It was fascinating to learn of esoteric languages, programming languages designed to serve primarily as statements or art pieces rather than to serve primarily as means to complete practical goals on the computer. One thing I never considered about esoteric languages and programming in general is that they could be a result of the surrounding cultural and political atmosphere in which this field has developed. After all, it is humans, not computers, that create languages to code.

One of the languages mentioned in Tveten’s article is Nasser’s Arabic language قلب, which is a programming language that is written in Arabic. The Anglocentric traits of programming languages is brought into the spotlight. For people who do not know English, it does seem like picking up programming would be much harder for them than for people who do know English. This would cause an inherent inequality for non-English speakers who want to pursue computer science and software engineering as a career. It is discouraging to hear Nasser tell those eager to learn coding without knowing English that it is not possible in the current state of the field. It also brings up the topic of Anglocentrism in a lot of other fields. For example. English is considered a language that all pilots must know in order to communicate with one another. I suspect that it is the result of English colonialism in the past and America’s global influence in the present. Nasser’s language opens up the possibility of non-English programming languages and makes a point that languages do not have to be in English to be practically functional, which could create a more inclusive atmosphere for those who do not know English.

Another thing that is addressed is the idea that society’s views of the binary may have been applied to programming through the binary logic prevalent in software. This was something I’ve never thought about before, and I wonder what kind of logic should exist if a binary logic cannot be replaced. However, there are some parts in which I find myself disagreeing that the way programming uses binary logic can be as harmful as some of the binary logic found in societal cultures. For example, many programming languages have a variable type known as a “boolean,” where binary logic is employed. The logic is that a boolean can only be “true” or “false.” Clarity is important when writing a program, and a straight true or false is clear and, while it employs binary logic, it can be equated with the binary logic of a simple “yes” or “no” answer used in real-world conversations, rather than equated to the binary logic of “male” and “female.” Even so, it would be interesting to see a programming language that rejects binary logic, and what practical goals such a language could be useful for. 

As a student majoring in Computer Science, I had noticed the Anglocentric nature of programming, but I did not notice until now the other political and cultural influences that the field has had.

Sources:

Tveten, Julianne. “Code Is Political.” Vice, 1 Mar. 2016, www.vice.com/en_us/article/3dak5w/code-is-political.

“Aviation English.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 29 Feb. 2020, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation_English.

Inequality of gender has been a problem in our society for centuries. It is no surprise that this inequality has carried over to the microchasm of game developers and designers, and while it can be subtle in some instances, it is jarringly obvious in other situations. Take the example of Riot Games getting caught propagating a workplace of gender discrimination, or this week’s example of “Dead Island” and the ‘FeministWhorePurna’ fiasco.  The developer’s space can segmented due to these stereotypes and prejudices in the gaming community itself, making the offices of a game studio a “boys club”. The “FeministWhorePurna” scandal was one such instance where women were treated as the butt of a joke on the internal development team, with this controversial code being hidden inside the game’s program by a coder who must have thought that ‘no one will see this, plus it’s funny to leave in’. What baffles me about this is that there are multiple steps a game must take to be shipped in its final form, yet this line of code was never taken out internally, and was discovered by dataminers. Surely there was more than ONE person who checked the game’s code internally, unless this heinous joke was snuck in secretly by a coder, right? This isn’t the first instance of game designers leaving jokes in their code, as coders of the “Crash Bandicoot” series infamously left dirty names for enemies in the game’s code, knowing that kids would never be able to find these internal names in the code, thus no one would get offended. It was only after several years that dataminers discovered the real names for some of the scientist enemies in the game, with the first game starting with names such as “obj.ass” and “obj.assbanger”, and making the names dirtier as “Crash Bandicoot 2” entered development, with some scientist enemies being named “obj.motherf**ker”. As long as coding jokes aren’t meant to offend, they are fine, but jokes like this, especially in a live service game of the 2010’s, are unacceptable. This mentality of the “boys club” also exists in the world of politics, putting down those who believe in feminism. This can be seen with the “Code is Political” article from this week, as the primarily white, republican, male demographic of the gaming industry puts down the women who create games and programming languages alongside their male counterparts. Truthfully, I believe that equality in the technological workplace is much overdue. Females should be treated with respect, and not as the butt of the joke.

