Inger Ekman will be presenting a paper Sound-Based Gaming for Sighted Audiences – Experiences from a Mobile Multiplayer Mobile Gaming In Audio Mostly 2007 conference. As you may figure out, the paper is about the sound design of The Songs of North game, especially it’s second version.

Note for myself. Dig out the research mentionened in Video game sheds light on fear. BBC mentiontion that one of the authors is Dean Mobbs of University College London and the piece was published in Science.

BioShock seem to be interesting game, as it made Kohler title his review: “Creepy Moral Dilemmas Make BioShock a Sophisticated Shooter“.

The review left me wonder are there moral dilemmas, in which all alternatives of a choice have ingame consequences, or are there just choices where a morally doubtful alternative are better (unless you  count the representation of the alternative)?

I completed the game yesterday and I the game managed to keep me engaged throughout whole game (my first impressions on the game is in old post). Canis Canem Edit uses fundamentally the same game mechanics and system as GTAs. I do not find GTAs very entertaining while Canis managed to do the magic. While in Canis Canem Edit there are some frustrating moments when change in camera and controls directions makes thing really tricky mission are more varied and balanced (for my skills) than in GTAs. Moreover, I find the theme of Canis Canem Edit more attractive than GTAs’. Specially, sarcasm and irony in Canis Canem Edit mostly works; character stereotypes, at the best, are a part of a joke.

A small disappointment to me was to notice that most of actions do not not influence how NPCs react to Jimmy; only the missions change respect values and behaviors (this said, flirting and giving gifts will have an effect to some NPCs, but not all, I think).

I watched document Sex and the Silverscreen that was about the history of film expression, censorship and presentation of sex in film. Quotes and anecdotes from 10′s to 40′s sounded very familiar: they were similar to arguments that games are not a form expression and arguments for censoring games. US supreme court rule 1915 that games are not a form of expression similar to literature or newspapers. An argument supporting this conclusion, among others, was:

Are moving pictures within the principle, as it is contended they are? They, indeed, may be mediums of thought, but so are many things. So is the theater, the circus, and all other shows and spectacles, and their performances may be thus brought by the like reasoning under the same immunity from repression or supervision as the public press,-made the same agencies of civil liberty. (Mutual Film Corp v. Industrial Commission of Ohio, 1915)

So, film would not be protected by freedom of speech and publication in Ohio or elsewhere in US as it is not expression or art; film more like circus and spectacles. Roger Ebert’s recent argument why games are not art seem to be based to similar logic:

I know it by the definition of the vast majority of games. They tend to involve (1) point and shoot in many variations and plotlines, (2) treasure or scavenger hunts, as in “Myst,” and (3) player control of the outcome. I don’t think these attributes have much to do with art; they have more in common with sports. (Games vs. Art: Ebert vs. Barker, 2007)

So, games are not art as they are have more in common with sports than, e.g., film.

US supreme court decided that film must be censored and as, among other things, “they may be used for evil, and against that possibility the statute was enacted” (Mutual Film Corp v. Industrial Commission of Ohio, 1915). Isn’t this basically the same claim than, e.g., ”[Rule of Rose] features children and perverse, violent and sadistic images that are harmful to human dignity” (B6‑0023/2007)?

Are games in the same situation that movies were over 60 years ago¹ or are my analogies bad?

Notes

1. In 1952 US supreme court countered the 1915 decision and argued:

It cannot be doubted that motion pictures are a significant medium for the communication of ideas. They may affect public attitudes and behavior in a variety of ways, ranging from direct espousal of a political or social doctrine to the subtle shaping of thought which characterizes all artistic expression. (Joseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson, 1952)