Self-Reflection: Finding Space Within Place

Over the past week, I have had my house to myself much to my own happiness.  After leaving university and going through the process of getting employment beyond small-scale commissions, I haven’t been able to fund my own flat which has moved me back into the parental home.  For those of you who have experience such circumstances, you will probably understand the shortcomings with such a situation, especially if you were rather happy in the previous living setup.  It’s a factor of the little things like sleep schedules, privacy, points of discussions, etc. which can build up into a recognised negative. 

The most recognisable thing for me correlates to my hobbies and interests, particularly gaming and a desire to learn more from the medium.  To be immersed in a world where your eyes envelope the monitor and ears hear nothing but the ambience is a truly wonderful experience; until people either disrupt with juxtaposed prose or a contrasting piece of radio / TV.  I don’t hold such a desire to be sociable against them naturally, but this event can make one less interested in either side of the spectrum and possibly come across as dismissive.  In the end, both parties get a fragment of what they wanted. 

So back to this past week, I had a couple events to attend to, but the majority of my time was set to creating an environment of immersive gameplay to rekindle some of that time I had in my previous university residence.  The stage was set and the first day went well, with a mixture of RPGs, shooters, a couple Indies to try out and some Dota.  I enjoyed my time greatly because it was disrupted by factors outside of the immersion.  However, as a couple days went on, I was unsure about how to fulfil my time which I had been looking forward to.  All my thoughts on this desire for personal space were (in a roundabout way) possibly unwarranted beyond small chunks of time.  As the week went on, I found a happy medium of social interactions and immersive gameplay (most likely due to my work commitments) which pushed me to consider a self-reflective experiment; with the return to the status quo how long would it be until I desired personal space and to what extent. 

Sunday came around and by 3 in the afternoon the parameters were in place to analyse my little personal experiment.  The return to normality was met with the conventional catching up and discussing how the past week went alongside a brief agreement on what to eat for dinner.  The day continued on with me replaying some tower defence games I had got back into over the weekend (Defense Grid and Sol Survivor).  I had particularly enjoyed replaying Sol because of the new modes and discovering the soundtrack again (Oil and Sweat my particular favourite track atm) which combined with the hectic decisions within higher difficulties held my enjoyment and interest.  It was in this timeframe that my experiment came into place; with myself being asked about an advert for hair care products while easy-watching TV droned on in the background around the 7-8pm mark.  The flow of conflict on screen was out of sync with my disinterest in the product of the advert it was most likely clear that I felt that way (although I accept I could have acted in a more amicable manner). 

Many hours later, I took a moment to understand this experiment referring back to my previous living situation trying to find any similarities.  What I considered that although I enjoyed my time in immersive gameplay and academic theory, I purposely took time to talk and discuss things with my housemates.  As I mentioned in one of my introduction posts, having hour long conversions at 3am about architectural theory, games or anything in-between was something I enjoyed a great deal.  So, on the surface I could deduce that I desired social interactions but only of particular subject matter with people of similar interest.  This made sense, but I felt that the range of my housemates and their interests ranged greatly of both the academic and general converse of life.  My second point was one brought from an architectural point of view being that I looked for both personal space and communal space within my environment; something that would seem rather obvious to everyone who is ever lived as we all have pigments of introverted and extroverted characteristics.  Beyond this although, it got me consider Heidegger’s ‘poetically man dwells’ alongside a few minor points. 

We live within places (houses, flats, etc.) but create space within them.  This space is an expression of self and as such becomes architecture.  This architecture can be created by a number of items of both physical and mental application; colour schemes and furniture to whether one converses within said space or not.  We also do this outside of the home, for example in public green space; we outline our space with jumpers for goalposts or towels for picnic; even though you don’t hold ownership of the area.  On the other side of the spectrum, it may me think of my previous mmo experiences where a person may lay claim to an area for farming (as in particular monsters or resource nodes) regardless of free ownership or the camping of spawn points for particular rare monsters.  One of the examples that Heidegger presents is a long distance lorry driver who may have a sleeper cab; this is their space with place but their journey still features interactions with exterior factors e.g. other people. 

With this reflection underway, it got me to think about the desire to return to the previous standard of living in a new way, because that kind of wouldn’t exist in my future.  To move is more of a case of self and defining self in his residence alongside their interactions.  To charge on with the possibly superficial ‘find my own place and get away’ would do a disservice to myself and those I interact with and I need to make sure I do it properly.

So yeah, this was a bit of an odd reflection for me because of what came about from this past week, but I hope you found it interesting or possibly similar to your own experience.  On the subject of employment mentioned above, I’ve built up a larger set of contacts so I hope to become a bit more established in the heritage / gallery space and I can look to make this a bit more than just words on a page.  In the mean-time, I’ve had some really enjoyable commissions recently and it’s keeping me going slowly but steadily.  If you can make a job out of something you enjoy, try it but be ready to accept some frustration; but in the end you can make it worth it.

