Talking about Videogames

Although I have discussed the effects of video games and violence in society of having no effect; videogames can, however, affect one socially. With many new ways to socialize and communicate in new videogames, gamers are finding videogames a social event rather than an activity spent alone. This applies to both multiplayer videogames such as World of Warcraft and single player games such as many adventure games like the Zelda series. Another article in A Media Studies Reader describes how the video game players are now engaging in socializing while playing videogames in “Talking about Videogames” by James Newman.

The first aspect of socialization in videogames comes from the new technology of communication while engaging in gameplay. Typically, this communication is in the form of voice from a microphone headset that both sends and receives sounds from other players playing the same game at the same time. Also, the player can type and receive messages while playing. This new form of communication makes videogames a social event rather than a single player activity. Previously, videogamers were struck with a stereotype of a socially awkward and lonely person that spends most of his or her time alone playing videogames. However, because of this new technology, the player can socialize and play the game at the same time, creating a new social network that gives the player a more social experience rather than a social disconnected experience.

Before the new technology of microphone headsets in gaming, gamers still were socially linked by connecting with other videogamers that are playing similar games.
For example, if a very popular videogame (without an online multiplayer option or without a microphone headset option) releases on a particular day and most players purchase and play the game on the same day, the players will often socialize significantly when he or she is not playing the game. This concept is known as the “watercooler movement” (466) and usually occurs at work or at school.

The article also attempts to contradict the “watercooler movement” by stating that different players have different skills and consoles (which result in different gameplay and/or release date) that will separate each player socially. However, I argue that this can either create more conversation and socializing or it can result in social stratification of the players. For instance, those that are really good at the game will join into a group and those that are average players will join into a group. Or, the two groups could socialize about the differences between the gameplay of the two platforms or positions in the game. Furthermore, the “watercooler movement” shows that videogamers are in tune with the social community.

What is a Game?

My class has recently brought up the topic of violence in video games and media. It is believed that media, especially video games, is causing a violence in real world society. However, I have reason to believe that violence is not caused by the video gaming industry according to A Media Studies Reader’s article: What is a Game?

In this article, Johan Huizinga finds a common theme in video games as well as normal games such as chess and poker. Huizinga finds that “games construct a ‘magic circle’ which separates the game from the outside world” (153). He goes on to say that no matter what happens in the game itself, it has no effect in the real world. For example, if one is playing a game of solitaire, no matter how long one plays the game or wins or loses the game, it will have no separate effect on the real life world. Thus, a “magic circle” is created around the gamer that creates a separation between the gamer and the real world.

Although Huizinga makes a great point about the matter of gaming, it is believed that some real life consequences can result from games. Edward Castronova, for example, argues Huizinga’s point of the “magic circle” by listing several consequences that games can cause. For instance, games require time to play that can take time away from other activities in life such as sleeping. Castronova adds that games can affect our moods and behavior. For instance, America’s Army is used as an effective recruitment tool for the United States Army (154).

Although both authors make a valid point, I am left to believe that gaming does not have a direct affect on violence in society. Although Castronova arguably proves that gaming can directly affect someone’s mood and decisions, there is still a “magic circle” that the gamer is aware of that separates the game from reality. Although the game can manipulate the gamer’s mood, the gamer is very aware of the boundaries of the “magic circle” that the game creates; because of this circle, it is unlikely for the gamer to make rash decisions based on a world or concept that the gamer knows is not real. For example, if a gamer is playing “Call of Duty”, a war game, and the gamers opponent has destroy the gamer, making the gamer lose the game, the gamer can become angry and enraged because he or she lost the imaginary game. However, the gamer will not become angry because he or she had lost real world supplies and lives. This is because the gamer is very aware that there is a “magic circle” that separates him or herself from the real world. Therefore, violence is arguable not caused by violent video games.

My Learning Style

As I continue my college career, I ask myself how I can better my learning skills to further improve in my studies. By changing my learning styles, I can more accurately learn subjects by simply changing the media in which I study with, or by changing the strategy of how I study a particular subject. For example, I could watch a demonstration of a science experiment rather than reading about the scientific concept. Or, I could learn about the human body in parts rather than as a whole. Overall, the learning style of a student can determine how the student learns from particular methods of teaching.

I have taken several questionnaires that examine my particular learning style and I have discovered that I am an excessive visual thinker. In fact, I have been told that I may have real difficulties with verbal learning such as lectures. I can use this information to help my studies in school. Perhaps I could study more with online videos and demonstrations to help me study.
I have also been told that I have a strong kinesthetic learning preference. This means that I learn by “doing” rather than reading or hearing. This information suggests that I do more “hands-on” learning.

Finally, I found that I learn more globally than sequentially. A global learner learns better when the subject is taught in pieces rather than altogether and in order. For example, if I were to learn about U.S. History, I would prefer to begin at WWII and then back to the Civil War. On the other hand, a sequentially learner may want U.S. History to begin at Christopher Columbus and then the Mayflower, and so on. Since I am a global learner, it may benefit me to learn the subject out of order, so that I may learn the subject as a whole and more accurately.