Tuesday, 26 August 2014

Historiography, Critical Thinking and Gaming Discussions

Over the past couple weeks; discussions surrounding gaming have been rather heated involving certain people and their practice.  Gaming, like other forms of leisure and art, finds itself having very strong opinions one way or the other with a limited central representation.  As it has been discussed for many generations; we associate by what we exclude and this carries onto hot-button topics not just in gaming; but in politics and social status, economics and welfare, artistic forms and interpretation, and so on and so forth.  That being said, I’m not too interested in this debate and it would do this blog a disservice to ‘pick a side’.  Because of this, we’re going to review why people may have a particular opinion and the potential weight to said opinion.  In history, this comes under the discussion of Historiography. 

Historiography is the discussion of the opinions behind an event and the correlation between them.  Historians naturally find themselves writing about important events (wars, political premierships, etc.) and over time a group of people will have similar opinions.  This is known as a school of thought and there are a number of factors behind this.  To give an example we’re going to briefly review the Cold War and its Historiography.

The Cold War was a significant event after WW2 that shaped world events for a course of 40-50 years (that to some extent still do) between Russia and the USA.  Throughout the Cold War there were 3-4 schools of thought that changed for a number of reasons:

1 – Traditional / Orthodox.  Coming from American historians starting in the 1950s, this view was naturally a pro-American viewpoint.  It discussed how America was in the right and it was protecting the world against the Russians and communism.  Such things discussed are the domino theory and the iron curtain. 

2 – Soviet / Socialist.  The opposite view coming from Russian historians of the same era, this was a pro-Russia viewpoint.  It discussed how Russia was treated unfairly and was a country on defence, looking out for its people.  Such things discussed are the capitalist vs. communist conflict and America’s missile bases in Europe. 

3 – Revisionist.  The alternative view coming from American historians in the 1960s.  This decade brought the ‘peace not war’ mentality and the Vietnam War; a conflict that caused a split opinion on the home front.  It looks to critique the traditional view and consider America’s own mishaps.  Historians of this school of thought tended to have a ‘left-wing’ mind-set although not exclusively. 

4 – Post Revisionist.  There are some differences of opinion to this school of thought, but for this I’ll be looking at the later soviet period and its policies.  Gorbachev, known as the reformer, created the policy of Glasnost (openness) in the 1980s to allow greater freedom of information and less censorship.  Historians of many backgrounds (not just American / Russian) now had a wealth of information to review and produce new interpretations. 

So as you can see, many different factors can come into play when we see someone’s opinion.  We can pair this with Critical Thinking to hypothetically break apart someone’s viewpoint to see what weight we can give them.  In Critical Thinking, we want to analyse things like corroboration, vested interests (bias), data, tone, body language, etc.  The last two are a bit more difficult to discuss on the internet but it’s something to consider.  So, let’s try and create a hypothetical example:

“Are you pro or anti <insert topic here>”

Person X is pro-topic

Person Y is also pro-topic

Person Z is anti-topic

Person X’s previous posts on the subject have been pro-topic as well as their friends.  They fit into a school of thought that believes in said topic.  They may also be other factors like agreeing in association (the friends are together because of this); personal background (parents / community may have this opinion); or dissociation (person X disagrees with someone of the anti-topic viewpoint).

Person Y’s post on the matter mentions a number of resources to back up their viewpoint.  This person is using corroboration to give weight to their view.  That being said, it depends on the validity of said resources and whether they have any particular vested interests.  Like with X, Y may also have some of the traits mentioned above. 

Person Z’s post originally discusses the topic but moves to challenge X and Y.  This person can look to critique the resources or the association concept between them to try and review why they may have the same opinion.  The challenge moves away from the topic so at this point the subjects of tone and body language come into play to see what language they use and what particular viewpoint they’re trying to refer to. 

This of course is a limited example and I’d ask that you do some further reading into the subject of critical thinking.  I should stress that this doesn’t intend to pursue anything but the discussion of ‘why’ which interests me most.  You could see this as a personal reflection and consider where you sit on certain topics and why.  Was it because of a particular news story on the matter, a friend’s mention of it, your own morals related to your upbringing, etc?  

I hope you find this discussion interesting.  Next time, I want to take fragments of this subject into the world of Architecture as we debate ‘form vs. function’ and the concept of Kitsch.  

Friday, 22 August 2014

Self-assessment: mono-gaming vs. 'multi'-gaming and general thoughts

A couple months ago I attempted to start a new rule for my gaming time; to allow time to play something new every day regardless of platform for at least 15 minutes.  The reason behind this was a personal drive to try new games coming out, try genres that I wouldn’t usually touch and break the mono-game mentality. 

For those that aren’t aware of the term, mono-gamer/ing relates to the focus of your gaming time on a single game.  Usual examples of this include competitive games (like Dota, LoL, Starcraft 2, CounterStrike, Call of Duty) and social games like MMO’s (World of Warcraft, Eve online, Guild Wars 2) or Facebook games (Farmville).  My experience of mono-gaming has featured most of these titles (in short wow->hon->dota2->gw2) and my time was really enjoyable.  The thing is everyone has a point (which they may have not experienced yet) where they start to consider the amount of time one has invested into a game and what other things you could be doing.  People have different reactions to it, some will go to the polar opposite type of game / hobby whereas others will find something similar, but the sentiment is usually the same. 

So, a couple months ago I stopped playing Guild Wars 2 (MMORPG) and found myself not really knowing what to do with my free time.  What I ended up doing was going back to Warframe (F2P shooter) and this started to fulfil the allotted time.  The thing is, playing one single game over all others has become less of an enticing action to take as more varied games have come out and I’ve got the financial backing to try out games.  The steam summer sale was kind of a catalyst for this, but since then I’ve been playing lots of different games.  These games include Don’t Starve (survival), Path of Exile (dungeon crawler), Electronic Superjoy (platformer), Hawken (mech shooter), Rogue Legacy (rogue-like), Sanctum TD (tower defence), Transistor (action-RPG), The Stanley Parable (non-specific), and many more.  As well as this, I’ve been trying more mobile games and seeing what the platform can create unique to the tech. 

While I’ve been doing this, there has been only short bursts of time where I’ve stuck to my ‘try something new every day’, but I feel that I’ve fit into a nice happy medium of new-to-old game time investment.  For example, today I tried Max Gentlemen for 20 minutes but played Warframe for 5 hours.  Trying new experiences is all good in getting you thinking about new experiences and the sorts, but it’s reasonable to have a core-set of titles that you can enjoy irrelevant to context.  That being said, this is a mentality I’ve tried to take on in other interests I have both on and offline. 

In Architecture, I was aligned to a specific mind-set for a long period of time which dictated my thoughts on the medium.  Heidegger theory, Brutalism design era and the architect Tadao Ando were my go-to topics for 2-3 years during university; but moving from architecture to history allowing me to express my thoughts in lots of different ways (see intro to this blog) and improve my own knowledge and interest.  My career path possibilities have expanded due to being more open to different areas of the heritage sector beyond archiving / curating even to the point of considering the possibility of freelance / self-employed status. 


Anyway, I was just thinking this over after finishing my Warframe session tonight and wanted to write it down.  It can sometimes be good to write about your thoughts to allow you to make more sense of what you think / how you want to implement something.  Take the time to think about your own gaming habits and how it fits into other facets of your life.  You may find it interesting = )

Wednesday, 20 August 2014

Rogue-likes and Japanese Architecture

Like many people, I enjoy rogue-likes and dungeon crawlers.  The mix of loot, exploration and a possibility of the game-ending death create an enjoyable experience.  For me this started with Dungeons of Dredmor; one of the more recent examples of the traditional rogue-like formula which I played a lot in my second year at uni.  As well as experiencing my first rogue-like, I was learning about Japanese architecture and today here I am mashing the two together like some Frankenstein’s monster. 

Japanese design (like other nations) is connected to its culture and heritage; with particular mention of Shinto-Buddhism and its mythology of ‘balance’.  In Japanese architecture, one of the tenants of design is ‘symmetrical design within asymmetrical concepts’ or something along those lines.  The delivery system for this is most commonly the tatami mat; a straw mat roughly 900x1800 (mm +/- 10%) used to plan floor layouts.  Examples of this which I particularly like are traditional farmhouses which use the mats and different height levels to make cool looking pieces.  So, by taking this philosophy of design one can see some similarities in the spotlight. 

