In Chapter 2 of Jesper Juul book, A Casual Revolution, he describes four traits that differ between “hardcore” and “casual” games. The fields of fiction preference, game knowledge, time investment, and attitude towards difficulty are all on the opposite sides of the spectrum, in theory at least, when comparing the two types of games. For “casual” games Juul states that their preference or setting in fiction is positive. He uses the example of Wii Sports for his argument, where he mentions that the cover and setting of the game are everyday events that seem to be more about having a good time and having fun. This is in contrast to the “hardcore” game he compares it to, Gears of War, which is set in a ruined world where the player is just trying to survive in the on-slot of hundreds of enemies trying to kill him.

This image of causal games being positive seemed correct to me. Sure games such as Angry Birds is a little violent, I mean you are blowing up pigs by throwing exploding birds at them, but it was a comical and cartoon like game that obviously was not real. However, when playing the games we had assigned this week I noticed that one of the games, The Torture Game 2, did not seem to fit, in any shape or manner, Juul’s claim of “casual” games being positive in nature. In this game you torture and kill someone using a wide variety of weapons and tools. There is no point system, no true goal—other than maybe just trying to keep the person alive as long as you can while doing horrible things to him—and it is definitely not a very heartwarming game.

If, Juul claims, “casual” games are supposed to be positive and “hardcore” games are supposed to be negative, then where do games as disturbing as The Torture Game 2 fall in the spectrum? For a game like that is far from being a positive and lighthearted game. I personally do not agree with Juul’s claim on the fiction difference between the two types of games. While Gears of War may be darker in nature than a game like Angry Birds, I still see it as a more positive setting game than a negative setting game due to the underlying theme of the game. While the combat may be gory, the story and plot have you moving forward towards freeing earth and “saving the day”, as it were, instead of mindlessly torturing someone for no reason.

In the end I would argue that most games, whether “casual” or “hardcore”, are in the middle of the fiction spectrum. They both have negative and positive characteristics in them, making it more or less the player who determines which side of the scale a particular game leans towards on the fiction scale for both types of games.

After reading Chapter 4 from “Game Sound” by Karen Collins, I only now realize the importance of music in video games and how it really affects the game-play experience. You know that the music is there in the background, but it is usually not always your primary focus while you play the game. If the music were to be taken away, playing the games would definitely not be the same and quite frankly boring. In the game Doom, I found it interesting where Collins describes how there are different sounds for each demon and the different volume levels depending on how far or close you are to the demons. This made me think of when I watch scary movies. When the creepy, eery music starts to play at a low volume and slowly starts to get louder, you know something is going to pop out and try to make you jump. This can be applied to video games, which lets the player predict when something is about to occur, and to know when you need to defend yourself or attack when an enemy is nearby.

Near the very end of Collins’ reading, I found the quote from Denis Dyack to be interesting. He states that the video game developers would rather focus on creating new games to produce rather than worry about the hardware and all the different platforms available. I think this poses an interesting topic of discussion: Do you agree with Dyack, to have just one hardware console out there so there can be more games produced? Or is it better the way things are now, with multiple different platforms and consoles for a well-rounded variety of gaming-experiences?

The readings this week, especially the Whalen piece, were very interesting and enjoyable for me. I have thought for a while that good movies and shows need to be supported by good music as well. The example that came to mind while doing the readings was my favorite childhood show, the Animaniacs. Not only were the movements of the characters in the show supported by many of the musical techniques discussed in the article, but the show was famous for the musical numbers that the characters themselves sang. This made me think of the various innovative ways that music has been used in video games as well.

Two obvious examples, mentioned in the Collins article,  were Guitar Hero and Rock Band. Although their novelty has largely worn off by now, when they came out they were revolutionary games that blurred the lines between “playing” video games and “playing” an instrument. Of course, playing Rock Band is nothing like playing actual instruments, but the point is that it brought about a distinct change in the relationship between games and music. The immersion and flow of the video and games is accomplished by music in a very effective and unique way. Instead of deep music in minor keys denoting dangerous territory or pleasant chiming tones associated with gathering money though, familiar music is meant to transport us into the position of our favorite rock stars. It is a kind of play that includes playing instruments, playing video games, and to an extent, even playing make believe, like we discussed in the definitions of play at the beginning of class. In this case, music is not only important as a support to the game, the music is the game. It ought to be acknowledged that, as was discussed in the readings, that there have been Rhythm-Action games since the very early years of video games, but none had ever matched the popularity and depth of the Guitar Hero and Rock Band series.

Whalen emphasizes in his article the point that music, whether diegetic or non-diegetic, plays a powerful role in expanding “the concept of the game world.”  I found it very interesting that he used the game The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, because for me personally, it was one of the primary reasons I took up studying music as a child.  When I learned to read music, I quickly used my skills to learn how to play the various themes from the Zelda series, many of which are used in game to “magically” transport the player around the expansive game world.  I still have some of them memorized, and when my suite mates and I replayed Ocarina of Time last year, they were surprised that I still remembered the various traveling songs that are integral to the game.

In other words, the music in the Zelda series created a kind of connection to the game and the fantasy world that encompasses it.  Every time Link learns a new song in the game, it is deeply connected with the location to which it corresponds.  Hence, the “Bolero of Fire“ and the “Serenade of Water“ musically portray the locations, the volcano and the lake respectively, to which they take the player.  The “Bolero of Fire” is an upbeat march with a chorus of drums in the background and the “Serenade of Water” is a simple, gentle melody.  Playing those songs outside of the game, for me, was a nostalgic experience that evoked memories of playing the game.  Therefore, music, at least in the Zelda series, is a salient force in connecting with the game environment.