Growing up as a consistent gamer I always correlated fun with graphics and enhanced narratives. As a huge fan of the WWE Smackdown vs Raw game series I always had the most fun experiences battling my way to WrestleMania. However, it wasn’t until I read about Amanda Philips’ perspective I began to understand the importance of losing as well. I began to realize how the pressure of losing in main event matches made me keep playing the game, because it wasn’t easy. According to Philips “This is particularly important in studying videogames because of the way they historically have been linked to fun and fandom. We think of games as things we do for fun, even when we are making or studying them. Much of the popular discourse around gaming connects them to the pleasure and satisfaction that comes from achievement or overcoming obstacles, even when the point is not fun itself, but more mundane achievements like training. The popularity of gamification attests to the allure of “fun” for educators, advertisers, and gamers alike. But fun is not everything. Bonnie Ruberg (2015) argues that the hegemony of fun in game design and culture flattens the emotional complexity of the gamic experience, and that “no-fun” can be an affective position with radical potential. She points to scholars such as Jesper Juul (2013), who writes about how failure and frustration are also important characteristics of gameplay. In fact, failing is one of the most important parts of a game, since we do it over and over and over again”. Ironically losing in games play as much of a vital role in the creation of video games like fun does. Personally, I enjoy playing Nba 2k20 when I’m working hard to win games. For example, starting off mycareer mode with a point guard that is a 60 overall makes it very difficult to facilitate wins for your team. All of this losing constantly makes winning a much more fulfilling experience.

Even without threat, certain communities aren’t given an equal amount of social justice in the world of game development. Philips continues to convey great detail about how transwomen don’t generate much income from producing, but yet they are still vulnerable to mass harassment. She states that “Anna Anthropy, the radical trans lesbian game designer, encourages everyone to learn how to make games. She advocates for simple tools such as Twine that open up game design to those without the programming skills often thought necessary to make games (Anthropy 2012). She and other transwomen designers, including Merritt Kopas and Mattie Brice, create min – imalistic, short games that subvert AAA expectations, often telling stories or using mechanics that are not marketable in the mainstream. Their games are highly personal, occasionally unpolished, but always evocative and meaningful to play. They do not make much money, often relying on crowdfunding models to support their production. In a tragedy for justice, these transwomen have endured intense harassment for offering alternatives to the AAA industry without being able to support themselves financially”. It’s also important to acknowledge that social justice in video games is not always given to everyone. Although Twine is a tool for freedom and creativity in gaming, members of the LGBT community still aren’t fairly encouraged. Philips excerpt conveys the lack of justice in gaming amongst people who receive a lot of harassment from the gaming community. I find the harassment to be unjust, because it holds certain communities back from enjoying video games with liberation. All gamers should enjoy access to this, because the gaming experience should always be safe no matter what community you are a part of.

Work Cited

Phillips, Amanda. “Game Studies for Great Justice.” The Routledge Companion to Media
Studies and Digital Humanities, edited by Jentery Sayers, Routledge, 2018, pp. 117-127.