Last week, we discussed how coding and technology affects our perception of games and gaming culture. We read a number of articles and passages covering different topics, but the ones I’d like to focus on are Bogost’s Pelé’s Soccer: Platform, Sicart’s Queering the Controller, and Tveten’s Code is Political. Bogost had made the argument that older, simplistic games are sub-par and inferior to modern games because of their technological limitations. From our class discussion, I believe the common consensus was that, yes, the games were simplistic and technologically limited; However, if we look at the game for what it was capable of for its time, it turns out to be quite advanced and innovative. I feel its a pretty ignorant way to look at games, or anything for that matter, by deciding its value based on the present. Its like saying the sword was terrible and worthless because we have firearms now.

Another topic that was covered was the Sicart’s piece which argued that we should explore the controller based on pleasure. The article within itself was a bit strange to me and the sentiment seemed to be shared by a few other classmates. The author uses a lot of references to sex toys and pleasure to argue that we should look at creating a more emotional medium to the games we play as it will increase immersion. Overall, I felt the article was a bit off putting and that the message could of have conveyed in a easier fashion. While I don’t totally agree with the author’s “manifesto”, I definitely see the merit in exploring what a person wants and finds pleasurable when playing games. There have been similar notions amongst the corporate world on employee treatment. Traditional corporations enforced restrictive rules which push conformity while expecting the employee to give their body and soul to the company. In more recent years, many large corporations began encouraging employee health with fitness programs, flexible work hours, more paid leave and vacation time. By looking at what people want and what makes them happy, we have improved quality of life. So to some degree, I do feel there is a purpose to exploring what makes us happy when we use a controller.

Finally, we have Tveten’s article which argues that coding is inherently political because the common coding languages all use English. Personally, I heavily disagree with this article. One of the examples the author uses is how an Arabic-based coding language is incapable of reaching any lengths due to its inability to integrate with preexisting languages. Coding was popularized in the 80’s and 90’s in the US; despite the various nationalities and backgrounds of prominent coders, English became the common language to use. The language used in various code is arbitrary and not political. For example, “popMatrix () ;” by itself pretty meaningless is entirely meaningless to the average person. No matter how fluent your English is, you wouldn’t know that this function helps translate objects. The programming language, Processing, which is based on JavaScript, is simply utilizing English syntax to represent a built in function. If simply using a language makes something political, then couldn’t you argue this very blog post is political with imperialistic undertones because I’m speaking English. Then numbers and math would be political because most of the world uses Arabic numerals. Why can’t we all just use Chinese numerals instead? I feel the author is grasping for straws in this article with very little substance to back up their claims. Throughout the rest of the article, the author brings up coding languages like C+= and TrumpScript as evidence. These languages were developed by people who wished to use coding as their political soap box; it doesn’t mean that coding as a concept and profession is inherently political. On a similar note, a video was shown in class that argued on a similar vein. I didn’t quite catch the name of the video but it claimed that AI is racist because a facial recognition program had misgendered several black women. Coming from an electrical engineering and software background, I wholeheartedly know that it is extremely difficult to design and perfect AI. One of the pictures being mistaken had said the woman had a handle bar mustache due to the dark shadow from her smile. Such programs tend to struggle with darker colors, often mistaking them for shadows caused by poor lighting. The AI learns from evaluating previous pictures in which a common trend is for men to have shorter hair and defined facial features. The notion that the AI is inherently racist and the people who designed it are racist simply because their program isn’t perfect is ludicrous and down right insulting. I would like to invite the individual who made this claim to develop their own facial recognition AI that is perfect and flawless. It irritates me to know that these people who take risks to innovate and push technology forward are being falsely accused of racism simply because their program made a mistake.

Some of the topics that we discussed in week six of the course were platforms, interfaces, controllers, empathy, and even coding. I enjoyed the coding aspect of the week. I think that we have focused a lot on the unjust parts of society in this course, mainly in video games. However, it was baffling to see that there are definitely other aspects of the world that also deals with the mistreatment towards certain groups. In Julianne Tveten’s article, “Code is Political”, we learn about some other types of coding languages that tend to be undermined because they are not like the normal American English language. In some sense, this can be connected to genres in video games. Somehow, society has found a way to create barriers between things that differ in just the smallest manners.

In her article, Tveten states, “Because the advent of software engineering arose in the United States, major programming languages—even those developed outside the US and Europe (e.g., Ruby and Lua, which originated in Japan and Brazil, respectively)—are written in American English” (4). As we can see, Tveten is trying to prove that major programming is only written in the American English language across the board. With this, other forms of programming that are not in this language do not have a place in the computer science world. She goes on to give an example of an Arabic programming language. This code, which is written by Ramsey Nasser, is devalued and even causes people to question whether or not they can code without learning the English language (11). What I find interesting about this entire conversation is that languages can be translated, yet, society and the computer science world is reluctant to be open to other forms of software. It is clear that at times, problems with outsiders not being accepted in certain places, just because of a few minor differences, occurs. I mentioned earlier that the article also reminded me of genres in video games. Of course, there is a broad range of genres in games, which is a great thing! The only bad part is that certain genres are considered illegitimate and maybe not even a genre to begin with. I think this demonstrates that there is a concealed element at work. The only reason that a genre might be considered illegitimate is because it might be appealing towards a certain group of people. Drawing a connection to the coding languages, is it really fair to throw out a coding language just because it is not in the form of American English? What about the people that can relate to it, the people who can understand it easily over American English? I think these are the questions that really matter. We have a lot of work to do in society, and it starts with accepting the fact that different objects will be appealing to others. It is just a part of human life.

Overall, we can clearly see that issues that occur in the gaming world might actually be the subparts of some larger problems at work. We see this when certain game genres are designated to certain groups of people. Coding languages that are different than American English tend to be displaced and disvalued, probably because they do not fit with the “normal” American English speakers and audience. Sadly, Tveten also states that hackers may even deface a website just because it endorses something different (11). As a society, we need to be more open about diversity. There is no need to treat something or someone differently just because they do not fit our expectations or assumptions about how something should be.

-Andy Kissoon

Brendan Downey – DMS 448 – 03/08/20

In week 6, we discussed gaming platforms, particularly ones in which we associate and identify with. Personally, I am frequently on Steam, iPhone games and the Nintendo Switch platform almost everyday. I also play chess and shogi on occasion. Some class examples that I have used in the past include Arcade games, Tamagotchi and Analogue games (board and card games).
This week, we also discussed the concept of interface and began thinking about how you interact with these gaming platforms. This interaction is responsible for how you move around the space and interact with the environment. Generally, this is the thing you physically interact with, whether it be a controller, trackball or keyboard and mouse. Using a physical object, the player is able to interact with the game’s graphic and user interface, such as the game menu and game screen. By interacting with this object and physically manipulating it, the player is able to feel like they have achieved something. For example, when a player finishes the game ‘Mario,’ they proclaim “I did it!!!” They do not scream, “Mario, you little Italian plumber, you did it!!!” The reason the player feels a sense of accomplishment is because they have physically and mentally made the effort to beat the game. However, this sense of accomplishment is tied to the Nintendo controller used to interact with the game. If a player were to replay ‘Mario’ using a non-Nintendo controller, they would have a completely unique experience. The type of controller the player uses affects how smooth or awkward the playing experience us. For example, if you were to use a Nintendo64 controller to play ‘Mario,’ you would have a normal and fun play session. But if you were to use the same controller on a modern system, such as the Xbox One or Playstation 4, you would be quickly rage quitting your next Call of Duty match due to the awkwardness.
In the article, ‘Queering the Controller,’ Miguel Sicart argues that players need a fresh perspective on what a “controller” is. Through our many years of video game play, we have been programmed to view controllers one dimensionally, as hand shaped remotes with buttons and joy sticks. However, Sicart persuades the reader to ‘Queer’ the controller by looking at the success of sex toys. Although not arguing that controllers should be designed as sex toys, he rather argues that we draw inspiration from these pleasure devices. In ‘Queering the Controller’, Sicart states, “We should approach the design of game interactions as sex toy designers approach the design of their products: by critically questioning the role of bodies and pleasure in the experience of a game.” Similar to controllers, sex toys are feedback mechanisms. They are both toys that help us play. However, sex toys focus on the player while controllers focus on the game. This shift in focus to become one part of a larger experience is the first step in ‘Queering’ the controller.

WORKS CITED:
Sicart, Miguel. “Queering the Controller.” Analog Game Studies, 23 Dec. 2019, analoggamestudies.org/2017/07/queering-the-controller/.
Huntmann, Nina B. and Payne, Matthew Thomas. How to Play Video Games. New York, NY, New York University Press, 2019.

Sean Cheney

3/8/2020

 

One of the topics that we talked about this week in class (Primarily on Tuedsay) is that of platform, through the lens of the How to Play Video Games chapter titled “Pele’s Soccer: Platform” by Ian Bogost. In this chapter, it talked about the Atari 2600 game “Pele’s Soccer,” which is described as being “a terrible game.” However, what makes it interesting is the following quote:

“Understanding something about the material constraints of the Atari suddenly makes Pele’s Soccer more comprehensible, not to mention intriguing. It’s not so much a terrible rendition of soccer, as it is a unique and curious implementation of soccer on a piece of equipment that wasn’t intended to make soccer possible in the first place (HTPVG 266).” This was the paragraph that intrigued me the most.

