Who decides what is a game and what is not a game? Since I was very young, my notion of a game was a fun, harmless, fictional realm in which there were set rules and an ending with some desired reward. However, as I get older I am exposed to more serious and less fictional "games." What happens when a fictional game is brought into real life and is no longer harmless? Is this still considered a game? As seen in The Hunger Games as well as a recent Law and Order: SVU, there is evidence of games in which the human life is at risk.
In The Hunger Games, representatives from each district are competing in a televised competition for survival. The rules state that there can only be one winner, forcing all participants to rambunctiously kill all others in the game. This "game" is neither fictional, fun, nor harmless. It threatens the lives of all participants. Similarly, in the episode of Law and Order: SVU called Hunting Ground, a man kidnaps women and plays a "game" with them. He directly states the rules of the game in that each woman must act as an animal and be waited to be hunted by him and his gun. In a dense forest, he searches for each woman and kills them. He tells each participant that the only way to win the "game" is to die. Based on these two similar life-threatening "games", my concept of what a game is has drastically changed. I no longer think of it as a childish activity that is fun and harmless. I now know that games come in many different forms, including ones in which death is the ultimate prize.
I had a similar revelation because of this class. Before I came in, I had a very simple definition of what play and games were. However, as you mentioned, this class has broadened those examples. But I think your post brings up a good point, not the question of are all games fun but the question of what is a game? I think a game has different meanings and definitions for different people, and that games, in my head, should be fun. However, I can now see that games can be anything that involves a competition, rules, winning and losing etc.
ReplyDeleteLindsay,
ReplyDeleteI too used to think that games were childish and simply a matter of play. Before taking this class and reading the Hunger Games, I wouldn't have associated any competition of death or survival as a game. Rather, I would have considered it to be a "challenge." Through the theory of competition, I learned that a challenge can undoubtedly be defined as a game.
I definitely agree with your post as well as the comments on your post. I think that when people think about the word "game" the first things that comes to mind is either a childhood memory or something revolving around sports. I know that is how I thought prior to taking this class. I definitely never would have thought that there were so many important aspects to gaming. In fact, we all face "games" all the time in our lives. This class has definitely broadened my spectrum of what it truly means to "play".
ReplyDelete-Emma Kessler
I think a classic example of a dangerous game is Jumanji. This movie TERRIFIED me as a kid. For some reason when the bats come out of the fireplace..... freaks me out today. I find it funny though that it was based off of a picture book, because when you think of picture book you think of very child oriented themes and not scary at all. Nevertheless, it is a great film with an entertaining story. I think the "clues" in the game, such as "They grow much faster than bamboo. Take care or they'll come after you" to foreshadow the growing vines, really made the film suspenseful and interactive.
ReplyDeleteI was doubting of taking this course because I’m not a gamer and think that video games are not fun. After emailing with Mister Manty about the content of the course I got really excited. My first thought about games was automatically video games, but of course there is more than that. I have to admit that some of the topics that we addressed in class aren’t topics that I would have thought about when thinking of ‘games’ for example language or a social network.
ReplyDeleteHowever reading this blog and the comments I’m actually surprised that most people only think about fun things when thinking of games. My first thought was video games, something that I don’t think is particularly fun, more a waste of time, but I realize that there are a lot of people that would disagree, especially in this class and thought about this as a fun thing. But what about war!?! That was the second ‘subject’ I thought about when thinking of games, did really nobody think of that? With games like world of war craft, modern duty and modern warfare, war is glorified as a ‘game’! I think that this blog shows one of the strengths and goals of this course. Making people think about the broad aspects of games, as something fun, but also as something that can be deadly serious.
I, like Elise, also was very doubtful about this course. As a psych major I understood that games were more than just board games or video games, but there are also mind games, social games, etc. However, since I am not a gamer I did not know if I would actually find it interesting. Since being in this class my perception of what a game is has changed even more. This makes me think back to the first time I realized a game can be much more than a childhood game. When my brother bought his first serious video game he chose one that was violent and intense. I, up until that point, had always shared very similar interests in toys as him. But I did not find this game to be fun, amusing or entertaining. I thought it was scary! Since then my perception of the world has changed a lot, but at the same time so have all of my perceptions of all major words. Words like love, family, trust, friendship, and work have all grown exponentially in definition to me, encompassing more and more situations. Looking back, it does not surprise me the word "game" is one of them.
ReplyDelete