Due to my mom’s distaste for games and my severe lack of
hand-eye coordination, I’ve never been a gamer. My fascination for the medium
has never been fulfilled, and despite my little sister’s explanations and help
with playing, I’ve never quite understood the enthusiasm most people have for
games (though I am guessing it’s much more engaging if you can actually play).
Observing the class play of Disney Infinity made the attractive nature of games
more apparent to me. Elements of interactivity, intertextuality, and simulacrum
give games an aspect of exploration that stands out amongst other children’s
media.
First, the whole game of Disney Infinity is based on
intertextuality. The game operates on the assumption that the audience is
familiar with the entire Disney universe, and a lot of the fun comes from
making different texts from the universe collide. In the class a lot of people
goofed around with the characters fighting each other and running around
together—it’s fun to see Rapunzel and Baymax shoot at each other or Hulk give
Sully a piggyback ride.
The game also is based on the idea that the player can
create their own Disney universe, which will combine bits and pieces of all of
the Disney texts that particular player enjoys. This creates a surreal atmosphere
that reflects the postmodern ideas we discussed in class. Specifically, it
reminded me of the work of Rene Magritte and his work with simulacrum. Many of
his paintings—including the famous The
Treachery of Images, more commonly known as “This is Not a Pipe”—combine
elements of everyday life in odd ways, emphasizing that his paintings are by no
means reality. Magritte’s floating people seem to have a direct relationship to
the floating elements created by players in the game, such as a bistro hanging
mid-air in the middle of a Disney-esque forest. Because the symbol and sign of
the thing do not equal reality, both Magritte and this game use that fact to
play around with these elements and create something surreal and fantastic.
The interactivity available in the game is also a
fascinating consequence of the rejection of treating the game world like the
real world. The players can explore the world at their own pace and do
ridiculous things with the objects around them—like picking up other people. Additionally,
players can manipulate the timeline of the game to suit their interests and
whims. Lastly, the glitches and physics of the gae let the players, through
their avatar, manipulate that reality even further. This has the same effect as
described above—the symbol of the thing is not the thing, and consequently the
players can do what they like with it.
Overall, the interactive experience of the game played with
the whole “unreality” that games and media inevitable possess. The
acknowledgment of this simulacra allows for experimentation and exploration
that is inherent in children’s play. This game reality, through its lack of
reality and heightened interactivity, provides a space for skill development,
competition, mimicking, and pleasure needed for a child’s progress.
No comments:
Post a Comment