Hatoful Boyfriend is a game I remember talking about with a fellow co-worker over the summer. I couldn’t remember the name of the game until we played it in class but the second we started streaming, it all came back to me. My friend was THRILLED about this game and was fully invested emotionally. This game is both humorous and weird and the thought of playing a bird dating simulator is definitely not a common one. Part of me wants to know how someone came up with the decision to create a bird dating simulator game. Dating human characters in a game is one thing but birds?

Hatoful Boyfriend is one of the reasons why I think that dating sims are one of the most versatile game genres out there. Dating sims leave the door wide open for game developers to be able to step out of their comfort zone and create something that has never really been done before. We saw that with Dream Daddy where you go around dating different Dads. Dating sims are also a simple way to create a game that isn’t too complex but represent a group of people that might usually not be represented very often in games. There’s a dating sim called Katawa Shoujo, where you find true love with one of the several girl characters in the game. What makes this game unique though is the fact that every character has some sort of disability. People with disabilities are a group that is not often represented in video games so being able to create a game that does so is amazing. With just a simple search on the web, you can see the multitude of dating sims available to us. Jurassic Heart involves a T-rex, there’s even an alpaca and printer(yes a printer) dating sim game out there.

There seems to be no limit when it comes to dating sims. If someone has made a dating sim about a printer, I am sure it can get even weirder from there. There’s no saying what dating sim developers will release next. I’m tempted to delve into the black hole that is the dating sim world and really see for myself how much weirder these games can get.

For my research project, I decided to play an Indie game called Virginia. I’ve never heard of this game until Dr. Cody brought it up to me but it lined up with my research topic pretty well and I decided to check it out. Basically, this game follows a female African American FBI agent as she investigates her first case on the job. Without giving too much of the game away, I must note that in order to “kinda” understand what is happening with the game’s story you really need to play this game multiple times – It has a weird ending I still don’t quite understand… As I played through the game my first time, I realized that it provided me absolutely no dialogue or narrative, whatsoever. All throughout the game, I found myself trying to get a feel for the protagonist’s character through the game’s story all while also trying to piece together what exactly was going on in the story itself. The game’s lack of dialogue, along with many other factors, led for a very mysterious, but confusing initial first play. This lead me to wonder whether or not games like this was popular amongst the gaming community.

Since this game had no dialogue, most of the game’s narrative was up to your interpretation, especially went it comes to the ending of the game. The ending of this game was very much like a si-fi movie. There wasn’t a clear defined way that the story was supposed to end and you really had to make out your own interpretation of what you think happened. Half of me enjoyed that there was a lack of dialogue because it let me define my character how I wanted to. You have the ability to pretty much build your own interpretation of the story and the character itself. How your character sounds, acts, moves is all up to you. On the flip slide however, the game’s lack of dialogue in combination with the random jump cuts to a completely different scene left me confused most of the time.

Lets compare this game to Gone Home, another first person walking sim game we played in class. Gone home had a narrative that would be triggered whenever you interacted with a particular element of the game whether that was a book, Television, etc. It also had images with text that you could read like the letters you’d find. Even though “Gone Home” didn’t provide you with direct dialogue like a visual novel would like “Dream Daddy,” the story was being told through various letters you would find and occasional narratives that would open up a little more about who we were trying to find. In “Virginia” there was no narrative, no dialogue, and barely anything that you’d interact with was anything readable. This made for a very open ended game where playing it multiple times may give you a different interpretation of what happened – which happened to me…

Most of this game was also produced as if it was a movie. There were lots of jump cuts, no real transitions to any of the scenes and there was a really direct path to get to the end of the game. In all scenes you’d have to interact with a very specific element in order to progress to the next scene. This brings up an earlier discussion we had regarding the “Video Games Are Better Without Stories” article where the author was arguing that games with no stories are better and that some games should be made into movies instead. That brought up the question for this game as well. Do I really think that this game would’ve been better as a movie? I don’t really know… I did enjoy the game and the fact that the interpretation of the story was up to the players, there are lots of discussions on the internet about what other people think happened at the end. The open ended-ness of the game created quite the talk online and I feel like that’s what makes this game unique. However, would I enjoy this story if it were a movie? Probably… The thing about video games is the interaction part of it. Even though this game had a very linear game play, it still let me explore the scenes for more than the 5 seconds I’d have if it were a game. Would I have liked it if this game gave me more hints on what actually happened? YES. I really want to know what the real ending to this game is and it’s killing me that I will probably never know.

This week we discussed user-generated content and the wonderful world of Minecraft. The fascinating thing with user-generated content (UGC) games, like Minecraft, is the ability for a game to sustain itself strictly depending on the creativity of their players. Minecraft leaves the gaming world with endless possibilities from re-creating real life attractions, building your own fantasy world, and even creating puzzles that challenges and connects players in the community. UGC games have the ability to create a huge community connecting players all around the world via a singular game.

In the “Minecraft: User-Generated Content” Chapter of HTPVG, Newman discusses “Minecraft’s mutability as a game” (277, HTPVG:Kindle) and refers to players as content generators. The mutability of Minecraft as a game allows for its players to choose the kind of experience that they want out of it. Players can choose to play in Survival mode and fend off the various mobs that they encounter, or take a more free-flowing approach and play in Creative mode to create their own virtual worlds. The wide range of gameplay that Minecraft provides allows it to be a game for all ages, genders, professions, etc. Mods that are available allow players to switch it up giving them endless different gameplay possibilities. The mutability of the game will allow for it to adapt well to the changing world of gaming. Minecraft is a game that grows with the player. As players go from Middle School or High School or High School to College, the virtual world they build in Minecraft will grow as they do.

Another great aspect of UGC games is the community they build around them. UGC Games like Minecraft and Super Mario Maker have HUGE communities of players. Newman states in the HTPVG chapter, “Minecraft’s UGC is not limited to creations made within its pixelated game world. Countless online video channels offer advanced building tutorials, tours, and explanations of expert creations” (278, HTPVG:Kindle). Newman brings up the idea of how Minecraft continues to grow outside of just playing the game. Similar to the video we watched in class, people stream their plays, give tours of the elaborate worlds that they’ve built and even give tutorials on how to build those worlds yourselves. The open-endedness of Minecraft gives player endless opportunities to try new creations by learning from their fellow Minecraft creators. Similar to Super Mario Maker, players have the ability to create their own creative Mario platform game. Players are provided with the tools they need to build their platform games and the rest is up to them. The online community of Super Mario Maker is endless. Players can post their own game creations online and others are challenged with the task to complete them. There’s numerous videos on YouTube of gamers playing 0.00% games which is basically where gamers play levels that have a 0% completion percentage in the community. This gives players endless amounts of gameplay. There will always be the challenge of creating a difficult game and also completing other 0.00% games. This competitive aspect of a UGC game is what keeps this game a staple piece in anyone’s collection of Nintendo games.

I can see UGC games becoming a more popular type of game for developers to produce. The ability to attract a diverse group of gamers as well as the endless possibilities of gameplay make UGC games an overall popular pick for any type of gamer.

This week in class we discussed more about Casual, Social and Mobile Games. The article we read from Tama Leaver and Michele Willson titled “Social networks, casual games and mobile devices: The shifting contexts of gamers and gaming” talked about the changes in the gaming landscape and the growing popularity of casual, mobile and social games. For the sake of this post I will be using the term “Casual Games” as an overarching term for social and mobiles games.

The article states ” What is undeniable is that social, casual and mobile games in all of their forms are being adopted by increasing numbers or the population.” With casual games rising in popularity, it poses the question once again of whether or not those who play casual games is classified as an actual gamer. If you search the definition of “Gamer” it will actually tell you that a gamer is defined as “a person who plays video games or participates in role-playing games.” The thing that caught my eye when I Googled the word “Gamer” is that they defined a gamer as someone who takes part in role-playing games. This would mean that anyone who plays a game that allows them to immerse themselves into the story would be a gamer. Now, do I think this is a good way to classify whether someone is a gamer or not? Yes? No? I don’t know… I go back and forth on this a lot. If going by the “role-playing games” definition casual game players may or may not be gamers. Those who play games like Stardew Valley and Animal Crossing would count as gamers since those games really allows each player to immerse themselves into the story and feel as if they actually are living on that farm or that island and building up their town as if it’s real life. On the other hand, those who play mobile games like Candy Crush or Angry Birds wouldn’t really be gamers because those games aren’t really role-playing games. At the forefront of everything, this looks like a pretty decent way to define whether someone is a gamer or not. But then what about social games like “Farmville” that kinda falls under “role-playing games” but those who play games like Farmville don’t play enough to really immerse themselves into the game. Are the gamers? Something I like about this “role-playing” gamer standpoint is that it takes platform out of the question and looks at it from a game standpoint alone. With the gaming landscape changing so rapidly, this allows us to look at this question from a game standpoint strictly instead of taking the platform it is on into account.

Something else to consider is what counts as a video game? Mobile games currently are seen as their own entity. They’re games but they’re not really seen as a video game and that goes hand in hand with the question of “Who is a gamer.” Mobile games still are not seen as part of the video game world so those who play those games also are not seen as a gamer. We need to first decide what we classify as a video game and from there, we can better define who really is a gamer. How I see it, is that there are two different classification of games, “Video Games” and “Games.” “Video Games” are those role-playing games we discussed and “games” are those social and mobile games that allow to pick up and play anywhere you go. The gaming community may never agree on who classifies as a gamer or what games classifies as a video game, but what we can agree on is that the world of gaming is changing and growing as we know it.

This week, there was a lot of discussion on Female Games and what that means. We read from Shira Chess’ “Ready Player Two” where in the Playing With Identity Chapter, it defined what a Female Game really consists of. It was said that games that are “low risk,” and more forgiving are more appealing to the female audience. Games like FarmVille and Words with Friends were called out specifically as being Female games since they are more social games.

What I want to focus more on however is what was mentioned on page 39 of the book. “We have a problem where the game industry does not see women as a market. They see women as a genre.” By viewing women as a genre, this makes any game that is released for women, the same typical social game that is defined as a “Female Game.” For men however, they are viewed as a market. Games are built to target a market but there are plenty of games that have the ability to target that specific market. When women are viewed as a genre, the games released for women typically fall under the “women genre” of video games. This limits the different variety of games that would be released for women as well as it groups all women into the same target audience. For the market place for men, there are more child appropriate games like “Cars” for younger boys and more mature games like “Grand Theft Auto” for older men. However, for female games, they all fall under the same category. The are all social, low risk, low consequence games.

I want to relate this to the ever so popular game “Animal Crossing: New Horizons.” This game falls perfectly under the guidelines for a female game. It’s social, no chance for failure, low risk and the worst that can happen to you would be an attack from a wild tarantula that forces you to Re-spawn. People who play this game varies from kids, to women of all ages, to men as well. This game seems to fall under the Female Category but who it exactly targets is hard to tell. Since these female game target such a large pool of people, you can never really tell who its real target audience is. However for a game like “Grand Theft Auto” you can tell immediately it is for a more mature male audience. Speaking of audience, why is it that when Men play a “female game” like Animal Crossing, they are not questioned about it but when a female plays a typical male targeted game, they are told that they don’t belong?

Growing up around the Mario craze, I have distinct memories of playing Balloon Battle on Mario Kart with my Pink Nintendo DS or Yoshi’s Island on my Game Boy advance. 20 Years later, Mario games are still taking over the console world, with Mario Party and Mario Kart being popular go-to games for group gatherings. The Mario Franchise has been around for about 40 years and their new releases never disappoint. With every game they release they provide us with both the excitement of a new game, but also the Nostalgia that older games provide. The nostalgia that comes from Mario games will never die. Why is that?

What makes Mario Games so Nostalgic? For one thing, games like Mario Kart and Super Mario Bros hasn’t changed significantly since they were first launched. Sure, the games now have definitely improved with clearer imaging on the Super Mario games and more elaborate tracks on the most recent release of Mario Kart. However, the overall concept of these games have not changed since they were first released. You play Mario Kart 8 the same way you’d play the original Mario Kart game. You might not be playing it on the same console, but the overall game play is the same. The same linear map is provided with every super Mario game. You’re provided with a pre-determined path that you need to follow in order to complete the level. Newer releases may give you more levels to complete or better graphics but the overall goal of the game never changes. That is what Nintendo does so well. Nintendo has done an excellent job in ensuring that with every new release of an Original Mario game, they don’t change the overall game play of it. This helps to build the Reflective Nostalgia mentioned in the Shovel Night chapter in How to Play Video Games. Regarding the reflective Nostalgia that the Shovel Night game provides, Vanderhoef states “Upon its release, critics praised the game for its ‘Classic,’ ‘old school,’ ‘retro’ appeal” (Shovel Night 319). This is similar to what Nintendo is doing with their games. By keeping their game design similar to how they were on the original release, they provide players with that reflective Nostalgia that they’re looking for.

What reflective Nostalgia does best is it gives us a sense of escape. Playing Mario games brings me back to my childhood. It reminds me of a more simpler time, playing video games with my sister and having no real “Responsibilities.” For this reason exactly, I find myself playing Mario games to get away from the real world and reflect on a part of my life where “adulting” wasn’t a thing. I feel that Reflective Nostalgia is especially significant for adults. It provides us with a memory of the past. Maybe that memory is with someone we used to know, or someone that is no longer with us. Whatever that memory may be, find a game from your childhood that provides you with that nostalgia.

After reading Bogost’s “Video Games Are Better Without Stories” article it got me thinking… are games really better without stories? I find myself disagreeing with his argument. If you take the stories out of video games then you’re left with games like Tetris and Candy Crush. In reality, I would never rank a game like Tetris over any game with a proper storyline. Games like BioShock allow players to immerse themselves into a fictional world and play as someone they’re not. When I play video games I’m making moves as if I am the character itself. Video games are an opportunity for us all to escape from the real world and story-less games like Tetris don’t provide that escape. Tetris and Candy Crush are games I like to call “Subway games.” They’re games you take out to pass time. You play them on your commute to work or school with no real purpose or goal in mind. However with narrative games they provide a storyline that allows you to continue building or exploring a world you’ve been working on forever. It drives you to keep returning to the game to see what comes next.

In Bogost’s article he mentions why narrative games can’t just be made into films. He says “Real-time rendering tools are as good as pre-rendered computer graphics these days, and little would have been compromised visually had the game been an animated film. Or even a live-action film” (Bogost). My take on why narrative video games should not be made into films is because the experience that video games provides is different from the experience that films provide. People that play video games are looking for choices – the opportunity to pick their own path. However, when you are watching a film, that freedom to choose is taken away. Even if games provide a false sense of choice, there is still opportunity for us to pick our own path. Players are “in control” when playing video games. However, when you watch films, you are forced to sit back and analyze the story. Sure, the story line of games are important and making the game into a film would help audiences better understand that story, but we are not here only for the story, we are here for the experience. We are looking for the opportunity to be someone we are not.

What if games were also made into films? How would that affect the gaming community? What would happen if people playing the game also had the opportunity to watch the full story? I feel like it would be interesting to see the full story play out. However, I also feel as if it would ruin the experience. The element of surprise is one thing that makes playing video games so entertaining. Not knowing what is coming next keeps players on their toes and keeps them wanting more. I do think though that being able to see a video game’s narrative being played out from beginning to end might be cool.

After reading Audre Lorde’s “Age, Race, Class, and Sex: Women Redefining Difference” reading, I want to touch on the issue of racial differences in our society today. It seems as if the differences between white people and people of color are more apparent today than ever before, however there are not enough steps being taken to fix this. Women of color are still seen as a separate group from white women, people of color are still being treated differently and representation of people of color is still very rare in video games – to name a few. This “Racial ‘Otherness'” that Lorde refers to is very much rooted into our society today. Our grandparents grew up with it, our parents grew up with it, and most of us also grew up aware of this “Racial Otherness.” Even though we are aware of this racial difference we all seem to ignore it. Using my family as an example, I know for a fact that whenever my parents bring up a stereotypical remark towards people of color, my sister and I act as if the conversation never happened. Why do we do this? Is it because we don’t want to explain to our parents why they shouldn’t say stuff like that? Do I hide behind the fact that they are immigrants that grew up in a very different environment and use that as an excuse to their actions? The point I am trying to make is that racial difference is rooted very deep into our lives, but recognizing that and making an effort to not ignore it is a first step in closing the gap between white people and people of color.

I want to reflect back on the Audre Lorde “Age, Race, Class, and Sex: Women Redefining Difference” reading. There is a passage that hit me like a brick. “Some problems we share as women, some we do not. You fear your children will grow up to join the patriarchy and testify against you. we fear our children will be dragged from a car and shot down in the street, and you will turn your backs upon the reasons they are dying” (Lorde 119). To put into perspective how much of a problem this racial difference is – I did some Google-ing and found that this reading, taken from “Sister Outsider,” was originally published in 1984. For a reading from the 1900’s this passage hasn’t aged a bit. The racial differences mentioned are just as relevant back then as they are today. People of color still fear for the safety of their children’s lives and some of us still choose to ignore that.

I want to continue this discussion by talking about video games and Race. We talked about wanting more women representation in video games but what about more representation for people of color? We rarely see people of color being portrayed in video games. Do ya’ll know of games where people of color are portrayed as the “hero” or as the main character? I don’t play many games today as I used to so if you know of any please comment them below. I want to check them out! As we play our video games in our past times try to keep a mental log of how many characters you come across as a person of color and compare that to how many characters you see that are white.