« GLS Conference | Main | Go Cabby (Past) Go! »

Jun 23, 2005

Comments

1.

Silly me, I missed that session, but this looks really fantastic. And a slightly different take on things, but I also presented a paper at DiGRA that outlines my Ph.D. research concerned with emergence, self-organisation and communities of learning. I'm very, very open to feedback...

Link to word doc here...

2.

Alas, this topic looks so lonely… so, in the midst of knocking about, some thoughts.

The concept of emergence has appeal, no doubt, but is that appeal solely because of its cool mystical flair? I understand the flock of birds analogy well enough, but beyond that, more seems to emerge from the papers about emergence than from what the papers are actually about (eg, Façade perhaps?).

And, then, related1: One of the themes I felt impressed heavily upon me at the recent DiGRA conference was that social play is a good thing – nay, a GOOD and EXCELLENT thing.

However, a couple of papers here and there – the Ho Lin et al stuff on griefing, the Pargman/Eriksson paper on law and order, and my own – indicate that not all is well, wonderful, or even that educational about the oppressive social structures (Pargman/Eriksson calls them “medieval”) that individual players (and play) must endure within mmogs.

Could it then be, I wonder, if emergence is now being positioned as another carrot placed atop the digital stick that would continuously and mercilessly beat individual play into submission? Something along the lines, perhaps, of the intriguing DThomas DiGRA paper on grinding, which I can only in retrospect incompletely (and probably inaccurately) summarize as: Sure, individual play in mmogs may be largely brain-dead and pointless grinding, but this can be a GOOD thing, because, given the proper rules-based social context, various socially determined pleasures of the self EMERGE.

Thus I wonder if there are no scenarios whatsoever, in imagination or in fact, within which emergence – and the social play that evokes it – would be a BAD thing? After all, an invasion of the body snatchers template would explain an awful lot about, among other things, Wolfram’s emergence-riddled A New Kind of Science. Eg., Individual play = cellular automata? Self = social “agent”?

And, then, related2: http://www.sportswebconsulting.ca/sportsbabel/2004/05/foundation-for-sports-geography.htm. Is something emerging here? Or, rather, is something being contained – and, thus, submerged?

And, then, related3: Hi, Lisa

3.

dmyers>
Sure, individual play in mmogs may be largely brain-dead and pointless grinding, but this can be a GOOD thing, because, given the proper rules-based social context, various socially determined pleasures of the self EMERGE.

This seems to reinforce earlier AI-oriented discussions wrt mmogs (e.g. simplified player solveable puzzles: 1., bootstrap game design: 2.). To assert a set of conclusions consistent with the above point on social play:

**) mmog individual play has been streamlined to assist group play (e.g. not too challenging combat AI);

**) enhancements to individual play will require game design improvements to support group play.

4.

Sounds like that basic economic law that says that "staying with the mass minimizes the risk". This is something that the human instinct strongly recognize (see pack behaviour), and yes I think it could lead to a stronger illusion and trusty behaviour in game terms too :)

Nice hint, thanks!

5.

Thanks for the mention Tim! The paper is in the book and on the digra site if anyone's interested. It's account of 'emergence' is probably more limited than MMORPG scholars would like (though dmyers might ;)), though I do talk about intentionality... my case study is a GameBoy Advance game that uses algorithms similar to cellular automata.
best wishes from PowerUp!

The comments to this entry are closed.