After the series of courses in which we discussed gaming, it really got me thinking. I always thought of gaming as we analyzed as the typical stereotype: immature, anti-social, silly, waste-of-time. But after discussing the different levels of involvement in gaming my opinion definitely changed- as I have never met someone who is an extreme gamer: undertaking a lifestyle or identity within a game that takes minutes and hours from reality in front of screen in order to gain importance within the virtual world.
In class we watched a documentary going into detail about examples of companies such as ES Sports, and the overall differentiation between work and play, and if these terms were becoming increasingly blended together. In the documentary, they went into detail concerning two main topics: ES Sports and America’s Army.
First of all I must express my opinion in terms of the example with ES Sports. In the documentary, there was footage showing the offices of the creators of the games, and some of which have to “play” for work. However, more of them were actually creating the games, which requires enormous talent- despite the action of playing commonly viewed as immature. I find this to be a completely different perspective than America’s Army example or even that of the couple who were frequent gamers (Chilled bubbly?).
America’s Army is a whole different ballgame, and despite the opinions people may have – it is interesting enough that the US army did indeed achieve their recruiting goals of that year with (mostly) the help of the game as an advertising tool. It seems like an odd tool to use, but also is logical, as they stated in the documentary that it is a volunteer army, and they are simply reaching out to an audience that is more likely to be interested in joining the army.
The actions of working and playing are mixed around and blended in these examples, as one may argue that if it is what the person loves doing, it can be for the better, just as an actor in Hollywood or a director of a film: where does passion step in? These backdoor views are the creators and purposes for the initiation of these particular games. As we saw with the director of Sims, it is a large project, not a game on that part- as large sums of money are involved and in America’s Army’s case- young males and females joining the US army for something as serious as fighting for their country. Perhaps working that is viewed as play is just a stereotype as gaming is considered a leisure activity, but the behind the scenes obviously isn’t the same discussion as picking up a game console remote or a computer mouse to complete tasks in an alternate virtual context.
These examples put a new perspective on the examples of people and gaming habits, and how work and play are blended and often confused depending on the person’s personal opinion and/or passion for their career. I do feel that this documentary was interesting and brings up a lot of points, but that it doesn't connect the idease by showing more examples of different types of gaming exaggerations out there in uses that may confuse work and play. At any rate, it was very interesting to learn of the example with the US Army as I find it quite interesting from a Marketing perspective.
Attachments & Findings:
1)Video from YouTube about the America's Army Game.
2)Secondly, here is a link to an essay I found online that is very interesting in terms of Branding and Marketing that the Game does for the US Army, emphasizing the changes in Media Communications over the decades: Together We Brand: America’s Army by Shenja Van Der Graaf and David B. Nieborg
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire