Games

Could computer games be considered a replacement for other forms of art?

The musician and philosopher Brian Eno has an idea that 'art is a rehearsal for life', for our emotional responses to various situations; 'what would we do if we were in that position?' Can games replace that? Sims-style games could 'train' kids how to interact with others, raise families, take decisions at the work-place. In that case, of course, it would necessary to program those games very well, in order that they be able to replicate those situations accurately enough to teach useful lessons. Is that possible? Maybe the reverse effect would happen -- humans would become limited, being able only to deal w those situations that arise in games?

How to avoid becoming a race of otaku? TV was the first medium in history to permit that; cinema & theatre were involving, but required effort & cash to go out & go to see them, books were involving, but required literacy (both literal and cultural) & a certain degree of imagination. TV, however, can create an all-encompassing world, visual images are immediate and need/allow no interpretation or ambiguity. But you can change nothing, only receive what you're given. This frustrates some people, who still have a basic human need for some kind of interaction. Now, games are becoming much more involving than TV; they offer the narcotic visual fascination of TV combined with the possibility to interact - two basic human needs fulfilled. In the future, there will be two kinds of otaku; one sort who will be passive, just sitting and absorbing the input, and the other involved in active participation in their games -- but neither will be able to interact properly with real humans.

Emotional involvement with game characters; in the past we could fall in love with Julia Roberts or Brad Pitt on the cinema screen. We knew they really existed somewhere in the world, even if we were never likely to meet them. (Think about teens and their devotion to pop idols; grannies with soap-opera characters.) But what about virtual stars? Lara Croft was a beginning, though still visually too unrealistic for all but the most seriously depri/aved otaku. But new figures are ever more realistic in appearance, behaviour and virtual character; and, with the increase in female playership, these characteristics will be true of virtual males as well as virtual females. What will our emotional responses be when we 'fall in love' with such characters, who we know full well have no physical existence? As their programming becomes ever more complex, they will interact with us in ways pop & film stars never did. (Maybe E-mail/chat friends are an unconscious rehearsal for this?)

Can any medium take over an entire society, as intellectuals fear? TV has existed for 60 years, yet there are plenty of people (but probably no longer the majority) who watch TV only occasionally, choosing what they watch, or do not watch at all. But large numbers are undoubtedly addicts. Weak personalities with addictive natures have always existed; the medium of that addiction changes from age to age, but addiction itself remains. (Consider the kid who committed a murder on the basis of a Playstation game; others in the past did so on basis of books, plays, etc.)

Could any medium 'break through' and enslave an entire population? I personally think it unlikely; human populations are too diverse for them all to fall under one spell. Also, the diversity of economic levels around the world means that many will never get into games, being preoccupied with finding food, civil war, etc.

TV has long been the target of writers' speculation as a means for mass social control; could games go that way too? Is there any potential propaganda value in games? Unlikely; perhaps because of their non-passive, interactive nature, games will always function better as escapism, perhaps better even than TV ever could.

(based on conversations w friends in May & June 2004)