= )

Ryan

Receiver and the Discussion of Combative Design Theory (form:function)

These past couple weeks have been rather busy with ‘IRL’ stuff so naturally things like this have been pushed to the side.  That being said, I enjoyed a little game over the weekend that I want to talk about in regards to a relatively modern architectural design choice. 

Receiver is a very small indie-fps title from Wolfire Games created as part of a 7 day fps game challenge which looks to create quasi-realistic gun mechanics.  Whereas in a conventional fps the reloading mechanics are a single button press; receiver includes individual bullets, magazine loading, checking the chamber and releasing the hammer to name a few.  It’s a rather confusing experience when you initially load in, but after around 15-20minutes the gunplay was making sense and it becoming rather enjoyable. 

Alongside these mechanics there is RNG based level design, item placement and enemy locations that keep you on your toes as you navigate your surroundings.  One may call this a ‘roguelike’ in terms of its permadeath and random starting loot, but I feel it’s more towards a tactical shooter by its combat mechanics. 

While playing this game, I got a feeling of a couple schools of thought in design and play on the concept apparent in Receiver.  Firstly there was the age old ‘form vs. function’ theory that discusses the relationship between aesthetics (form) and mechanics (function).  In architecture, this can sometimes be the nature between an engineer and an architect but certain eras in architecture have gone one way or another e.g. Brutalism tends to be on the side of ‘function’.  Receiver is a game of pure mechanics in its gunplay while its aesthetics are rather spartan in its night time city-scape and plain rooms.  Not to say that this is a bad thing as one should remember this was made in 7 days…

The other feeling I got from this game was a kind of Deconstructionism / Victorian industrial ideology that turns the ‘function’ side of the debate into its own aesthetic.  A couple examples of these traits include London Paddington Station; Lloyds building in London and the Pompidou Centre in Paris.  Each of these examples uses the structure, the framework and the stuff that is usually hidden away behind walls in conventional buildings to create their own pieces of art and design through architecture.  Looking at these examples, one can see a correlation of Receiver and typical fps games through the use of the reloading mechanic; as the simple press of a button (usually R) is now a fully-fledged mechanic to take into consideration.  There are games that have played around with the reload mechanics in the past (one of the more famous examples being Gears of War) but I feel this is the most literal and by proxy the closest to the above architectural theory. 

To be honest, I grabbed this game on the Humble Store end of summer sale for free, but you may find it interesting to review in how minor aspects of design can be created into a new format.  Outline theories you may want to look at include symbolism, discussion of ‘space’ and usage of signs in culture but overall I hope you found this discussion interesting. 

References / further reading

*Receiver, Wolfire Games (2012)

*Eco, U. Function and Sign: The Semiotics of Architecture

*Barthes, R. Semiology and the Urban

*Bachelard, G. Poetics of Space

Gothic Architecture and Gaming: A Duality of Sorts

Over the past couple weeks; I’ve been putting together a talk on architecture for an event next month.  Although the subject matter is primary on history, it’s got me thinking about certain eras and how they fit into popular culture and gaming.  Today, in a roundabout way, we discuss the matter of Gothic and its duality within theory and design.  (I’ll admit thou, I’m not too clued up on these cultures so the writing may seem sporadic….)

Generally speaking, when you mention the term ‘Gothic’ it conjures thoughts of the darkness; unworldly mythical beings which revolve around imposing architecture with a sense of ritualistic actions.  Looking into the pop-culture of ‘Gothic’ one can see many influences from the Victorian age in regards to fashion and mentality.  Vampires are regarded as a manifestation of sexual uncertainty for the more elaborate acts (although some Victorian historians would imply the opposite) and their dress sense involves similar connotations.  Gothic architecture corroborates this view because of the way it’s presented.  The grand structures of places like Notre Dame give an imposing feeling; with its sheer height, mass and aesthetics correlating with acts of ritual. 

That being said, when looking at Gothic from an architectural point of view, there is a very different impression given to its design.  Gothic architecture is one of pious sentiments; use of light and colour in their interiors; and the omnipresence of a higher being within its surroundings.  Compared with earlier eras of medieval and classic design, Gothic looked to play a bit more with softer edges on larger, airy rooms making it more welcome.  Even something like gargoyles (or grotesques depending on singular or plural) are aesthetic pieces to make the facades more interesting; similar to the ‘storyboard’ statuettes on some cathedrals like Exeter.  Of course, the popular culture connotations didn't come until much later (architecture focused on the 1200-1500s roughly and pop culture more towards 17-1800s+) but it’s interesting to see the duality of the term and how it’s used in gaming. 