Rogue-likes and dungeon crawlers (Torchlight 2 being my favourite of the later) work on a creation of random maps within a catalogue of possible fragments pieced together.  When it all comes together (combined with a horde of goblins and loot bags) it creates the whole package, much like the tatami mats and houses under the Shinto theory of balance.  Every game and every player experiencing the genre can be given the same building blocks but create their own adventure and explore their own world. 
There are some games that do this while applying their own design flourishes which I feel are worth discussing.  The 2d-castlevania rogue-like ‘Rogue Legacy’ uses these tenants alongside distinct environments that have their own sets of pieces like traps, platform formations and general obstacles.  Beyond the rogue-likes, there are other genre’s that also take this design theory, like Warframe (which I’ll look to do a talk on at a later date) that breaks down the design room by room.  Next time you look to play a game (particularly a rogue-like or dungeon crawler) consider this design philosophy and where the pieces maybe fitting together.  The literal pieces will be at door-frames and corridors, but maybe some pieces will be a bit harder to define. 

As I mentioned in my introduction, I believe architecture and video games have an interesting connection that can be drawn if one takes a minute to have a look.  To use a ‘correct’ term you’d probably say transformative work but I feel that this blog is trying to have a bit of fun exploring the medium. 



I hope this provides some thought and I look forward to writing more in-depth pieces in the future.  

References:
*Dungeons of Dredmor, Gaslamp Games, July 2011
*Torchlight 2, Runic Games, September 2012
*Rogue Legacy, Cellar Door Games, June 2013
*Warframe, Digital Extremes, October 2012 (ongoing)
*Oliver, P. Dwellings, Phaidon, London. (2007)

My thoughts on Firefall

Game: Firefall
Genre: MMO (shooter)
Platform: PC (Steam / game-launcher)
Playtime: 40 hours
Level Attained: 37/40
Cost: Free to play
Personal Microtransactions: £0

Firefall is an interesting beast that has had a long development time; particularly for myself first experiencing it back in late 2011 as a closed beta state. Since then it has changed its mechanics, economics and progressions but for the sake of this discussion we’ll be focusing on the recent release of 29th July 2014 and the brief early access I experienced as a former beta tester.

Firefall is a mmo-shooter brought from Red 5 studios which allows the player to experience a quasi post-apoc south America in a redeveloping world. The player is introduced to a small scale player customisation and tutorial before taking charge of a powered battleframe. These frames fit into similar rpg archetypes that you may of seen before (tanks, damage dealers, healers, etc), but due to shooting mechanics these ‘classes’ have some enjoyable traits to them. During my playtime, I experienced each archetype but it was the assault battleframe that I enjoyed most of my time with.

The assault battleframe is a mid-range damaging class that has an affiliation with movement based skills and minor support. Although all frames are given decent jump heights and jet boosters for traversing the environment, it was the assault frame made me feel the most free. Scaling a cliff-face with my jets and at the last second of energy kick in the afterburners onwards to my next objective granted me a big smile. On top of these skills, the frame’s main weapon (a plasma canon) felt like a combination of the unreal tournament rocket launcher and flak canon requiring me to lead the target and create some fun air-raid style attacks. Against the more traditional hit-scan weapons like the dreadnought minigun and biotech biorifle, the plasma canon gave me more enjoyment and reinforced my desire to play the assault class.

Alongside each frame’s signature primary weapon, each player gets a secondary weapon that provides a supportive boost in times of limited ammo. The secondary weapons feature a more typical shooter arsenal of assault rifles, sub-machine guns, shotguns, burst rifles and grenade launchers which aren’t locked to specific frames. In my experience, I used each of these types, but it was the AR that gave me the most satisfaction when out of primary ammunition or not willing to waste shots on minor enemies. Regardless of my earlier comment on hit-scan weapons, I felt it was a suitable additional to my playstyle.

Over the past couple years, one of the most used phrases in mmo’s has been ‘dynamic content’ and Firefall is one to follow this mentality. Around the playable environment, I experienced a number of missions that took on-the-spot objectives to receive a selection of rewards from xp, currency and minor items of interest. The tasks varied from defend point x, collect x of an item, wave-based attacks and named minion assassinates to name a few. These have been enjoyable, although I have felt that their density has greatly reduced outside of the first area of engagement. In the early levels, I found myself going from event a b c naturally whereas later on it has become a lot more traditional and linear. That being said, the higher levelled environments have featured much larger scaled events that brought my attention back into focus, with particular noting of the OCT event in Sertao. This event sees the defense of a control point against one of the game’s largest enemy factions (the Chosen) featuring a multi-stage co-operative task of the players in the area. Destroying the large enemy ships (or Darkslips) with an orbital canon targeted via the effort of the players gave me a similar feeling to games like Guild War 2 and its world bosses. On a slightly small scale, there are also melding tornadoes which feature a 2-phase group event. The Players are tasked with destroying the tornado’s shields to create a portal to its dimension, which turns into a ‘goldrush’ style lootgrab where you judge how long you can stay until the portal implodes on itself and you meet an untidy end.

