3 questions. 3 answers. But what if every question is the same? Every question leading to the same answer?
Ok, down to work. The second reading was TOUGH! It took me the entire weekend to perservere through the reading, ouch baby, ouch, but somehow I muddled through, and this is my two cents worth from the perspective of one who's never done computer programming (and nearly died reading all the technicalities and computer terminology). I've tried to simplify the extremely scary chunks into simpler and more comprehensible explanation, here goes:
Question 1.1
Choose an example that you consider to be “new media”, and describe it in terms of Manovich's five principles. What implications do these principles have for narrative and play within interactive media?
I chose Handphone games e.g. playing golf on my motorola
- Numerical representation: the distance the ball travels is calculated by the angle and power of the stroke I choose PLUS the weather conditions; following Manovich's logic the computer component of the golf game itself makes it numerically representable - the graphics are composed of pixels and the user's input (pressing buttons to adjust projectile of ball) is actually all subject to mathematics and manipulation of formulae. Now would probably be the time to admit I never did physics in O levels...groan...
- Modularity: Each game is different, yet same. I suppose this is rather limited in the game because I can't exactly modify the little itsy-bitsy components of game to play better. But I bet there is something in the game that makes its separate, independent parts conjoined althought "stored indepdently" and therefore modular. Still, there's standardization in terms of how the VR Aileen golfer looks like - hideous - and I can save the unfinished game when have phonecall without the game being affected (parts stored separately?)
- Automation: This is probably the most obvious principle in the game. I can play against computer opponents in the competition rounds to gain money, which in turn gives me access to buying better golf equipment. The AI technology versus Aileen's brain is not working out so well for this game, it is so effective in "pretend(ing) to be intelligent" I can't get past the first round. Anyway, I'm assuming the AI has something to do with the Java logo that pops up everytime the game starts up.
- Variability: There are uncountable versions of golf games I can possibly play. Sometimes the first stroke goes into the water, or the sand trap. Sometimes it is the eighth or twentieth stroke. But the permutations are mind boggling because there is no way every game is the same unless I somehow manage to get my ball to land on the exact spot at every hit. The variables include having the freedom to make it My Own Unique Game and adjust the angle of stroke, the golf club used, and even uncontrollable weather factors - sometime raining, sometimes dry. Also, user customization is seen in me turning the annoying music off.
- Transcoding: hmm..playing golf on handphone would affect playing golf in real life? I suppose after playing in Virtual Reality too long, if I actually strike lottory and get a chance to step onto a golf course to play real golf, I might see things in computer blinkers and translate the same strategies for winning to reality when it might not work. I might overlook that golfing with your non AI opponents involves much more psychological manipulation, such as letting him win a little before I trash him in complacency, or other means like bribing his cabby, casually sneezing before they swing or slipping a laxative into their drink before the game.
Implications
Converting golf culture to golfing game involves the element of play where we are led to believe we have a choice in the outcome but there are actually limited options. Does this mean there are really limited options in a golf game? (probability of killing a bird in reality is almost nill but it is not zero) Put in larger terms, does this mean life choices are really limited? Manovich suggests the Myth of Interactivity where in a new media, we are not interacting with the computer and each branch we choose is actually based on "pre-programmed, objectively exisiting assumptions". Which means... the game designer controls me through the game, instead of the other way round! Creepy.
Right. Not sure if this made any sense at all.
Ok, down to work. The second reading was TOUGH! It took me the entire weekend to perservere through the reading, ouch baby, ouch, but somehow I muddled through, and this is my two cents worth from the perspective of one who's never done computer programming (and nearly died reading all the technicalities and computer terminology). I've tried to simplify the extremely scary chunks into simpler and more comprehensible explanation, here goes:
Question 1.1
Choose an example that you consider to be “new media”, and describe it in terms of Manovich's five principles. What implications do these principles have for narrative and play within interactive media?
I chose Handphone games e.g. playing golf on my motorola
- Numerical representation: the distance the ball travels is calculated by the angle and power of the stroke I choose PLUS the weather conditions; following Manovich's logic the computer component of the golf game itself makes it numerically representable - the graphics are composed of pixels and the user's input (pressing buttons to adjust projectile of ball) is actually all subject to mathematics and manipulation of formulae. Now would probably be the time to admit I never did physics in O levels...groan...
- Modularity: Each game is different, yet same. I suppose this is rather limited in the game because I can't exactly modify the little itsy-bitsy components of game to play better. But I bet there is something in the game that makes its separate, independent parts conjoined althought "stored indepdently" and therefore modular. Still, there's standardization in terms of how the VR Aileen golfer looks like - hideous - and I can save the unfinished game when have phonecall without the game being affected (parts stored separately?)
- Automation: This is probably the most obvious principle in the game. I can play against computer opponents in the competition rounds to gain money, which in turn gives me access to buying better golf equipment. The AI technology versus Aileen's brain is not working out so well for this game, it is so effective in "pretend(ing) to be intelligent" I can't get past the first round. Anyway, I'm assuming the AI has something to do with the Java logo that pops up everytime the game starts up.
- Variability: There are uncountable versions of golf games I can possibly play. Sometimes the first stroke goes into the water, or the sand trap. Sometimes it is the eighth or twentieth stroke. But the permutations are mind boggling because there is no way every game is the same unless I somehow manage to get my ball to land on the exact spot at every hit. The variables include having the freedom to make it My Own Unique Game and adjust the angle of stroke, the golf club used, and even uncontrollable weather factors - sometime raining, sometimes dry. Also, user customization is seen in me turning the annoying music off.
- Transcoding: hmm..playing golf on handphone would affect playing golf in real life? I suppose after playing in Virtual Reality too long, if I actually strike lottory and get a chance to step onto a golf course to play real golf, I might see things in computer blinkers and translate the same strategies for winning to reality when it might not work. I might overlook that golfing with your non AI opponents involves much more psychological manipulation, such as letting him win a little before I trash him in complacency, or other means like bribing his cabby, casually sneezing before they swing or slipping a laxative into their drink before the game.
Implications
Converting golf culture to golfing game involves the element of play where we are led to believe we have a choice in the outcome but there are actually limited options. Does this mean there are really limited options in a golf game? (probability of killing a bird in reality is almost nill but it is not zero) Put in larger terms, does this mean life choices are really limited? Manovich suggests the Myth of Interactivity where in a new media, we are not interacting with the computer and each branch we choose is actually based on "pre-programmed, objectively exisiting assumptions". Which means... the game designer controls me through the game, instead of the other way round! Creepy.
Right. Not sure if this made any sense at all.
posted by aileen @ 8:20 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home