[Editor's note: themizarkshow evaluates the New Gamer Dictionary. -- CTZ]
A few weeks ago, the HAWP video, "New Gamer Dictionary," posed as a solution to the issue of gaming not being taken seriously. Immediately, my brain started assessing the situation with all that philosophical/theological vigor I haven't gotten many chances to use since I got my BA, was forced out of the dorms, and decided to be a lazy college grad with a job before addressing the options of grad school.
The video, with it's agenda of entertainment and humor, raised a good point and at least started us off in the right direction of a viable solution.
The problem? Gaming isn't taken seriously as an art form, storytelling mechanism, or even respected as a valid source of entertainment by many people. The proposed solution? Come up with a common vocabulary, as would happen in science, philosophy, history, art, etc, to further validate and further expand the community.
As a Philosophy BA, this solution sounds like something straight out of American Pragmatism as put forth by Richard Rorty. For those of you not in "the know" ... Pragmatism, as a theory, more or less says we don't need the pesky, problem-ridden metaphysics to explain the world because it can never be proven: the conversation is always an abstract one, not a practical one. Instead, they focus on what is "most workable." Rorty wasn't just a philosopher, however, but an avid linguist who believed that it is in language that we find truth. He went as far as to say that "Truth cannot be out there —cannot exist independently of the human mind— because sentences cannot so exist, or be out there. The world is out there, but descriptions of the world are not. Only descriptions of the world can be true or false. The world on its own —unaided by the describing activities of humans— cannot.”
Having read that, I assume you see why the "New Gamer Dictionary" gave me flashbacks to my Postmodernism/Pragmatism Seminars.
(Rorty is a total badass, in case you didn't know)
If we are to take this idea seriously, we have to first admit that there is already a sort of Gamer Dictionary in place. Common gaming terms like FPS, MMORPG, console, LAN, pwn, frag, noob, camping, lag, backpacking, and many more have even made their way into much of our wider culture and cannot be ignored. Terms such as these are fairly easy to come up with and, if catchy/accurate, will of course be picked up by the gaming community. Since the HAWP dictionary started with terms like those listed above, I feel that they started this new linguistic process in the same place as the one which is already established; thus, expanding on an already existing dictionary rather than jump starting a new one ... and that is perfectly fine, if you are willing to admit that is the goal. All vocabularies and dictionaries can use some refinement and redirection at points, but if you are after something "new," then there is an immediate problem we must first address: We, as gamers, are not creating, discovering, or experimenting. We are, instead, using what others have made for us and exploring it.
If we are to ignore the fact that the game worlds are created by men/women, it is our description of them that provide truth/meaning to them, something the worlds are void of before we put it into words. This leans in the direction of meaning that the creators of those worlds/games, would have less say than the public because, as in most artforms, intention isn't what matters as much as the reality of how things plays out. But, because the creators opinions do matter and, thanks to blog/news sites such as this, that information is easily spread and accessible. We are thus, more akin to movieaholics, avid readers, and art appreciators than scientists, philosophers, historians, etc. If this is taken as a truth, it could mean that we have more of a gaming theology/mythology in the works rather than a philosophy/science. We are playing as creatures (creations) within a created world made by developers (deities of that world) who can now even interact with these lower lifeforms via online multiplayer, coop, interviews, cons, and DLC/patches (avatars).
(this kind of avatar ...not the Rare Ware ones. Although that works too, I guess.)
So, we are not the ones pushing gaming forward, and thus aren't the ones in charge of the fields direction. However, we aren't just those benefiting from the artform/science which others are crafting/creating, either. Unlike the sciences, the mainstream has a huge say in what will be popular and for how long. Yet, unlike most artforms, the gaming experience is an interactive one, meaning we do get to participate in the experience and possibly enjoy it much more than those who created it. We aren't in control, yet we are. We don't create, yet it is not beyond our abilities to do so ... making the overall field of gaming, a very unique and interesting one.
