On April 8,2010, a rainy afternoon, I got a chance to meet the author of the book persuasive games, an excellent scholar in games studies, a professor in Georgia Tech University, Dr. Ian Bogost.
During the 1 and a half hours’ meeting, people posed like around 10 questions to Dr. Bogost. To each question, he gave a long and meticulous answer. I feel lucky to have chances posing four questions to Dr. Bogost during the symposium, here are my questions:
1. A lot of people think that games are something meaningless, a wasting of time. In your book persuasive games, however, you argued that games have their own culture. In addition, they transmit certain culture and ideas through their persuasive or rhetorical way. My question is if games could reflect and represent certain culture, do you think players and their behaviors in games could do the same? If yes, how and why.
1. A lot of people think that games are something meaningless, a wasting of time. In your book persuasive games, however, you argued that games have their own culture. In addition, they transmit certain culture and ideas through their persuasive or rhetorical way. My question is if games could reflect and represent certain culture, do you think players and their behaviors in games could do the same? If yes, how and why.
2. In your book, you talked a lot about video games rather than online games. As far as I am concerned, compared with video and PC games, which have settled up the game content for players, online games grant players more freedom to play according to their own style and will and it is more possible for them to represent the developing trend of games in the future. But an interesting thing is, according to some game market report, the percentage of online games in the whole game market is only around 20%, (while in China, it is 77%) which seems like online games, compared with video and PC games are not that popular in the U.S., how do you see this phenomenon ?
3. Do you see games more like a platform? a cultural mirror? an entertainment tool? or a media?
4. Could I ask a little bit personal question? (People around the table all laughed, which made me feel embarrassed...T_T) Well, it is not that personal... Electronic games started at around the 1950s and 1960s, but the serious studies on electronic games in academic field had not begun until recent decades of years. And your research is one of the first attempts. I am curious why did you choose this field to research? Did you at the beginning of the studies already foresee the promising development of electronic games?
Getting his permission, I filmed this syposium. I am not sure if I could put that video up here without getting his permission. For those in our class who are also interested in games or this syposium but failed to attend it, you could email me linw@clemson.edu to get more information about this symposium.
Anyway, it is a wonderful exprience to talk with such a famous scholar in game studies. For me, it is more like an encouragement on my research. In China, game studies are still in a lower than average level, and there are not many Chinese scholars showed interest in this field. A lot of time, I am not very sure if my research would be meaningful to Chinese games, especially in China, they are called electronic heroin by mainstream media. But after talking with the forerunner in this field, I kind of getting a little moved. I see there are a bunch of people they are conducting the research on it, they are opening a wider space for the future research of electronic games. They are passionate and optimistic, they are insightful and persisted in their pursuit. I feel like he is transmitting a spiritual force that could drive others to walk further.
No comments:
Post a Comment