Keith Stuart (Guardian Games Blog) discuss on Manhunt 2 ban in England in Manhunt 2 ‘ban’ – it’s good, but is it right? He raises a question whether games are judged in same standards as film. He points to BBCF report, which, quoting Stuart, “suggested that watching violence on TV could be more upsetting than playing violent video games” (Stuart, see also BBCF report, p. 13). This point can used as argument for why game violence is more dangerous than film violence, but as the report states that “[m]ost gamers concentrate on their own survival rather than on the damage they inflict on others” (BBCF report, p. 12), the argument (as supporting that game violence is more dangerous than film violence) is not well grounded, at least based on research in BBCF report.

As Stuart argues, it seems that there are different standards to film and games (and literature).

There is a worrying proposal at EU parliament:

Motion for a European Parliament resolution on a ban on the sale and distribution in Europe of the video game ‘Rule of Rose’ and the creation of a European Observatory on childhood and minors (B6‑0023/2007).

While I share the concern for children and minors, it seems that motion is attack against the game Rule of Rose in a disguise of protecting children and minors. However, is the assertion made in motion (“[Rule of Rose] features children and perverse, violent and sadistic images that are harmful to human dignity”) really grounded?

I haven’t played the game, but based on review at Game Spot the assertion seems not to be very insightful. Greg Kasavin writes:

The gameplay itself simply involves making Jennifer run around collecting things, avoiding enemies, and occasionally solving puzzles. When you’ve got Brown the dog with you, which is most of the time, you can use him to help lead you around. (Kasavin, 2006.)

Rule of Rose earns points for broaching some subject matter that’s fairly bold for gaming, and while a game with such an unsettling subject shouldn’t necessarily be fun in the purest sense, it also shouldn’t be boring. (Kasavin, 2006.)

According to the review, the game contains cinematics that might be the source of worry. If the context of the game is described fairly then, for example, Grimm’s version of Cinderella, Lolita by Nabrokov, and whole production of de Sade should also be banned by the same logics behind the motion.

It seems that I should play the game to make my own judgment. Unfortunately, the game is described to be boring.

There is new open access journal on games: Loading… the Journal of the Canadian Games Studies Association with the first number published.

The table of contents look promising, need to go the issues through more carefully later on.

Is Jade (the player character in Beyond Good and Evil)? It seems that that opinion vary (see, Chris Kohler’s “Jade Is Black?!”: Racial Ambiguity in Games). Kohler writes:

It’s quite likely that the game’s designers wanted Jade to be racially ambiguous, so that she would have just this effect. By which I do not mean “making people fight on message boards.” I mean causing the player to see in Jade whatever they want to see, so as to better identify with her. (Kohler.)

Pat Miller criticizes Kohler’s argument in the entry Race and Player Characters questioning whether racial ambitiousnesses will be a general design solution for making a game approachable by different groups and there is a point.

I am not certain whether Kohler’s point was intended as general design rule, but a possible design choice. However, I am not convinced on Kohler’s premises. Kohler argues: “The more details that define a character, the more you distance the player from it, and the less engaged the player becomes.” To me, it is not obvious why more details in character would inevitable lessen the engagement. On the contrary, as I have argued earlier that empathic engagement is a mode of engagement with a game that relies on defining character traits via, e.g., affective expressions (as a side note, I am not claiming that that the empathic engagement is the only mode of the engagement). Moreover, the claim neglects the links between character traits and a game systems (see, my Building and reconstructing character: A case study of Silent Hill 3).

I finished Deus Ex: Invisible War yesterday evening. The game is interesting and it seems contain branching goal structure with various endings. The game balances between offering choices to a player, that will influence how the game progress, and coherent information structure. (I need to play the game again to the how that works.) In contrast to Deus Ex, fractions are portraited more or less in neural fashion, which lead to a problem: choices in the final parts of the game seems meaningless–I did not find grounds to prefer one alternative from another. All choices seem to be equally bad. Thus the choices rendered the end to anticlimax, which was pity; I really enjoyed the game.

Wish I could be in Denmark for this lecture: Can you make them cry without tearing your hair out? Emotional Characters, Thursday June 7th. I hope that someone will blog the lecture…

Totally off-topic rant…

I have been trying to get flight tickets to DiGRA conference at Tokyo but using travel agency Area, that Finnish universities are required to use, seem to render this very simple task impossible.

I asked ticked (at May 23) to Tokyo so that I would arrive to Tokyo before September 24, 2007 (which is Monday). I got two alternatives:

1. One leaving Sunday, September 22 and arriving to Tokyo September 24.
2. One leaving Saturday, September 22 and arriving to Tokyo September 23. This one was not really an alternative as it costs 1000 euros more than the first one.

After asking about this by email I got no reply and finally called Area and asked about this. Vendor assured that the flight should be fine and there is just typo at itinerary and I just need to get back to person I have been in contact with previously. So I asked he, again to confirm that the flight in alternative 1 will be leaving Saturday, September 22 and will arrive Sunday, September 23.

I did get aswer to this one: “Yes, the flight is leaving at Sunday, September 22 and arrives at Monday 23.” Flight should be fine I have been assured;/ However, for some reason I cannot get itinerary that is correct nor right dates in paper–only conflicting information on flight dates. Our departments secretary have also contacted them (twice, I think) and asked Area to send new itinerary so that we could confirm that reservation is correct and ask them to write tickets. We haven’t heard anything from them after that.

Sadly, this isn’t the first time: I needed to use train at my last conference trip at January 2007. At first, Area offered me train choices from January 2o06. After asking new alternative that I got them promptly and from right year. However, only one choice with I could be in time at airport.

I am really tired to this gorgeous service offered by Area; luckily I am not traveling with my work as much as I just to do (I need to say that it used no to be this bad when I was working at the University of Tampere).

Mark Grimshaw have made his PhD thesis available to download. It’s a rare breed of studies in soundscapes of games. Need to check it out with time.

Grimshaw, M. (2007). The acoustic ecology of the first-person shooter. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Waikato, New Zealand, http://sirfragalot.com/mainsite/phd.html.