Much like my GW2 reference earlier, this game does also feature traditional quests in two ways. Firstly, there is a story to follow regarding you (the pilot Ares 3-5) and the large conflict with the chosen which unlocks as you level. Although these missions feature a collection of the tasks mentioned in the dynamic event section above, they do go to some lengths to make them feel in context with the story mission. For me however, these missions didn’t really grab me until #6-8 where the missions became much bigger and things like the verticality of levels were considered to a greater aspect. This may be due to my own interests in the movement mechanics but this is the feeling that I got.

The other quest system were the Ares job boards that are dotted around each larger settlement in the environment in set level brackets. This felt very traditional-mmo with the directed path of missions around a central point until the next area’s missions have been accessed via a breadcrumb ‘priority’ mission. Like with the other content, they feature a mixed-bag of kill / defend / grab / escort objectives which the last one has received much dislike from players I’ve experienced in-game. I can understand their viewpoint as the pathing and non-preservation of some targets become frustrating at times, but it is a larger application of these quests that grabbed one of my few negatives of this game.

In many games, particularly those that follow traditional mmo questing, each area is given its own narrative to give context around quests involving that location. For example, in wow a cave maybe home to a gnoll or murlock group and quests involving this cave can be things like “kill x or y to clear the cave” or “recover stolen property cause they’re thieves”. In Firefall when you accept an Ares mission from a board, each objective (beyond the stationary story npcs relevant to the mission) is spawned in a random location whether it is a random camp / cave / roadside area / etc. There has been a number of times when I will be roaming the world and a set of diggers and boxes will spawn right in front of me because someone is doing the relevant mission. This is a jarring experience and it pulls me out of the world whenever I see it knowing that it’s being conjured up by the game’s software not the world itself. Dynamic content allows a varied mixture of stuff to happen in similar locations but for this it makes the world less enticing to explore when very few locations have at least a minor narrative within it.

Even though its world can pull me out of the experience sometimes, something that has got me invested is its crafting system and approach to gearing your character. As I mentioned earlier, you can get weapons and abilities for your frame, but these pieces can be further augmented through the use of mods. Although these pieces can be acquired from all the methods of play mentioned above, to get a tailored build, one will most likely look to craft a loadout. How Firefall’s craft system works is that it’s a progressive system designed to build as you experience the game. As you play, you’ll receive a number of trash items that won’t be of use or undermine current gear. Although items can be sold on an auction house you can also salvage the gear for currency, materials and research points. The research points are used with crystallite to uncover new patterns and the resources are used to craft said patterns. Most patterns use a couple common resources, but to access the higher quality stuff you’re gonna be wanting to hunt the rare types of enemies found in the world. Researching alongside levelling my assault frame, I’ve been able to grab new weapons, skills and mods as I level and it feels like an extension of my character itself. The other thing I like about it is that it gives clear goals to attain, something which the traditional rng-based loot-roll environment was a frustrating experience in my younger days of raiding.

To finish up, one must address the elephant in the room when viewing free to play titles, in its economy and cash shops. I look to discuss this in more detail at a later date, but the general census of free to play discussion is the fairness of these titles given to the free player versus a paying one. The spectrum ranges from ‘pay to win’ items to ‘cosmetic only’ at a rough scale, but Firefall fits slightly leaning towards the item purchase; with unlocking advance frames early with pilot tokens, modes of transportation like vehicles and gliders, and vip access for faster levelling. I haven’t got a proper measure of this market as of yet, but the majority of these items can be acquired from playing the game, whether it be by maxing a basic frame to 40 (the current level cap), crafting, or converting in game currency to the paid currency at a market-control player economy (buy order and sell system similar to GW2). In my experience there has been mixed opinions on the matter, but personally I feel that in my play there hasn’t been a time where I’ve felt like a ‘second class citizen’ due to my ‘non-purchase’ status and I don’t feel a desire to change that.

Overall, Firefall is an interesting concept in the mmo world trying to bring alternative genre’s into the space. I commend its existence but I feel that its kinda a retrospective of the mmo as a genre. Maybe the genre has inherent flaws, but I’d like to see what Red 5 studios can do with this title looking to the future. If you enjoy third / first person shooters and are looking for a game to play with friends (and if your wallet like mine isn’t suitable for many game purchases currently) you may find some enjoyment from this title. Whether you find 5 minutes or 500 hours play out of this game I think it’s worth just having a little go, particularly with big titles not showing up for another couple months.

Friday, 15 August 2014

Gaming Through Architecture

(post #2 of the uploaded website)

This may seem like an odd paring at first glance but hopefully i’ll explain some method behind the madness in the coming sentences. Like many people, I enjoy playing video games and experiencing the wide range of entertainment in this medium. Over the last 4-5 years however, this has grown further into a interest to promote video games in a better light; opening the medium up to such topics as education, social considerations, drama, etc. This has been heavily influenced by the web series “Extra Credits” by Daniel Floyd and James Portnow, which has grown from a small weekly discussion on games into a large group of invested individuals with their tagline of “because games matter”. What made this series special in my view was that the presenters weren’t only discussing views from a designer point of view; giving precedence to the arts, humanities and scientific considerations. Quite appropriately I was starting to open the world of architecture into a new light soon after watching these early episodes.

My second year at university featured a small book called “What is Architecture?” which opened my mind to countless possibilities beyond bricks and mortar. With such theorists as Heidegger, Leach, Lyotard and Certeau asking the question of said book title, I viewed my environment (both real and virtual) through different ideas and possibilities. That being said, these years didn’t really make the strong connection that I’m investigating now due to my gaming habits at the time. I played a significant amount of WoW (World of Warcraft) and HoN (Heroes of Newerth) from a quasi-competitive point-of-view and as such wasn’t thinking about my actions beyond performance of play. However, I hope to talk about both genre’s in a future post….

Getting back to the crux of today’s point, it started to come along only recently some two years ago. I had changed from architecture to history due to a number of personal reasons and found myself alot more time to pursue personal interests. Initially, this was more gaming, but didn’t take long to slow down and get me thinking. My starting point was ‘combient’ architecture (or at least what I’ve thought it to be defined as) being the discussion of architecture through the use of technology. A rough example discussed in a past lecture was ‘Second Life’ but at this point I was more interested in the literal interpretation that something like ‘Minecraft’ gave, with its digital Lego feel. That being said, a great deal of people have built wondrous pieces in Minecraft with the care and attention on both a individual and group level which in this context constitute architecture; it just wasn’t really letting me feel like when I read “What is Architecture?”. I needed a way to discuss these views and so then I turned to the real world and started talking.

In my last year of university, I found myself with a new set of housemates. One of new guy’s was a first year architect who enjoyed designing buildings and playing games. We got on well and chat quite a bit about games we were playing. One evening when discussing the medium, we came onto the topic of architectural theory and how to interpret it. After umming and erring through a couple ideas, I started to use video games as ways to discuss Certeau (the definition of space and place within architecture) and we got to understanding of the subject. I enjoyed this alot, possibly owing to the hour or so conversation it entailed, but it got me talking about it. Over the period of that year, we spent time ever so often having similar talks which became the inspiration for producing a web series on the connection.

As discussed in the introduction however, its been a long time coming and I hope to get talking more about this odd combination in an ever growing medium. (That being said, i’m gonna do a little review on a game I’ve been playing next so it’ll be a slow but steady pace).




Extra Credits – http://www.youtube.com/user/ExtraCredits or http://www.extra-credits.net
“What is Architecture?” Ballantyne, A .(2002). Routledge, London.

Introductions

(just as a little note, post #1 and #2 are from a website I tried to setup and kept having missing words...I hope for this to be more suitable)

 …and so this has been a long time coming.

Since I finished university last year, I’ve wanted to produce a video series looking at video games through the concept of architectural theory (a subject I’ve studied for the past 5 years). To do this I was looking to build a new PC to accommodate the power required for video editing and the sorts, but this wasn’t to be the case. My desire to pursue a career in the arts and heritage sector has been a slow but steady process; with the by-product being having a limited income for leisure spending. After discussing the idea with a number of people, it has come to my attention that I should stop waiting for the hardware and just go with a simpler start-up to get my ideas rolling.

In future I hope that this could be a additional piece to elaborate on video media like other well-known blogs or video discussion pieces. The last year I’ve been starting up projects in RL and the biggest lesson in that time is just get going with it. I’m not sure on the consistency of posts or the ratio of topic / review / journal-esc as that will come with time; but I hope that to those who read may find what I’ve written interesting. So, as I hover over the publish button its time to actually get this idea rolling in some incarnation : )

Here’s to the uncertainty of the future !