skip to main content
10.1145/2393132.2393184acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmindtrekConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Making and analyzing games: not as art, but as literature

Published:03 October 2012Publication History

ABSTRACT

Despite the common tendency to understand computer games as a medium somewhere between film and traditional software, this paper argues for a more appropriate position amongst literature. This writing explores the opportunities in analogizing digital games not as art, but as literature. Within this framing new opportunities reveal themselves for innovative game design and more manageable archiving of games and their relationships. It should prove useful to media theorists, designers, and game librarians seeking a new way to frame the analysis and production of digital games.

References

  1. Friberg, J., Gärdenfors, D. Audio games: new perspectives on game audio, Proceedings of the 2004 ACM SIGCHI International Conference on Advances in computer entertainment technology, p. 148--154, June 03-05, 2005, Singapore {doi>10.1145/1067343.1067361} Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Fullerton, T., Swain, C., Hoffman, S. Game Design Workshop: A Playcentric Approach to Creating Innovative Games. New York, NY. Morgan Kaufmann, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Valve Corporation. Portal. Bellevue, Washington, Oxtober 9, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Broken Rules. And Yet it Moves. Vienna, Austria, April 2, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Billal, W., Lydersen, K. Shoot an Iraqi Art, Life and Resistance Under the Gun. September, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Gottschalk, P. Hamlet and the Scanning of Revenge. Shakespeare Quarterly, Vol. 24, No. 2 (Spring, 1973), pp. 155-170. Folger Shakespeare Library.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Murray, J. Hamlet on the holodeck: the future of narrative in cyberspace. New York, New York: Simon and Schuster Inc., 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. McMahan, A. Immersion, Engagement, and Presence in The Video Game Theory Reader, by Mark J. P. Wolf and Bernard Perron, 67-76. New York: Routledge, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Titus Software. Superman 64. Paris, France, May 29, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Bungie. Halo: Combat Evolved. Bellevue, Washington, November 15, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Giant Sparrow. The Unfinished Swan. Santa Monica, CA, 09 01, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Rockstar Games. Red Dead Revolver. San Diego, CA. May 3, 2004Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Capcom. Gun. Smoke. Torrance, CA. November, 1985.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Rainey, L., Poggie, C., Wittman, L. Futurism: An Anthology. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Harmonix. Rock Band. Cambridge, MA. November 20, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Number None. Braid. Berkely, CA., August 6, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Experimental Gameplay Project, http://experimentalgameplay.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Making and analyzing games: not as art, but as literature

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      MindTrek '12: Proceeding of the 16th International Academic MindTrek Conference
      October 2012
      278 pages
      ISBN:9781450316378
      DOI:10.1145/2393132
      • Conference Chair:
      • Artur Lugmayr

      Copyright © 2012 Author

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 3 October 2012

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      MindTrek '12 Paper Acceptance Rate19of43submissions,44%Overall Acceptance Rate110of207submissions,53%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader