A new game that has recently entered closed Beta is a tactical shooter by the company that made league of legends, RIOT games. Being as the game has the play style of the popular tactical shooter by Valve, Counter Strike: Global Offensive, it draws a lot of players from this game in. The interesting aspect of Valorant is that it tries to combine the tactical play style of Counter Strike with the ability management of games like Overwatch and Apex Legends. This has resulted in players from both of these games moving over to try their hand at becoming pro players in a game run by the company who made League of Legends into one of the most successful E-sports of all time. Because of the competitive nature of the community as they try to step on top of each other to reach fame and fortune, Toxicity is running rampant in the game. You have players from Overwatch,one of the most toxic communities in gaming, and players from League of Legends, who have toxicity in their middle name, melding together to compete in becoming the best in a game created to foster competition in E-sports.
Did you think players got mad when they lost rank when it was just a title? Well, It is rumored that the top players of Valorant will be paid for having the highest rank. Imagine the rage these players are going to have when they lose a game and lose their chance at the cash reward of being Top 10.
All I am saying is this might be a game that casual players will be ran out of by players producing more toxicity than the smog of LA.

This week we discussed how harmful rhetorics, such as with the Alt-Right movement, can be spread in gaming communities, as well as what impact user generated content has on video games. While we discussed social justice in video games and its many benefits last week, we explored the opposite side of this discussion this week. Many movements begin on the internet and in video games due to how quickly information and word of mouth can spread, in addition to the amount of impressionable users in virtual worlds on the internet, such as “Fortnite”. A common ground is found in these games, in adoration of the game, and is used to the advantage of people who want to push their beliefs onto others. For example, if a rumor is started that the lead developer of a game hates a mechanic that many players love and is looking to change it, many players would get upset and rally for the game to stay the same. This vulnerability is exploited by those who want to push their own political beliefs, and helps further the agenda of whomever wants to take advantage of impressionable or young players. An example of this is with the satirical presidential candidate, Ace Watkins, who touts himself as “The first gamer president”. While many political candidates scapegoat violent video games as the cause for domestic terrorism, violence in schools, and crime, Ace Watkins joyfully posts on his Twitter about political and gaming issues, such as that healthcare should receive more funding, and that loot boxes “should at least tell you the drop rate before you open them”. While this example is humorous, it shows the potency that a community as large as the gaming community can have on the political climate, as Ace Watkins started to surpass the follower count of actual politicians in mere days after his tweets first began. This issue of video games being politicized ties in loosely to the topic of User Generated content, as some use the creative functions of games such as “Minecraft” or “Fortnite” to push their agendas further in subtle ways, such as by making a large shrine to Ben Shapiro in “Minecraft” or putting “MAGA caps” in “Garry’s Mod”. While these cases are minimal and most are satirical in nature, the free speech and use of self generated content can be used in this context. In most cases, user generated content can range from elaborate and masterful creations, such as the building of world scale replicas of Disney World in “Minecraft”, or the weird and wacky, such as with Pickle Rick character mods in “Grand Theft Auto”. Creative outlets such as extensive editors and modding tools allow for players to send any message they want to other like minded players around the world, whether these messages be lighthearted or loaded with political statements and calls for change. The gaming space has certainly become vastly different with the introduction of online multiplayer and modding, allowing for anyone to spin their own stories and find their own voices in the worlds made by developers.

What makes a game a game? For some games it’s a specific mechanic such as reversing time. For other’s it’s the community within the game. Almost every modern game series nowadays has their very own community. These communities offer up a play where people playing a specific game can begin discussions, connect with each other, and (at times) produce content. The community produced content comes in the form of fan art, gameplay modifications (mods), lore, and much much more. Based on my gaming experience and opinion, no other game has more user generated content than the simple block building game Minecraft.

User generated content is often defined as “In-game material and resources created by players rather than developers” (Newman 277). This content usually comes in the form of mods (modifications) to a specific game. One example of a mod that eventually became its own game was a World of Warcraft III mod that eventually became the popular multiplayer online battle arena (MOBA) game Defense of the Ancients (DOTA). Modding is also seen extensively in the popular block survival game Minecraft. Examples of such mods include the Portal Gun Mod by IChun which brings portal guns into Minecraft. Another example is Thaumcraft which brings magic into the game. The list of mods in Minecraft is extensive and there even exists modpacks that bundle mods into an easy to download file and can radically change gameplay. However, modding isn’t what makes Minecraft unique. What makes Minecraft unique is it allows players to become the content generator.

James Newman in his passage “Minecraft: User-Generated Content” states that “to play Minecraft is to become a content generator” (Newman 278). As a long time Minecraft player, I agree to his statement. Being a sandbox game, Minecraft gives players the ability to create whatever they want in the game as well as make up whatever narrative they want. Ever since the game’s release, Minecrafters (Minecraft players) have created some amazing builds that range from a simple townhouse to a replica of King’s Landing. I myself have spent years building up a Minecraft world with my friends on our free time. Although there was no specific purpose of story to the created world, over time we created our own narratives and game lore. At the beginning of our project, we each took a specific area of the world and made plans to create our own kingdoms. For one of my friends, he decided to make a grand castle with a huge airship. For me, I created an elvish city in the middle of an enchanted forest. Not only were each of our build’s unique, they all had their very own narrative to them. In this way, Minecraft essentially became “a platform for storytelling and game-making” (Newman 278).

User generated content is an important aspect to any game. As we’ve seen from sandbox games such as Minecraft, user generated content can become the game. Allowing players to build their own game and express themselves creatively isn’t a unique idea. However, no one game shows the importance of this simple idea than Minecraft itself.

Work Cited:
Huntemann, N. (2019). How to play video games. NYU Press.

In class last week we talked about player created content in games.  One of the examples we looked at was Minecraft. Minecraft is an amazing example of this because the whole point of the game is for players to unleash their imagination and create new worlds of their own.  The creativity and imagination of players is truly inspiring. Personally, it motivates me to want to play and build my own worlds in Minecraft.  Player created content reminds me of fan fiction in a way because the creators of the game provide a world in which players can create what they want. For fan fiction, people take inspiration off of pre-existing things and create their own things with it. Minecraft is a pre-existing game that provides the players with the tools they need to create whatever they would like.  This is what makes Minecraft very different from a lot of other mainstream games because every player’s experience will be unique and tailored to them.  Another game that is tailored to player created content is Jackbox.  The humor and entertainment that steams from the game comes from the players themselves.  This is really cool because any person can play these games and have completely different experiences with them.  It appeals to all different kinds of people.

There are many games that have an option for players to host their own custom game. In a custom game, players are able to alter the rules or mechanics of their game to create their own versions for them and their friends.  When I would play Halo Reach all the time the main reason would be for custom games.  That was because my friends and I would make unique maps and alter the mechanics of the game to create new game types.  Even many years after the game was released, my friends and I would still play just for the custom games.  There is even a forge mode within the game that allows players to create their own unique maps.  This allows the players to make their own maps from the pre-existing material provided within the game. This allows players to personalize their play experience and it makes it more appealing.  Overwatch has a custom game browser where players can look for games that other people have made.  Players are able to create their own versions of games and share them with anyone who is interested.  I personally believe that having a creative aspect added to any game is a bonus and can be one of the most exciting things to do that keeps players interested.

Overall, games that allow for player created content encourage players to take control of their play experience.  Players can include a piece of their identity in the games they play, and that can be shared to many others who play the game as well.  These games bring a new wave of inclusions and inspiration into the gaming industry.  The main restriction would be the imagination and creativity of the players themselves.

Works Cited

Minecraft. Java ed. for Mac, 2017.

 

Last week in class there was a discussion on social justice representation in video games. One of the topics that we discussed were about queer and indie games. We played a little bit of the popular indie game Journey produced by thatgamecompany and analyzed a few aspects to the game. One thing that was brought up during all of our discussions was one about how queer games weren’t fun. That got me thinking- do games need to be fun?

When you think of a fun game, what game or type of game comes to mind? The answer to this question varies from person to person because “fun” is a subjective term. According to the paper “Game Studies for Great Justice” by Amanda Phillips, “un-fun” or bad games include those that “annoy, anger, disappoint, and hurt” (Phillips 4) These games can be further categorized as “easy games, boring games, ugly games, amateurish games, glitchy games, experimental games, and unfinished games” (Phillips 4). This is the total opposite of big budget AAA games that are often well crafted, has interesting narrative, and is aesthetically pleasing. However, Phillip does argue that these “un-fun” games still offer something extremely important: art and creativity. A lot of mainstream AAA games are usually limited in creativity and has only one purpose: to make money. One example I can think of was the increasing popularity of multiplayer online battleground games when I was in middle school. At the time, there were many titles to choose from such as league of legends, DOTA 2, Heroes of the Storm, etc. To me all of them were basically the same game with different paint jobs. It was pretty obvious these game companies were trying to capitalize on the MOBA genre popularity. If you really think about it, this situation isn’t unique. A lot of games that are our there are usually very similar to each other with the only difference being their aesthetics and narratives.

When examining Journey, it may seem like a boring exploration game. However, it’s narrative gives something (at least I think) more valuable: an experience. At the beginning of making my Twine game for my creative project, I feared that it was going to be boring. I was stressing out on what can be done to make the game more fun. I planned on adding mini games to each stat up choice. However, I quickly realized I couldn’t go it by the due date due to Twine’s limitations as well as my own limitations when it comes to programming. After stressing about it for a few weeks, I was a little relieved after this class. Our discussion really did help me realize that it was okay for my game to be boring. To be totally honest, the boring aspect to it really fits into the overall narrative of my game.

At the end of the day we should realize that games don’t need to be fun. Games can be used as an art form to convey a narrative, an experience, an emotion, or a message. In a way, that’s more valuable than fun.

Work Cited:

Phillips, A. (2018). Game studies for great justice. The Routledge Companion to Media Studies and Digital Humanities, 117-127. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315730479-12

I wanted to make this post because of our recent discussion this week on Alt-Right to Fortnite. It was brought up during the discussion that Pepe the Frog was a symbol from the Alt-Right movement. This is true of its past and I am sure that there are individuals that still view this to be true and use it in a malicious way, but more than often you will see Pepe in a twitch streamers chat or streams. BEcause Pepe has been turned into a popular twitch emote the younger generation is exposed to it on a daily basis through Twitch without the rhetoric of the Alt-Right. The frog is viewed more as a “cute” mascot for twitch, having nearly infinite iterations. Some iterations are animated and some are just Pepe. Some examples include PepePls, MonkaS, Pepega and Pepehands. These are all off of the website BetterTTV which is a plugin most twitch streamers use to add more emotes to there chat. Each of these emotes have their own meanings from simply dancing to music (PepePls) to an emote to be spammed when something producing anxiety or concern happens (MonkaS). The emotes often mirror twitch’s base emotes in one way or another. It is interesting to see the large developments of this small frog from Alt-Right Icon to Twitch Super Star.

“How League of Legends Could Make the Internet a Better Place” was an interesting read especially considering League of Legends is a game that I have spent a [redacted] hours on. The article was defiantly a little too hopeful for what the new systems it spoke of claimed to fix. The article mentions two main systems that League of Legends has used to decrease toxicity in its game. One is the Tribunal System, which has not been in the game since 2014, but involved players reviewing reports and determining whether or not the reported player should face punishment. This has since been replaced with the other system. The next system the article mentions is the honor system (along with a few other things) , which at the time was brand new, but has since been in the game for about five years (to be honest I swear this system is like two years old, but like this article claims to differ and time is fake). In the honor system players can give other players honor at the end of game for sportsman like performance. This leads to the player leveling up in honor and if a rando (someone not in the player’s party) or two people in the party honor the same person at the end of the game their honor level will be displayed on their portrait the next time they load into game. The article gives the reasoning that “reputation means a lot” so that players will want to be honorable so that they can show off. (Though I consulted with a friend and neither of us are sure if the load screen display still exists, so I would say it might not be the best). The other thing about this honer system, is that honoring players is often more done for people with good scores or carried games and less about how sportsman-like they are. (While yes, if you flame your teammates they probably will not honor you, but when teammates are honoring they are often just being nice to whoever carried — or in my case, randomly clicking cause why not?). The article also mentions other things this new honor system included, such as explaining to players why they were reported and sending screen shots of chat logs. The article claims that this has majorly helped the game from having repeat offenders. From a player’s perspective though, this new system, while it has not hurt the game, is no where close to making “the internet a better place” as the title implies. Overall the game still feels as toxic as when I started (yes I might not get flamed as consistently, but that has more to do with the fact I actually understand how to play the game), if you mess up a game or feed a few kills your teammates can easily turn on you, especially in ranked queues. While changing up the systems might help the numbers slightly, I do not think they will actually make a meaningful impact to players until the culture of the game changes. While players do not like getting flamed and will often complain about the toxicity in the game, it is something they expect. Because of this, flaming is just seen as another part of the game and while frowned upon is not explicitly taboo.

This week we discussed Social Justice in video games, as well as Feminist and Queer spaces in the gaming industry. This week touched on several topics we have discussed before, such as the feminist and queer movements in gaming, but also discussed the hacking scene, as well as social justice as a whole in the industry. To begin, social justice has become a topic that has been widely shunned by the gaming community. Like I have discussed before, the majority of the gaming community is seen as a “boys club” of sorts, seemingly made up by predominantly white males, and the thought of social justice in video games sickens the extremists of the community.  These thoughts have been reinforced due to many factors, such as marketing strategies of the 90’s, stereotyping of genders and races, antaginization of difference, among other things we as a class have looked at in the past weeks of the semester. However, as the video game industry expands, so does its audience. Finding a happy medium that can appeal to everyone is incredibly difficult when it comes to gameplay, but designing characters and crafting stories can be much more complex. Fighting for social justice through video games can be like walking through a mine field when it comes to the internet. Like I stated before, extremists of the gaming community are incredibly negative in reception when it comes to social justice in “their” video games. For example, when designing the new character “Neeko” for “League of Legends”, the designers at Riot Games decided they would try something a bit different when writing her character. “Neeko” became the first character in the game’s history to be originally written as an LGBTQ character. While other characters, such as “Varus”, were rewritten over the game’s history, changing their origins, “Neeko” was released with the message of acceptance of sexuality. Her in game voice lines allude to this part of her character, but never explicitly state “this character is LGBTQ”. However, a small group of fans of the game were furious that “Riot ruined their game” by adding the character. Forum posts on 4chan stated things such as “I didn’t pay for a game to get sappy messages of tolerance shoved down my throat.” (Reminder: “League of Legends” is a free game which never requires payment, unless the player chooses to buy exclusive event passes or cosmetics.) It always seems that on the internet, the negative messages of hate outweigh the positive messages of approval or praise. However, the gaming industry is becoming more tolerant as a whole, with audiences broadening, female and queer game designers showing the world their breakthrough titles, and the gaming workspace diversifying. As social justice evolves, so does the gaming industry.

In class, we took a look at the game Journey and how it correlates to social justice dialogue. The game can be played single player or with another player, and in our livestream, the player plays a character with no arms who travels through a deserted wasteland littered with what appears to be gravestones. The game of Journey does not feature high stakes of losing or a clear win condition. Instead, the game seems to be more to experience a (no pun intended) journey through the lens of the character they play as. 

The creator of the game, Jenova Chen, explains the decision to take away arms and mouths, thus removing the ability to pick up things and to speak, as a way to take away forms of violent online interaction. This includes griefing and verbal harassment through the player characters (Nakamura, 7). I think this also brings up a point in putting to conversation the lack of voice and visibility given to marginalized groups, especially in fields such as gaming, without directly saying it in the game. In addition, the restricting of verbal and somatic interactions through hands forces players to look through other ways to interact with the other player in a co-op experience. Chen also added visual feedback of the player’s character when that character experiences harm. This takes into account that players are usually much more willing to harass others online due to the fact that they are not facing their victim in person (Nakamura, 7). By creating a vehicle for players to see the result of harmful actions done to their cooperating player up close, the players will feel less inclined to commit online harm to other players. 

I think Journey does something unique in that it puts strict focus on the element of cooperative play. This is done through making the players the only characters present in the setting, and stripping any potential for competitive or griefing behavior towards the other cooperating player in the game mechanics. Nakamura mentions that the way that the player characters are designed makes them gender ambiguous, disabled, and non-white. I think this gives a case where a game can be created where the “default character” is not just a generic white person. In many games that I have played where there is character customization, the default model is usually a white character, let alone being able to have an option where they are disabled. I think having the player characters in Journey be the opposite of what is usually present in games with customization brings up another point of view in handling the default model, as well as the highlighting of options not present in customization. While there are a few games out there that highlight the disabled experience, mostly through the single-player experience, I think it would be interesting to see a game such as an MMORPG tackle this issue. I say this because it gives the player a choice to experience this, and the game can give certain mechanical disadvantages to the player for choosing this certain customization that highlights the struggles of disabled people in the real world.

Sources:

Nakamura, Lisa. “‘Putting Our Hearts Into It.’” Gaming’s Many Social Justice Warriors and the Quest for Accessible Games.

I wanted to use this week’s blog as a way to write out my thoughts on random topics that have been on my mind recently. First I want to start off with the launch of the new Riot title Valorant and how the beta launch has affected the landscape of other games.

To start off with Valorant, the launch was a huge hit with gamers across different game communities forming this mixed player community. To be totally honest the launch worked out way better than it should have, I love the game so far, but objectively it’s a really flawed game. I feel that the sudden surge with the launch can be traced back to the idea that the current game landscape in terms of a competitive fps was very stagnant. Games like Overwatch, Rainbow Six Siege, and CS:GO were the options people had for competitive shooters for quite a few years at this point, and it could be argued that these brands held a little bit of a monopoly on the competitive shooters genre: CS:GO in specific was one of the most popular of these games. I’m gonna use CS:GO in specific as an example here where Valve’s track record on responding to what the community wants has been very sparse.  But suddenly a week after Valorant’s launch there were quite a few updates rolled out and some concerns that the pros brought up that day with something minor (a bug with crosshair settings) were fixed within a few hours of being stated on Twitter. Why suddenly is Valve so responsive and proactive now? Now that a game could be competing for the player base that CS:GO had for so long is now leaving for Valorant. An example of one of many cases is a semi pro CS:GO player named Tyson Ngo aka “TenZ” was pursuing his career in CS:GO and had his chance with the organization known as Cloud9. Shortly after the hype of Valorant was spreading, TenZ made the move from being a CS:GO pro and signed with Cloud9 for Valorant. With all of this in mind the point I wanted to show is that when Valve had more control and a dedicated player base they were not as urgent with keeping the players happy since no other game could give what CS:GO could provide. Overall CS:GO is still going to be very dominant at this point in time, but now Valve is being cautious of the competitor Valorant. Given enough time anyone could be dethroned.