So, if we are to create a new vocabulary, or even refine our current one, where/how do we start? Must we start from the ground up, assuming nothing about the realm of gaming at all? Science does this by trying to work from outside the object(s) they are studying, leaving behind preconceptions, biases, etc, so as not to interfere with the natural habitat and the realm of possible conclusions they could draw from this observation/experimentation. If that is the case, should each game/series be its own field of study/inquiry, set apart from others existing in the same genre? If so, we have a rapidly growing and largely unmanageable field at hand (a possible reason for the lack of respect for gamers, since it is fairly difficult for newcomers to get into the culture). Should we first start by looking at how we classify games, ourselves, what our beliefs about games are, etc? Before we can start naming instances, we should have already built the categories within which the names will fall. Or maybe we should first try to refine and expand the current vocabulary until we have an understanding of why it doesn't work, or where it fails, so we can then move forward successfully.
Or, maybe the problem lies with people, like me and probably you, who take ideas like this far too seriously and fail to just respect gaming as a form of entertainment and enjoyment. Maybe trying to force gaming to fall across the realms of literature, science, history, and philosophy doesn't work because gaming is its own thing and we need to just let it be and fully develop into that thing by sitting back, enjoying the experience, and not worrying about what others opinions of us and of the gaming culture/industry actually are.
Contest:
7:00 PM on 05.18.2009
| 
:P just kidding
This is quite a complicated blog. I think it would be hard to start from scratch as you would obviously have words/ideas that jump straight into your head so it would just be a jumble of ideas, but the same if you just start compiling from a random point.
I can't think of a solution except just don't bother.
Since there already is a vocabulary, as you mentioned, we should expand on that one, since it developed itself in a natural way, meaning by usage, and is not constructed. It is also important to see, whether or not gamers will adopt the language, since it would be useless if they wouldn´t.
On an academic level, there are already certain specific words (like Homo Ludens, which I personally really like...)
My comment is way to long, but if anyone wants to discuss, you can always PM me...
I would slightly disagree in your comment that 'we' are not in control of the medium's direction. Though we may not make the games, we do consume them, and 'we' (as consumers) are in a historically unique position.
Through the internet, one person's opinion can have an inordinate effect on how a game is perceived by others. Though we may not create the game, we do control how it is consumed, and that feeds back into the direction of future game production.
. . .
I'm having flashbacks to earnest conversations in sociology.
Is that blue chick smokin a pipe?
As for the video game art debate. People play video games for FUN. It's in the name for crying out loud, video GAME. If you want to turn a video game into art, then it would be called interactive cinema art. There are other plenty interactive cinema that are used for non-fun related stuff, like education and training (here's looking at you Math Blaster, Capitalism, and VBS2).
Also, your last paragraph basically summed up a post I wrote a month or two ago, which I dig. However it was nowhere near as well written as this. Keep up the great writing.
This is actually relevant to this post, since the etymology of word beyond its popular usage is important to understanding its proper usage, which is important when trying not to sound ignorant when conversing with someone who understands both your popular interpretation and the word's more analyzed meaning. What all this means, really, is that even when people speak the same language, they may still need to derive a common interpretation of their shared vocabulary -- because the usage and meaning might not shared as well. When you tell your great-grandad you're a 'gamer,' don't be surprised when he pulls out the cribbage board. And I think this is what the poster is proposing in saying a proper step in garnering respect for our medium is the organization of a terminology for use in further discourse.
Anyway, themizarkshow, I hope you can keep your voice alive and well, and carry on this theme of video games and culture (and beyond?). There are a number of bloggers out there that touch upon the overarching matter of video gaming entertainment in a ever developing technological society (a lot of them developers, it seems), but none that I know of who commit themselves wholly to commentating on the impact of interactive media itself.
I've tried to write like that myself, here and there, mostly because I find myself more interested by gaming concepts and potential projects more than the games themselves, but never go very far, and probably don't do very well even then. Perhaps I've been academically programmed not to say anything unless it's fresh, at least somewhat insightful and most of all contributory to the discussion at hand. (Though, what do you do when it comes to formally introducing the discussion?)
