Search results for "critical code studies working group"
| Results 921 - 930 of 1114
|
Page 93 of 112
|
|
Sorted by: Relevance | Sort by: Date
|
Results per-page: 10 | 20 | 50 | All
|
[…]upon which to build a theory of interactive media. Ludologists generally come out of game studies [e.g. Avedon and Sutton-Smith 1971], take the computer game as the paradigmatic interactive form, and seek to build an autonomous theory of interactivity (read: free of the English department), which, while borrowing from classical games studies, is sensitive to the novel particularities of computer games (this is sometimes described as a battle against the colonizing force of narrative theory, as Eskelinen does in First Person). Both camps take issue with an Aristotelian conception of interactive drama, finding it theoretically unsophisticated, an impossible combination of […]
It seems that Jane Douglas never got as far as the title of my piece. Otherwise she would have understood that I was addressing computer games, not interactive art. I don’t think Richard Schechner’s “I don’t think” carries the intellectual weight it was perhaps intended to carry. In fact I don’t think it even qualifies as a commentary. Together these two cases of non-communicative self-promotion show the current sad state of discussion on and around computer games: you can say pretty much anything you like if you don’t care to define the concepts you use. Douglas and Schechner won’t or […]
[…]its purported subjects. First published in France in 1986 and culled from manuscripts Genet was working on when he died, Prisoner of Love, in a translation by Barbara Bray, has been republished by New York Review of Books. Hailed by Edward Said as a “grand and fearless” account of a struggle that even before the intifada of 1987 has seemed doomed, Prisoner of Love moves seamlessly between polemical deduction and poetic meditation. Genet’s narrative is more philosophical than psychological, flashing back in time from his first two-year “visit” to the West Bank in 1971, during King Hussein’s offensives against the […]
[…]its scope to any one media form. In fact, the term ludology was introduced to computer game studies in the Cybertext Yearbook According to Gonzalo Frasca, who is credited with introducing ludology and operates ludology.org. Markku Eskelinen is coeditor of the Cybertext Yearbook, with Raine Koskimaa. — named for Aarseth’s term — and has been partly popularized by the community around the journal Game Studies, of which Aarseth is the general editor. Aarseth’s theoretical positions were influenced by those of Stuart Moulthrop, whose work as a critic and artist (which rose to prominence with the dual 1991 publications of the […]
[…]to continually reinscribe the mind/body split. Sensorial immersion, I argue, can also be a form of critical awareness. Such complex experiences in simulations may not be games in the strict sense, but are certainly configurative practices, and configurative practices that engage our bodies in very direct ways—and in ways that question the social and material conditions of our felt experience. Yet this strategy is reliant on a sense of immersion. What then is the relation of such a form of immersion to the notion of transparency? It would be easy to dismiss “immersive” virtual reality (VR) as simply an example […]
[…]a cultural object generates undisputed affect and significance in an unfamiliar way, then familiar critical schemata are not going to help us either to understand or make more of it. Narrative, closure, and pleasure are only any good at helping us to see why bad stories are bad. The formulation: configuration for the sake of interpretation = art/work; interpretation for the sake of configuration = game/play is highly suggestive and useful as an articulation of distinct practices. However, the formulation itself implies and necessitates both an interplay of these overarching “user functions” (as they are called in the Aarseth/Eskelinen schemes) […]
[…]I do with the native strain. This is not to say, however, that my respondents have failed in their critical duties. Both complain with some justification about the characteristic lack of subtlety in my polemic. Cayley worries that my provocative title sets up an absolute division between its two terms: “I think we have to play more on the ambiguities of ‘play’ here,” he writes, and goes on to argue for “transitional cultural objects” occupying ambiguous positions between market categories and art genres. This is an important and enlightening correction to my dualism, and one which I am inclined to […]
[…]Rather, E-AI is a stance or viewpoint from which all of AI can be rethought and transformed. Critical technical practice Both SS-AI and E-AI are instances of what Agre calls critical technical practice (CTP). Agre defines CTP to refer to a scientific and technical practice which engages in a continuous process of reflective critique of its own foundations. This reflective critique consciously constructs new, contingent myths to heuristically guide the practice. No fixed-point is ever sought or found. A CTP is in a continuous state of revolution. A critical technical practice would not model itself on what Kuhn called “normal […]
[…]as the resulting cognitive differences, Jenkins runs the risk of reducing his comparative media studies into repetitive media studies: seeing, seeking, and finding stories, and nothing but stories, everywhere. Such pannarrativism could hardly serve any useful ludological or narratological purpose. Jenkins’s text is entertaining, but his criteria would turn Zelda into a musical instrument, gardening into a spatial narrative, Picasso’s Guernica into a bombing, and every novel and film describing games into a game. Players, readers and spectators usually need prior knowledge, but there’s no reason to privilege any particular source for that information. Jon McKenzie responds Henry Jenkins […]
[…]First Person essay: So if there already is or soon will be a legitimate field for computer game studies, this field is also very open to intrusions and colonizations from the already organized scholarly tribes. Resisting and beating them is the goal of our first survival game in this paper, as what these emerging studies need is independence, or at least relative independence. One can’t help but note that Eskelinen’s position is significantly more rigid than the one adopted by Frasca and Aarseth. Far from seeing ludology as a “complement” to narratology, Eskelinen wants to barricade the gates against any […]