Search results for "C_THR86_2305 Latest Study Guide 📟 Reliable C_THR86_2305 Test Sample ⌛ C_THR86_2305 Braindumps 🥈 Open [ www.pdfvce.com ] and search for [ C_THR86_2305 ] to download exam materials for free 🤲Test C_THR86_2305 Lab Questions"
| Results 661 - 670 of 1053
|
Page 67 of 106
|
|
Sorted by: Relevance | Sort by: Date
|
Results per-page: 10 | 20 | 50 | All
|
[…]that of saying what something is by virtue of what it is ‘not,’ but by way of affirming heretofore unacceptable connections. Heuretics is heretical (or her-ethical). Historically, women have been defined in terms of their lack of a masculine signifier, the phallus. Ulmer’s principle of invention, however, is an economy of thinking without reserve (lack), which would be a leap out of Oneness and binaries to threes-as-excess (see Derrida 258-60). Such a locus of thinking, reading, and writing fundamentally negates all the basic principles of (masculine) logic. 2. An anti-model of how we will have thought: For me the number […]
[…]and very brave. It battles and conquers the term Chick; it explores, explains, sometimes gives into and sometimes blows away the notion of a chicklet, trapped by birth to imprint its parents; it is sexual and sensual in dear or savage or shocking ways. And it proves itself structurally, lyrically, and formally as lit-erature. The anthology calls up all of the subtle differences in the prefix post and introduces multi-leveled ideas of feminism – it’s historical, political, social, economic; it’s funny, sad, dramatic, mean, indulgent, moving, scary. It’s about mothers, daughters, wives, lovers, partners, victims, heroes, whiners, friends, Dorothy in […]
[…]and other active elements. (As this is going on, the dramatic guidance system is also acting to guide the flow of events toward the author’s story.) All of these criteria are related to those of traditional stories and games, yet many are different in important ways needed for interactive drama. Murray urges us to not be limited by the dichotomy between stories and games, but rather to recombine and reinvent their primitive elements. In working to build these systems we have found that this is not just useful, but necessary. Interactive drama allows us to tell stories that we couldn’t […]
[…]of Love finds the enfant terrible to be more reflective and even wistful, inviting his readers to come close, to bear witness to his own reclamation of these various moments and periods in his life, what he calls these “souvenirs.” At times we peer over his shoulder as he writes. The book, though, is also fuelled by back-glancing anger. He rails against the British Empire’s betrayals of the Arab world and seethes with hatred of Israel and the indifferent Arab regimes of Jordan and Egypt. Yet he portrays his Palestinian hosts with a disinterested, probing intimacy that renders issues of […]
[…]interactivity, particulary that side of the study concerned with user behavior. Hayles notes, “[T]hese physical enactments teach the interactor.” Her use of the term “interactor” and other neologisms like “spectactor” or the instrumental stalwart “user” all point to the fact that this kind of interaction is a new cultural phenomenon which is awaiting adequate language to represent its qualities. But terminology like “physical enactment” can tend to reinforce Cartesianism. This is a tendency I strenuously attempt to avoid. I would prefer to speak in terms of a new more holistic conception of “embodied mentality” where physical enactments are not thought […]
[…]dissertation, which is available at www.ludology.org. I believe that many of the issues and questions that Eric Zimmerman raised in his thorough analysis are answered in the full text of my thesis. I am fully aware that any method, including Boal’s or my own, carries ideological baggage. Zimmerman finds that my method is not ideologically neutral: I never claimed it was. Actually, I thought I made my agenda quite clear: my main goal is to foster critical thinking among players and that obviously makes me a manipulator – along with most artists and educators. Indeed, games such as Pac-Man carry […]
[…]Without this willingness, one cannot expect those involved in agent-building traditions to listen to and learn from the critical perspective. The cost of this intellectual border-crossing is that there is not one neat, coherent perspective from which the world can be viewed. This costs the reader effort, as Suchman has noted. Integrating two such widely divergent worldviews and conversations is likely possible only on a contingent basis, driven by particular problems and projects. Nevertheless, I think it is an effort well worth taking. (To Michael Mateas) Philip Agre’s formulation of critical technical practices opens a rich space of possibility by […]
[…]videogames and cybertexts as games. Our intention is not to replace the narratologic approach, but to complement it. We want to better understand what is the relationship with narrative and videogames; their similarities and differences. [Frasca] Or, to refer to another of the texts Eskelinen urges us to consider, Espen Aarseth’s Cybertext: “To claim that there is no difference between games and narrative is to ignore essential qualities of both categories. And yet, as this study tries to show, the difference is not clear-cut, and there is significant overlap between the two.” [Aarseth] Both of these “ur-texts” for ludology, then, […]
[…]a cohesive study of computer gaming, scholars must look at a very wide range of disciplines and histories, some extremely popular and “lowbrow.” Cultural studies as a theoretical discipline has thankfully paved the way for the academic study of popular culture, so that activities from kitsch refrigerator magnets to Barbie collecting can be studied with intellectual ferocity. Those who look at games need to draw upon studies of communities in sociology and other areas, cognitive psychology, and studies of interaction and use patterns in fields such as industrial design and architecture… Unfortunately, calling for new language and methodologies with which […]
[…]to the question: how useful are Zimmerman’s definitions? To what extent do they bring us closer to understanding the concoction of game and narrative? Unfortunately, the concluding suggestions he offers don’t seem to get us very far; no grand answers leap from the page. Perhaps this is too harsh a standard by which to judge his contribution. Perhaps we should settle for a more lenient standard of judgment, to wit: had these ideas been widely accepted ten years ago, would we have been spared some of the many disastrous marriages of narrative and interactivity we have seen? Consider branching stories […]