Pele’s Soccer is still a bad game (according to Bogost, at the very least) but it derives value in a different way. It derives value from the fact that it dared to attempt to translate a game as complex as soccer into a video game system that had 128 bytes of RAM and used purple squares to represent people. If you view it from that perspective then Pele’s Soccer can be considered, at the very least, a meaningful attempt at something greater.

I personally find it obnoxious when people try to make video games into something they’re not. Complaining about a sports video game for not being a sport seems very contrived. It is not a direct representation of that sport, nor is it intended to be. I see this as being in the same vein as complaining that Counter-Strike or Call of Duty doesn’t have realistic shooting. I fail to see what the point is. No, it doesn’t have realistic shooting, but it’s not supposed to and to suggest it should entirely misses the point. What makes these games fun in the first place is that they aren’t realistic. Nobody would want to play a shooter game where you sit in one spot waiting for 10 hours for a target to appear.

Another interesting concept that was brought up in class was the culture that exists surrounding different game platforms. Specifically in class we focused on PC Gaming and the elitist culture that has developed around it. I am primarily a PC Gamer and will tend to gravitate towards getting something (especially online games) on PC over consoles if there is a choice. Of course, for exclusive games I still have a PS4 and Nintendo Switch (and many older Nintendo consoles). However, if given the choice, PC is by far the preference.

The class got me to thinking about why that was. I ended up finding myself reaching three reasons. The first was because at a base level, it was where all of my friends were. Everyone was playing League of Legends and World of Warcraft when I was younger and I wasn’t able to play with them on my terrible laptop. This led to the purchase of my first PC. The second reason was that I genuinely found myself preferring PC play to console.

I myself have fallen into some of the traps of #PCMasterRace (I’ll even jokingly use the hashtag in attempts to make fun of friends). I think it’s completely fine to have a preference, and even to have the opinion that one thing is “objectively” superior to another. It’s even ok to make jokes (within your specific friends boundaries) about things along those lines. However, preference quickly devolves into superiority and elitism.

Having more positive and accurate representation of different people in video games starts with the people in charge of making the games.  The thing that caught my attention the most this week was the “FeministWhorePurna” incident.  It is upsetting that it is even an incident at all, and even more upsetting that it is undoubtably not the only one of its kind.  First, I am just confused as to how something like that slips through the cracks of an entire company.  But I am glad that it didn’t because it shows the kinds of people who are employed to make such games and it gives clarity as to why games can misrepresent people so much.  I agree with the statement Robert Yang makes in the article “On ‘FeministWhorePurna’ and the Ludo-material Politics of Gendered Damage Power-ups in Open-World RPG Video Games” that, “FeministWhorePurna is not just a rogue prank by a sole misogynist commercial game developer: it is a useful lens to articulate wider systemic problems of gender representation in video game culture” (98).  If there are video games being made by people who believe in gender stereotypes or gender inequality, then those things will leak through into the games that are being made.  Video games can be seen as a direct reflection of those who are making them.

The game Dead Island, which was talked about within the article, is a clear reflection of how the mindset of the people making the game can leak into the game itself.  Two female characters within the game (Purna and Xian Mei) are the embodiment of stereotypes for their race.  This is a reflection of the mindset and beliefs of those who created these characters.  Not only do gender stereotypes play a role in the development and appearance of characters in a video game, but also the abilities that are associated with a character too.  There are many video games where the female character is the stealth character, or that the female character at some point would have to be a distraction for a group of male enemies so that the protagonist can save the day.  In many cases, women in video games are boiled down to fragile, objectifiable, side characters in a male driven world. This can only be attributed to the mindset and beliefs of those who are developing the games.

In recent years there have been many cases where there are strong female protagonists who break the mold of what had been mainstream in the gaming industry for so long.  Games like Life is Strange, Hellblade: Senua’s Sacrifice, and Gears of War 5 all have strong female protagonist that prove the depth and complexity of humanity beyond that of gender, race, or stereotypes. Not only is it important to represent gender in a more realistic and complex way, but also things like age, culture, sexuality, disability, etc.  These are all things that deserve to be represented in an accurate way, but the only possibility for that is if those who choose to represent these things actual take the time to understand and appreciate them first.

Works Cited

Yang, Robert. “On ‘FeministWhorePurna’ and the Ludo-Material Politics of Gendered Damage Power-Ups in Open-World RPG Video Games.”

Mohammad Farraj

DMS 448

BLOG POST 6

            Throughout this week we have discussed various topic within the gaming world. These topics range from stereotypes to understanding the controls for games. These topics within the gaming world peak interests due to the reward system that some games have, involving dehumanizing actions towards women. To not only understand this discussion, writers Robert Yang and Miguel Sicart proves have these issues both technical and social are present within the gaming community. Therefore, their pieces will help readers understand the phenomenon present in such community and how they need attention from both consumers and developers.

            Technology within the gaming community provides a foundational issue that needs to be addressed. In the article, “Queering The Controller”, Sicart states how technology ultimately needs to be updated to modern times due the out dated equipment it provides. In addition to this, he also states that those same controllers and equipment needs to have an alternative access. In the article, he states, “While games mature into the future of creative expression, we still control them with technologies developed decades ago” (Sicart, 2017). What this shows is that, if gamers truly desire to reach their top creative levels within video games, the technology they are using are needs to be updated. Sicart believes that, the controllers for video games haven’t been resourceful the last couple decades. Therefore, due to this, gamers have been held back in reaching their ultimate potential within video games. Sicart also goes in depth about the accessibility these controllers bring fourth to gamers. In the article, he states how, “the culture of “alternative controllers” like those showcased at alt.ctrl.gdc …does little to reassure me… We don’t need alternative controllers, we need controllers for the alternative emotions, alternative bodies, and alternative experiences that games now foster” (Sicart 2017). What this shows is that, the presented controllers that gamers receive are not enough for gamers. The technology and design of these controllers are being demanded by the gaming community in which they should accommodate to gamers emotional and  physical state. In doing so, this will support gamers ability to reach their next level of skill and creativity within whatever game they are immersed in. Therefore, Sicart proves why technology within the gaming community needs to be up to date with modern technology, to ultimately improve the gaming experience for gamers.

            Video games are proven to show acts of violence and provide dehumanizing stereotypes towards women. In the article, “Feminist Whore Purna”, Yang provides evidence of disturbing acts towards women within video games and gamers are ultimately rewarded for it. In the article he states how, “The game Red Dead Redemption rewards the player with an achieve-ment trophy called “Dastardly” for placing a “hogtied” NPC woman (and only a woman) on train tracks and watching her get run over by a speeding locomotive… It specifically requires you must place her there, you must watch her die before it will reward the player with five Xbox Gamerscore points (Yang 100). What this shows is that, gamers need to forcefully capture a woman in the game, brutally tie said female up and lay her down on a set of train tracks. Then to ultimately watch that same woman die and players are required to watch this act of violence in order to get rewarded. This shows the dehumanizing act towards woman within the game because emphasizing on the detail where players need to watch this woman being killed and being rewarded for it only proves the negative representation of women in video games. Therefore, this proves how there is a presence of dehumanizing stereotypes and violence of women in video games.

                                                            Work Citated Page

Sicart, Miguel. “Queering the Controller.” Analog Game Studies, 23 Dec. 2019, analoggamestudies.org/2017/07/queering-the-controller/.

Yang, Robert. On “FeministWhorePurna” and the Ludo-Material Politics of Gendered Damage Power-Ups in Open-World RPG Video Games. https://learn-us-east-1-prod-fleet01-xythos.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/5e00ea752296c/5412910?response-content-disposition=inline; filename*=UTF-8”Yang%20On%20FeministWhorePurna.pdf&response-content-type=application/pdf&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Date=20200308T043317Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=21600&X-Amz-Credential=AKIAZH6WM4PLTYPZRQMY/20200308/us-east-1/s3/aws4_request&X-Amz-Signature=8ce45b2210a8970fbe44cd72ab8d5b891ee45067ad36b52d803de63e0fbdb7f8.

This week in class we discovered quite a bit about in game identity, and what it means to customize a character in a game. When I set about creating my character in World of Warcraft I had originally thought to simply look for why certain options were missing, but I slowly began to take notice as to why I made some particular decisions in regards to customizing my character.

What I considered most when customizing my character was the idea of “sameness identity” from Adrienne Shaw’s “He Could Be a Bunny Rabbit for All I Care! How We Connect with Characters and Avatars”. In it Shaw states how “sameness identity describes feeling that one has become or is the character–sameness identity refers to the way games make players think about their actions in terms of themselves rather than in relation to characters in the text as separate beings” (Shaw). Though I only went through the customizer and didn’t actually interact with other characters or story I viewed my character as me, and not a separate entity I simply controlled.

When it comes to my decisions in terms of customization I tried to consider why I made the decisions I did, some of these were easy to trace back, while others were more difficult.

The first aspect of my character I chose was its “faction” which was essentially its species. As to why I chose a member of the Draenei, well its rather simple. When I think of myself being a human I think of all the problems humans have caused, and how flawed we are, so I prefer to think of myself in game as something “other”. Then of course there was gender, which there were only the two options, male and female. When it comes to gender I am not usually conflicted, I always choose the female. Why this is I had to think about though, and it goes deeper than the stereotypical “females are nice to look at” or “I wish I were a female”. Gender, in and of itself, I view as a social construct. We’ve limited ourselves to particular fashions, looks, accessories, jobs, responsibilities and such all because of simply…sexual parts. I do not wish to be of the female sex, I am fine being of the male sex, but I do not wish to conform to the limitations of the male gender. Therefore I often choose the female gender in games, not to go against the male gender but to look beautiful, and accessorize as I please, which is often only an option as a female character.

With hair color, face, horns and hair style I didn’t think  too much about it, I just thought what looked most like how I would like to view myself in a mirror. I think the end result is something that somewhat mirrors me in a fantasy world, though the breasts are a bit too circular and large for my liking.

Overall my interaction with the character customizer in World of Warcraft was interesting, I felt that the choices offered were very limited, and that the options for different genders were missing. Additionally the gender choices seemed to fit the two binaries of what “male” and “female” are defined as through looks, and the difference in armor for women was a bit unsettling in how it showcased the breasts on most of the female characters, but that’s a discussion for another time.

Empathy is normally described as a good thing. Placing yourself in someone else’s shoes creates a lot of incite towards another person’s perspective, but it is limited. A game or any type of media can’t fully immerse oneself into another person’s life. This is why many people hate when others say they can relate to what they are feeling, because if they aren’t them, then they really can’t. This is brought up by Teddy Pozo and that not only can this type of empathy accomplish less for the empathizer, there are always drawbacks, especially when the empathy causes more realization of distinct differences between the issue being explored and the people trying to empathize with it. It’s not only negative. It can also be beneficial like bringing awareness on an issue, but it almost seems like there could be a hint of danger with empathy. How far can empathizing go within gaming?

It is from queerness that we are confronted with empathy being essential not only within the game, but trying to connect from the controller to the game. Controllers do not fully connect us to a game. They are an extension of us, but there is no physical feedback except maybe the rumble pack in a console controller. Miguel Sicart stresses the importance of queering the controller. This would mean to have actual feeling from it. Miguel specifically compares how sex toys are made with the body in mind and that video game makers should think similarly. When reading Sicart’s article, all I thought about was in the movie Ready Player One, where the main character received a suit where he could feel everything in virtual reality. This reference is what I got out of Sicart’s interpretation of a queer controller for some reason. Now a bodysuit in virtual reality sounds pretty cool, but also to what extent could games become quite horrifying with this invention. There is something that could be quite amazing with being able to feel something in a game, but also there are plenty of terrifying events that could happen that nobody would want to actually place themselves fully into. I believe maybe games have no place in being a fully connected experience. In positive ways, it would be fine, but how far can we go before your controller becomes a torture device. Interactivity like pleasure and temperature are quite tame for a controller. It wouldn’t be a deathtrap and it would allow a greater experience for the player and their body. It could create better empathizing within games, but as I said earlier, we can’t experience the real life feelings of others.

Overall, when controllers provide the player with a deeper connection. It allows greater empathy. This is positive for a fictional narrative, yet people might find themselves becoming too close to the fictional or nonfictional experiences. They might feel like they know what another person has felt, which is never truly beneficial. The differences between the empathizer and one who is empathized with, would be lessened, but not everyone will see this as an opportunity to learn and spread awareness.

Works Cited

Pozo, Teddy. “Queer Games After Empathy: Feminism and Haptic Game Design Aesthetics from Consent to Cuteness to the Radically Soft.” Game Studies – Queer Games After Empathy: Feminism and Haptic Game Design Aesthetics from Consent to Cuteness to the Radically Soft, Dec. 2018, gamestudies.org/1803/articles/pozo.

Sicart, Miguel. “Queering the Controller.” Analog Game Studies, 23 Dec. 2019, analoggamestudies.org/2017/07/queering-the-controller/.