The Suicide Game: Player Perception of Self-destruction in a Game

I have put up a conference poster made in collaboration with Albert Dang and Kan Yang Li when I visited Design & Technology at Parson’s School of Design in the fall 0f 2006.

The poster documents an experiment in identifying a basic convention of video games, in this case that players always fight for their own survival, and exploring the ramifications of breaking the convention.

Albert Dang and Kan Yang Li built a two-player game in which the object of the players is to commit suicide by drinking poison and stabbing yourself.

Yes, it is somewhat uncomfortable and perhaps controversial, but we wanted to explore that space by way of a prototype and user testing. The poster was presented at the DiGRA conference in Tokyo September 2007.

Play the game here:  http://www.jesperjuul.net/text/suicidegame/

Read the poster here: http://www.jesperjuul.net/text/suicidegame.pdf

From the poster:

Video games do not necessarily present the player with a positive role to play: The player character may be a villain, be morally corrupt. Yet it is almost universally the case that
video games make players fight for the survival of their character. In a discussion of tragedy in interactive media, Marie-Laure Ryan has noted the seeming impossibility of an
Anne Karenina game, a game where the player’s ultimate goal is to commit suicide by throwing herself in front of a train:

Interactors would have to be out of their mind-literally and metaphorically–to want to submit themselves to the fate of a heroine who commits suicide as the result of a love affair turned bad, like Emma Bovary or Anna Karenina. Any attempt to turn empathy, which relies on mental simulation, into first-person, genuinely felt emotion would in the vast majority of cases trespass the fragile boundary that separates pleasure from pain.
(Ryan 2001)

While Ryan identifies a clear game convention of players fighting for the survival of their character, we know little about what would happen were this convention to be broken:
How would players perceive the controversial or uncomfortable game content in a game where the player had to seek self-destruction?

The Suicide Game

Call for Papers: Future and Reality of Gaming

The Vienna Games Conference 2008 “Future and Reality of Gaming” will be held from 17th till 19th of October in Vienna.

Digital games have become a driving factor of contemporary cultural, social, and economic development. They are enablers of global cultural exchange and serve as entry points for media participation. However, the cultural, social and economic significance of games usually remains underestimated or misunderstood by the general public. In 2007, the City of Vienna decided to host “Game City”, a high profile event bringing together representatives of the games industry, non-profit organizations, academia and the general public for the discussion of the current state of computer games, digital youth cultures and games research. One key element of “Game City” was the Vienna Games Conference, which had the objective of serving as a public information platform as well as an international networking event for game researchers of various disciplines. Due to the overwhelming success of this concept, the “Game City” event and the Vienna Games Conference will be held again in the fall of 2008.Abstract submission: 28th of March 2008

Notification: 25th of April 2008

Full paper: 03rd of October 2008

Conference: 17th till 19th of October 2008

 

Call for Papers: Computer games, between text and practice

Computer games, between text and practice
call for papers per un numero monografico speciale di E/C,
e-journal dell’Associazione Italiana di Studi Semiotici
edited by / a cura di Dario Compagno e Patrick Coppock

Confirm participation and send the title of your paper before February 29th, 2008.
Papers (maximum length 20 pages, images not included) are due before April 30st, 2008.
From May 1st to June 31st, 2008, authors participate in the review process.
Online publication: July 2008

More here.

(I have decided to start posting more about call for papers and new publications.)

First use of the term “casual game”

I have been researching the first use of the term “casual game” and thought I had struck unexpected gold when this August 17, 1885 article from the New York Times came up in the search results: “Provisions for an Ocean Steamer”. I was awaiting the description of the game-playing habits of the passengers, enjoying, probably, a casual session of some card game en vogue at the time.

But the casual game in question is the other meaning of game, as in “hunted, non-domesticated animal”. Not sure what makes it casual though? Small amounts?

Casual Game

(The first use of “casual game” relating to game as in “rule-based pastime” is either 1919 or 1936, depending on how you interpret the 1919 article.)

Asteroids: Forgotten Futurism. Defender: Unnecessarily Hard.

I wanted to share my two game reviews from the Space Time Play anthology: Defender and Asteroids.

This was two attempts at writing more theoretical and media-historical reviews where each game is considered from a specific angle. I.e. reviews with a little more reflection that your usual game review.

I also experimented with using time lapse images to illustrate how the games change character from the beginning to the end of each level.

To give away the conclusion, I think that Asteroids ultimately does not work, but that Defender is wonderful. Conversely, I think the Asteroids review is the most successful review.

Some quotes:

Defender: “Defender is an exaggerated version of the early 1980s arcade game in all its virtues: a large number of possible ways to fail, extremely unforgiving and no rewards beyond a high score and a few smart bombs. The purest arcade game.”

Asteroids: “… Asteroids is a nostalgic game of the future, but the actual future has better games.”

All Game Industry 2007 Keynotes in short form

From Magical Wasteland via GameSetWatch, this funnily and unfairly entirely sums up all game industry keynotes of 2007:

*

1. Let’s think about the future for a second. You probably don’t understand the kids that make up the bulk of our audience, but I do. I call them the network MySpace remix 3.0 social generation. Unlike any other people before them, young people today like to interact with each other. They also like music. YouTube is the perfect example of whatever point it is I’m making. Everything should be online and customizable.

2. Iteration is the key. Everything is about iteration. How many times can I use iteration in this talk? Iteration, iteration, iteration. This is how you make good games: by iterating.

The more you iterate, it doesn’t matter what direction you’re going in or what you actually do, as long as you get the number of iterations up. This process (iteration) is what turns all the bad stuff into the good stuff. Here’s a graph showing game quality and number of iterations approaching infinity together. This graph proves my point.

3. For our last project we used Scrum, and boy, are we glad we did. There is no way anything we did would have been possible without it. What is Scrum, you ask? It’s a set of new terminology for things that already happen when groups of people work together. For example, instead of a “meeting,” you have a “Scrum,” and so on.

You should use Scrum too, since it will solve all your problems. If I’ve piqued your interest, sign-up sheets for my specially discounted seminars on Scrum can be found clipped to the bottom of your conference program.

4. The game we made was great – because we’re great. We are just a group of awesome people. We never crunch, and we go to the beach every other Friday to play volleyball. Even those times when we did crunch, we had delicious catered meals. And there was one time we got a masseuse in the office. Awesome. Yes, our studio’s amazing array of perks and benefits keep us happy and doing our best work all the time.

We have a ton of open positions we need to fill very quickly so please send us your resume as soon as you can.

5. The game industry is in trouble. We can’t keep doing what we’ve been doing before. We need to do this other thing, which is the thing that I’m doing. I said this last year but none of you came with me. Well, this time I really mean it.