Whatever the case, it's good to see someone who's not afraid to put some content into their content, rather than the usual 'I LIKE [CONSOLE], HERE ARE MY COMP SPECS, I DON'T VOTE BUT OBAMA RULEZ,' drivel, as exemplified by one of the initial comments who acronymoniously reminded us that our expected role is to shut the fuck up and just play [the] game. The next time I see someone seriously remark “TL;DR,” (whilst, you may notice, having time to say so), I'm going to burn down a Best Buy. Okay, probably not, but I'm a sucker for alliteration.
But, to comment on your post, I do have to say that the idea of formally defining our terminology, though a proper extension of a philosophical/analytical heritage, is contrived, because I think the practice is always contrived. It's one thing to have to explain yourself if you're going to speak in words with invented/focused meaning like 'différ[/i]a[/i]nce,' but to continuously
I suppose that a formal terminology could function to prevent this need to continuously defining the terms of discourse, such as it does in scientific fields, but I'd have to imagine that as far as video games go, such a codex would be justified in nothing more than a coffee table book. Chronic was actually right when s/he said that the words we use come from a lingo -- further discussion of the medium and its significance in greater culture don't require them (e.g does 'FPS' say anything that can't be derived from 'shooting game from a first-person perspective?). Their very nature as inside-slang might only impede the conversation. It's one thing to analyze how a group speaks a certain way, and why, it's another to contend that that speech is even necessary.
This isn't to say that video games, or video game culture, won't evolve to include words that require a proper explanation, and which are perhaps only possible within the context of a universe particular to the community. But I'd hope we could proceed without complicating things. As I maintain: video games aren't art, they're a medium for art, and so too are they a medium for all other creative outlets within our culture -- writing, performance, music, etc. What better concentration of culture, then, to explicate in merely cultural terms?
All in all, don't ever digress from wanting your medium to improve, and especially if that improvement includes a maturation from (being falsely perceived as) a fringe recreation to a fully-fledged intellectual community. Given the rushed-looking appearance of your last paragraph, I'd have to guess you threw in such a digression to buffer yourself from criticism. Don't. Seriously, throw your ass to the wolves. If you're hard enough, they'll choke. Or better yet, actually like the way you taste.
(Or in so many, less sexually cannibalistic, words.)
Don't know how many times spellcheck corrected that before I could finally get it how I wanted, SIC. And I went and effed it up anyway.
Carry on (my wayward son).
Grats on the fp :D
Now i dont know anyone who would claim that holding a six shooter to their would be a "fun" game to play.
Maybe if they made it for the Wii.
Russian roulette is a fun game, you know the nerf version. Unless you're immortal...
Why do people like you never have an avatar? I know it may seem silly but I almost skipped your post (although I never would have commented TL:DR so put down your matches) because of a lack of a funny picture next to it. And I bet a bunch of dtoiders will skip your post because of it. Which is shame because you have a lot of great things to say.
All in all, don't ever digress from wanting your medium to improve, and especially if that improvement includes a maturation from (being falsely perceived as) a fringe recreation to a fully-fledged intellectual community.
This is exactly it, video games will never be seen as equal to cinema and literature until gamers start respecting the medium more. And part of that is engaging in intellectual discussion about games, like TheMizarkShow has done here.
But again, LoweSox, put up the red sox logo or something in your avatar. Anything to differentiate yourself from every other newbie on the site.
I only skim read your post, so I apologise if I missed a vital point, but can you provide an example of a situation actually requiring a new word or phrase?
Words such as pwn (which is 'pown', not 'pawn' btw Excel) and frag are already unnecessary given that the English language provides adequate synonyms, so what would be the point of creating more?
I personally feel that lobbying for an extended vocabulary just to make games seem more respectable to the layperson is as weak and sad as listening to an asinine cocksmoker proclaim a deckchair with a turd on it to be 'art'. You don't need to intimidate people with grandiose and complex words, or abstract pseudo-intellectual reasoning to gain their respect.
And with games now outgrossing movies, I would suggest that we have absolutely no reason to try. After all, we're the majority.
KIDDING! :)
Great blog man. Lots interesting points.
It's coming.
Well done, congrats on front page!
I'm almost positive I've tried to upload an avatar in the past, but have always seemed to run into a site error or something. I'm actually usually pretty consistent with making myself identifiable whenever I sign up for a site.