In my own experience of playing games, it’s the horror genre (and games that use horror elements) that generally show up Gothic.  The Devil May Cry series (particularly the first game) features large, imposing, cathedral-like structures which are usually traversed physically or visually alongside fighting demons from the evil depths.  Although a lot of the game is relativity dark, there are points where light is used to different effects.  Here are two examples that I feel are relevant:

• ·       The cathedral-like structure where you fight Phantom (lava-spider boss) initially features a lot of light radiating from the ceiling and windows.  However, as the game goes on and you visit this place later, it is much darker; with a more monstrous being awaiting you called Nightmare.  One could say that this is due to the time-span of the game going from day to night, but I feel that it takes on the idea of Gothic in a nice way in both sides of the spectrum.
• ·       The meet with Mundas in the underworld features a large room with a large amount of light beaming into the interior, making the room somewhat bright.  This is contrasted by the darkness and demons of the previous area that saw the player go through.  Although this shows the ideas behind Gothic architecture, I believe that it’s kind of a troupe to have a grand, contrasted setting for the antagonists’ arena. 
• 
  

Thinking beyond this example, there are games that follow one or the other ideology when it comes to Gothic architecture, but it’s an interesting concept to view.  Religious / ritual sites are common examples of architecture in the early – mid eras of civilizations.  When looking at a game that has these sorts of structures, take a moment to see how the piece uses light and the size of its interior and maybe it’ll be influenced by the origins of Gothic architecture.  If you don’t get much out of this post, I hope you find the idea of the duality of Gothic a little bit interesting…

Kitsch and the Gaming World

So over the past weekend I went away with friends to celebrate (well, anti-celebrate) the end of summer and start of the academic year.  Currently this isn’t a significant time for me, but a number of the revellers for the weekend work in the educational system.  On our way back home in the car, I ended up looking out the window thinking about how to discuss this topic in a state of quiet contemplation.  After some miles had passed, my friends commented on my quietness to which I replied “Just thinking about how to connect Kitsch and gaming through the medium of architecture.  Got a couple ideas running around my head…”  This was met with a confused ‘rrrright..’ so I took a little time to think how to word it better.  With that said, I came up with a hypothesis of “Toys R us is like Call of Duty”. 

So, here we are today.

Kitsch has a number of different definitions depending on who you talk to and what subject it’s relevant to.  In product design, it usually refers to ‘tacky’ objects that don’t seem to have much purpose but itself (similarly art is sometimes defined by having no purpose but itself).  In architecture it’s referred to buildings that are ‘built not designed’ where a structure could be placed anywhere and the considerations of place aren’t observed.  With this, one may that it’s not particularly architecture and just buildings, but it has its place for this discussion.  Here are a couple examples of kitsch in architecture:

• ·         Out of town shopping centre/mall: Generally speaking a large concentrated area of shops / services accessible by a central concourse away from the Central Business District (CBD).  The shops will have a large array of stands, displays, corridors and the sorts but the building will generally be a warehouse-style shell of the building. 
• ·         Modern housing estate / mass-produced estates: Due to the nature of modern housing construction, a large amount of housing estates follow a ‘paint by numbers’ design choice. In short, estates kind of find themselves built like ‘terrace1.1 here and 2 terrace 1.2 here’ fitting together. 

The overall concept from these examples is a base foundation to work on from which personalisation can be produced.  I feel there are two ways this can be compared with in gaming; genre definitions and game engine use. 

• ·         Genres naturally follow particular trends to be defined into the said genre.  For example, FPS’s will always have you in a first-person view; an RTS may involve base building; and an RPG will usually have xp and levelled combat.  To follow these traits religiously, one can consider it similar to building not designing a product.  Even within genres, sub-genres like modern military shooters (like MoH and CoD) can have their own trends like shops vs. houses vs. office blocks. 
• ·         A game engine (like Unity or the Unreal Engine) has an appeal to be used ‘out of the box’ to create a game.  The by-product of this is that the default textures and colours maybe used; giving the commonly used ‘grit’ colour scheme of browns, metals and washed-out pallets.  This could be considered similar to the shopping centre idea with a warehouse giving a shell for the shop to build on. 

This comparison may paint a picture of bad / lazy design, but I feel that it’s interesting to review the undertones of popular culture in gaming.  Just because you follow the kitsch design, doesn’t mean you can make the most of the environment to personalise.  Architecture can go beyond bricks and mortar, becoming something beyond its foundations.  For example, Spec-ops: the Line does everything a ‘paint by numbers’ third-person shooter would do, alongside being a complete deconstruction of the genre and military shooter sub-genre. 

So, in a roundabout way, that’s how Toys R Us and Call of Duty can be compared.  Kitsch design, building vs. designing something, and the fundamentals of what is design can find itself traversing art mediums.  I hope you find this interesting and look to find comparisons in your local built environment. 

Extra resources:

*Spec-ops the line (2012). Yager Development, 2K Games (deconstruction of genre kitsch)

*Venturi, R. Scott Brown, D. Izenour, S. (1977). Learning from Las Vegas: The Forgotten Symbolism of Architectural Form.  MIT Press. USA.  (not directly kitsch but interesting discussion building vs. design)