Author Archives: lhokanso

A Closer Look at the Plinkett Test

Following the Dramatic Storytelling in Games presentation by Seamus Sullivan at the Writing for Games Conference on Tuesday, I wanted to further investigate his second tip for creating videogame characters: Apply the Plinkett Test. I personally had never heard of this test, and thought Sullivan’s description of it was intriguing. Basically, the test consists of describing a character in a story, or movie, or game, without referencing their appearance, profession, or what they do in the story. Sullivan asked a few members of the audience to present their favorite videogame characters and subject them to this test. Two of the proposed characters were Sonic the Hedgehog and Mario. Surprisingly, even with the little narrative, per say, that exist in the games that these characters are a part of, the audience members were able to describe these characters using this test, describing Sonic as cocky, and sort of a BA with a good heart, and Mario as a light-hearted hero. Now of course, not all games are intended to have characters that play integral roles in the games themselves, and some omit characters completely. But, for the games that Sullivan was pinpointing, it was interesting to think about just how crucial it is to develop characters that the audience can really relate to, in and out of the game. The Plinkett test is a great indicator as to how well we will be able to associate with these characters, and just how much we will invest in them. Mario and Sonic are two great examples of characters that are globally recognized because players see them as more than just a hedgehog and a plumber. Gamers worldwide relate to the character of these characters, for lack of a better terminology. When developing games that are story-based, Sullivan stressed just how crucial it is to give the player someone to see themselves in, because this is in fact who will be leading us through the entire game. Also, Sullivan proposed that if the main character is going to be rather void of details, that there should be other non-player characters (NPC’s) that fulfill this same purpose.

Anyway, I just found this test to be very accurate in terms of identifying characters with more to them than a name and face, but rather, an identity. If you’re interested, you can view the original Plinkett Test from Red Letter Media here, beginning at around the 7:00 mark. (WARNING: Graphic Language.) In this original test, the characters in Star Wars Episode I were being put to the test. Through this video you can see the stark contrast between the greatly detailed and rounded characters of the first movies, versus the empty, essentially floating characters of Episode I. The video in its entirety is pretty entertaining if you’re interested, but you’ll find the Plinkett Test applied at that location.

This test, and (the playwright) Sullivan’s presentation are yet a further demonstration of the interconnectivity between the integral component of storytelling in all areas: literature, movies, and videogames.

Videogame “Docudramas”

A docudrama is defined as a “fictionalized drama based on real events” (dictionary.com). The past few classes we’ve been focusing on what we’ve categorized as documentary style games, but I think that it is important that we differentiate between the documentary games and what I would view as these “docudrama” style games. Although they seem rather similar, I think that the implications that they have can have very different impacts. Molleindustria, who created some of the games that we have played, such as Unmanned and Phone Story, take on this idea of a docudrama, in which, they create very real scenarios based on actual events. In Unmanned, the soldier doesn’t necessarily represent one soldier in particular, but rather one who represents all soldiers and their struggles in everyday life. Documentary style games I think are more like the JFK Reloaded game in which the historical details are finely tuned and paid very close attention to.Take for example however, the Flight to Freedom game. This game is a direct representation of a narrative of a fictional, although very realistic character, attempting to escape slavery in America. In this game, one of the characters is a true historical figure who actually lived and aided in the freeing of runaway slaves. This game blurs the distinction between actual historical recreation and a dramatization, and thus documentary and “docudrama” style games.

The reason I find it important to attempt to distinguish between the two is to understand the impact that these games can have that are different from one another. “Docudramas”, much like the ones on TV and the like, can give us an idea of something that is occurring, or has occurred, without taking us there necessarily. One great example of this that I’d like to introduce is Food Force. This game occurs on a fictional island, but presents all of the ideas that are crucial to our society in this time including civil war, famine, and global warming. However, it doesn’t take place in a real environment. Darfur is Dying however, informed us of the actual crisis going on in Darfur by placing us in that location, although with a fictional family. I think the fundamental distinction between these two games is their ability to make these locations real in our consciousness. Without the realism of location or storyline, it’s hard for the games to have the same impact in making us concerned or aware of the particular issue as it is meant to be viewed.

