related to the player's ability to see and
understand the simulation author's implicit or explicit claims about
the logic of the situation represented.
Conversations
(333-334)
But criticism requires formal discourse, often limiting itself to the
academic and cultural elite. More generally, persuasive games can
produce discourse in the general sense, like the blog conversations
that cropped up around the Dean game.
(335) The ability for a
community to consider, refine, revise, and reinvent itself bears
fruit for advertisers only if such opinions found a large enough
collective to consume media-placed messages. Even a focus on niche
markets rallies around the same logic; tools like blog advertising or
search keyword networks simply replicate mass-market media
advertising on a smaller scale.
Conversation systems built into or around games is where deliberation often takes place, since not yet built into game logic itself: imagine my Macy Conferences game.
(336)
Other researchers have attempted to build conversation systems
directly into their educational games.
(337)
Social scientists may not that such conversations could be measured
using qualitative analysis.
(337) But qualitative research too
relies on an economy of return. . . . The common use of qualitative
research in general and ethnography in particular among
anthropologists helps justify their particular interest in
characterizing the general operation of social and cultural systems.
. . . Based on ethnography, researchers draw conclusions that neatly
tie up their observations. A place for every social gesture, and
every gesture in its place.
(338) Philosophy has offered numerous
meditations on the vicious economic cycle. Jacques Derrida
argued that the true gift confounds economics because it neither
demands nor expects recompense. . . . Even if a procedural rhetoric
products such intense simulation fever around an evental site that an
event erupts, the event itself can never understand its consequences.
Derrida dissemination.
(338) Derrida drew a connection between the gift and what he called dissemination, a replacement for communication that admits that the source of a message has no certain knowledge about its successful delivery.
(339) But if procedural rhetorics challenge the logics of structures that contain them, then the only way to address their success is through transformation.
Humanities appeal of persuasive games tracing procedural construction of subjectivity.
(339-340) Humanistic approaches to cultural artifacts could be seen to trace the procedural construction of human subjectivity—the interlocking logics, histories, and cultural influences recent and past that drive our perspectives on new challenges. As the name suggests, the humanities help us understand what it means to be human, no matter the contingencies of profession, economics, or current affairs.
Historical scale of meaning suggests games may be played and studied in the distant future, just as other humanities artifacts: consider what may be done after all copyrights expire, so that black boxes can be opened to explore both internal workings and iterative development processes. Reverse fetishism, combine with sourcery, by focusing on humanities components of videogames.
(340) Most importantly, these observations take place over time. In
part, they take place over the time of an individual's life. . . .
The videogames we make and play today may have meaning for us now,
but they also defer that meaning for future players, who will
experience these artifacts in different contexts. Meaning takes place
on the historical scale.
(340) As players of videogames and other
computational artifacts, we should recognize procedural rhetoric as a
new way to interrogate our world, to comment on it, to disrupt and
challenge it. As creators and players of videogames, we must be
conscious of the procedural claims we make, why we make them, and
what kind of social fabric we hope to cultivate through the processes
we unleash on the world. Despite the computers that host them,
despite the futuristic and mechanical fictional worlds they often
render, videogames are not expressions of the machine. They are
expressions of being human. And the logics that drive our games make
claims about who we are, how our world functions, and what we want it
to become.
Bogost, Ian. Persuasive Games: The Expressive Power of Videogames. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2007. Print.