07 Jan 2008 [ Prev | Next ]

Effort: Work and Fun with ''Adventure''

The discussion of Thy Dungeonman and of Adventure are useful to help us consider how the games that went before us have shaped the games that we play now.

This is a good time to introduce the term "ergodic," a word appropriated for Game Studies by Espen Aarseth, who writes in his book Cybertext:
The reader's pleasure is the pleasure of the voyeur. Safe, but impotent.... Trying to know a cybertext is an investment of personal improvisation that can result in either intimacy or failure. The tensions at work in a cybertext, while not incompatible with those of narrative desire, are also something more: a struggle not merely for interpretative insight but also for narrative control: "I want this text to tell my story; the story that could not be without me." In some cases this is literally true. In other cases, perhaps most, the sense of individual outcome is illusory, but nevertheless the aspect of coercion and manipulation is real.
His book considers hypertext narrative along with text-adventures, but his concept of "ergodic" -- that is, requiring effort -- has become very popular among games scholars. Another important concept is fluidity -- that that part of gameplay that seems fluid, when you're in the zone, motivated to keep pushing buttons and running through mazes because you're enticed by the wonders your actions create. Leslie (a student who took this course in 2006) spoke of a heroic effort to get her "IF juices flowing" -- to move the experience from conscious effort to fluditity. I created the annotated Adventure frameset in order to help out people who were stuck in the very beginning of the game. Since the first mainframe computer games were created by geeks, for geeks, for the shared pleasure of doing and admiring something cool, I wanted the class to look at Adventure -- a pre-commercial product, created by a man who know a particular cave very well, and who first shared it with his young daughters, who knew caving very well.

Text-based games weren't boring to the first generation of computer gamers because for a long time, all programs were written to run on terminals that printed out on reams of folded paper. The display could do nothing but print out a line of text a time. You could do ASCII art to make some kinds of text-games look useful, but when that program was played on a machine connected up to the printer, it would have to print out the whole screen if one item on the screen changed. And that could take a minute or more.

For those of you who felt frustrated by the command-line routine of type something, read the response, then type somthing again, how would you feel if you had to enter your command into a bunch of punch cards, take your "stack" to a machine that read the cards and sent a request to a lab-coat-wearing "computer operator," who, when he or she got around to it, would enter your program into the computer, then take the resulting printout and put it in a cubbyhole with your name on it? Correcting a single typo could take a whole afternoon!

The ability to issue commands directly to the computer, through the keyboard, was a huge innovation that revolutionized programming -- and, shortly thereafter, gaming. Initially, the only people who played computer games were computer programmers, so those games naturally incorporated a hacker's idea of fun -- puzzle-solving, brute-force trial-and-error techniques (such as the ones you need to make progress in Adventure).

But it's not enough simply to like hacking, you also have to like words. You have to invest *effort* to get the game to work. Some gamers enjoy making their avatars respond to button combos. To me, mastering those combos is *work*. Solving a verbal puzzle is certainly *effort*. I don't usually turn to IF when I simply want to relax. But just as what counts as "fun" will change from person to person, so too will what we classify as rewarding effort and meaningless drudgery.
Categories:

7 Comments

Derek Tickle said:

Hi Everyone!
Here is my blog entry about Effort in video games.
http://blogs.setonhill.edu/DerekTickle/2008/01/new_words_for_effort.html

Kevin said:

I know I mentioned in one of my blogs that IF games are inherently related to psychoanalytics. I related IF games to the id, insofar that for the majority of people (nowadays, anyway) playing IF games, it is the immediate sense of accomplishment and gratification we get from figuring out the linguistic puzzles and managing the dialog trees.

While Koster mentioned about our brains picking apart patterns and trying our darnedest to get to the root of the pattern (not a cheating, but as utilizing a loophole), IF games can present a unique experience: we can't always find the pattern in someone else's thinking. We have to really work hard at determining what is required to understand the puzzles. It isn't just ">hit dragon with sword," but more of:
">examine dragon"
">attack weak point for massive damage"
">take dragon tooth"
">use mortar and pestle"
">grind tooth"
">add dwarf foot"
">snort powder"

Finding these strings and chains can be just as much fun as actually accomplishing the "X" objective in the game. Of course, it can be a different feeling of accomplishment, but that is the whole process of the id.

Derek Tickle said:

Kevin, I really enjoyed reading your IF/if/id blog entry and posted an in-depth comment. I agree that IF games allow the player to obtain an instant accomplishment as compared to modern day video games. IF games do require a thoughtful thinking pattern because the games are designed from the author's style. Just as your example states, "hit dragon with sword" you must go into more detail than just that (like you have shown us).

Brandon Gnesda said:

I think via my lens as an athlete I have come to find that fun, for me, generally entails some sort of hard work. While this is not a strict requirement for fun, I've found some of my most rewarding moments of fun based on work. I find a greater sense of enjoyment from games which required a little extra effort on my part to complete. I certainly don't mean this is my only source of fun, but I would definitely say that rewards are indicative of work in most cases.

zach t said:

I have been somewhat critical on the IF, text based games more so because there's no visual stimulation. But with continuing to try these types of game, it gives me a different perspective of 'gaming', making you think more and visualize yourself what you acting out in the game. I don't mind playing games that make you think a little more than others, just getting used to a 'non-visual' game is more of a factor for me.

zach t said:


I have been somewhat critical on the IF, text based games more so because there's no visual stimulation. But with continuing to try these types of game, it gives me a different perspective of 'gaming', making you think more and visualize yourself what you acting out in the game. I don't mind playing games that make you think a little more than others, just getting used to a 'non-visual' game is more of a factor for me.

Leave a comment


Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Recent Comments

zach t on Effort: Work and Fun with ''Adventure'': I have been somewhat critical on the IF, text bas
zach t on Effort: Work and Fun with ''Adventure'': I have been somewhat critical on the IF, text base
Brandon Gnesda on Effort: Work and Fun with ''Adventure'': I think via my lens as an athlete I have come to f
Ashley F on Effort: Work and Fun with ''Adventure'': My Response. http://blogs.setonhill.edu/AshleyFarm
Derek Tickle on Effort: Work and Fun with ''Adventure'': Kevin, I really enjoyed reading your IF/if/id blog
Kevin on Effort: Work and Fun with ''Adventure'': I know I mentioned in one of my blogs that IF game
Derek Tickle on Effort: Work and Fun with ''Adventure'': Hi Everyone! Here is my blog entry about Effort in
January
    1 02 03 04 05
6 07 08 09 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31