Videogames: The (Hidden) Yoda to our Luke Skywalker

In Ian Bogost’s book “How to Do Things with Videogames,” he writes at one point that in music games, like Guitar Hero and Rock Band, mastering levels of higher and higher difficulty in the game “does not lead the player to a greater state of mastery as a musician, but to a greater depth of understanding as a listener.” And although Bogost is really only referring to these two musical interaction videogames and their relation to musical literacy as a result, I think that the idea that he presents here can be teased apart to represent a larger applicable argument to videogames and their ability to teach the player. One of the arguments that many parents and videogame critics present is that videogames are (gasp!) brain-rotting. However, I believe that if we use Bogost’s argument about the aforementioned games on a grander scale, we can in fact find greater benefit to the playing of videogames and to our mastery of certain skills. Take for example a first person shooter game like Call of Duty. Most parents would look at this game and think that it is nothing but a violence-promoting waste of time. Perhaps however, if we looked at the game and its intricacy and depth, we would be able to agree that although the game does not make one a better shooter or soldier, it does sharpen reflexes, promote critical problem solving, and an increase an aptitude for spontaneous strategy adjustment (ie. “Crap, we should probably take a different route since this one appears to be chock-full of zombies.”) I’d like to think that many videogames can promote this process of deeper understanding of something, and in fact teach the player something, even if it isn’t that which the game is mimicking or necessarily representing. After playing most games, even simple ones such as Words with Friends or Temple Run, we walk away having absorbed some sort of benefit. All of the chapters in Bogost’s book emphasize this idea of deeper content to videogames than meets the eye, and this statement and these reasons demonstrate the teaching ability of videogames that tends to get lost in the noise (since this specific chapter was about music after all).

“It takes me back…”

In response to our discussions in class and a few of the blog posts, I thought it would be fitting to talk about how much sentimental and reminiscent video game sounds can be for us. Since we are from the “Nintendo generation,” a lot of us grew up listening to the Mario theme song, or the tunes from Zelda. To this day, as demonstrated in class, most of us can still identify which one note sound corresponds with the movements that Mario makes. At the same time, these sounds take us back to the fond memories we have of playing these games as children. For example, here is the commercial I was referring to in class that most people who didn’t play Sonic or Mario wouldn’t understand. But since these were our games, we know that Mario is up the flag just by hearing the few bars that indicate this movement for him. This, I like to believe, is one of the most integral components of having music in video games. Sure, the game would be rather boring without it, but it would also be entirely less memorable. The audible sounds have such strong ties to the memories we create while we play these games. And especially in terms of the older games, where the graphics weren’t really anything special, it was the sounds that created and transformed the screen into a game world.

Beyond the simple noises and original pieces created for the games, I know personally that the menu music for EA Sports games, like Madden and Fifa, also tended to be real sticking points for me. These were songs that were actual soundtrack music from artists in the music world that would play on a loop during the stand-by menu. I know sometimes, and this may have just been me, but I would leave the menu up just to have the music play while I was doing something in my room. After about a week of playing these games, I would have most of the words to these songs memorized. It made the game that much more enjoyable for me.

In conclusion, I agree with shandler and their saying that music really does a lot in enhancing the game for us. I think that music isn’t just an important side note in a game. I really believe that it is an essential part of the game.

Also, here is a clip of music from the other game that I was talking about, Swords and Sworcery, revolved solely around the music of Jim Guthrie.

“Supplier Responsibility” — The Start of a Manufacturer’s Conscience

Last class we discussed the joining of Apple into the Fair Labor Association (FLA). I was curious as to how much Apple, being the “slick” marketing empire that they are, might address this on their website. I was very pleasantly surprised to find an entire section of their website devoted to what they call “Supplier Responsibility.” In this section, they identify some of the problems that they have observed and are attempting to fix within their own corporation. These include some of the problems that Daisey addressed in his podcast, such as work hours, worker age, and living conditions. Needless to say, we as the consumer must take an evaluative approach to these claims. What I mean by that is that we must really wait to judge the severity of their commitment on the results, not the means. Intention, in this facet, is not what counts as much as reaction, change, and actual results. However, I respect the Apple Corporations enactment of this area, and the fact that they are willing to be open about the problems that they see both to the consumers, and in essence to themselves. Now we can only hope that they do something about it.

Blurring the lines of Galloway’s “Four Moment” Schema

In the first chapter of Gaming, Galloway introduces a schema for loosely categorizing games using four contexts; diegetic, nondiegetic, machine, and operator. Depending on which constitutes a majority of the involvement, that of the console (machine) or that of the player (operator), and upon the amount of graphic on screen to be considered a part of the gaming world (diegetic) and that which is not (nondiegetic), Galloway is able to create a means of identifying the essence of a game and its experience. What is most intriguing about this concept is the means for which it provides a way to not only draw the lines to distinguish say, diegetic machine acts from nondiegetic operator acts, but also to identify those which distort the lines completely. Galloway rightfully acknowledges that these categories cannot be held as concrete, but I think what is so beneficial to these quadrants is their existence in relation to those games which blur the lines. As technology is evolving with each passing year, I believe that these lines will be further distorted. For example, what would Galloway have to say about the infringement of nondiegetic space by the diegetic world in a 3-D video game? The same could be said about virtual reality games, or motion-sensor games in which the body becomes the controller. As the operator becomes more and more crucial to the processes of the machine (with the elimination of a controller with the XBOX Kinect for example) how do we as an audience demarcate the space that the game acknowledges and that which it does not? I think these are interesting points to discuss is moving forward with the analysis of these “four moments in gamic action,” as discussed by Galloway.