MEANING
Video games matter.
Residing in that phrase is the premise that video games mean something to the people who play them, the designers and companies that produce them, and the cultures in which they are made and played. What video games mean is dependent on a variety of contextual factors. Games such as Final Fantasy VII (Square, 1997) or Super Mario Bros (Nintendo, 1985) mean a variety of things, from the nostalgia they may trigger in gamers who played them to the personal stories, thoughts, or discussion about these games can prompt, to the impact they had on the adoption and use of the Sony PlayStation and Nintendo Entertainment System respectively. There is also a level of cultural meaning stemming from these two games, as both are products of Japanese culture, but were widely played around the world.
The meaning of games varies depending on context and there are typically multiple meanings to any game. Video games mean different things to different people in different situations; each game typically has many levels of meanings. However, meaning in games can be divided into three general areas: the meaning of games, the meaning in games, and the meaning created around games and game culture. The meaning of games is connected to their role as cultural objects and media products. The meaning in games focuses on the development and execution of games and how meaning is expressed within a given game. The established and growing community surrounding video games ensures that there is also meaning that develops around games, from the discourse of professional gaming to the socially-determined roles, practices, and language of gamers. The boundaries among these categories are blurry, but each demonstrates a particular dynamic of how games signify. Although these three areas are not exhaustive, they are comprehensive enough to illustrate how video games mean, what they mean, and why their meaning matters, which gives those interested in studying and analyzing games a new way to look at a favorite activity.
Before moving through these three categories of how games contain and express messages, it is appropriate to denote my positionality. As a communication studies scholar schooled in rhetorical analysis, my beliefs about meaning are shaped by my academic background. Rhetoric is often concerned with questions of meaning, as the discipline is about “the study of what is persuasive” (Campbell & Huxman, 2009) and is founded on Kenneth Burke’s belief that the reality we “see” is predicated on the symbol systems we use (Burke, 1966). For rhetoricians like me, questions of meaning can be found everywhere as rhetoric “is a way of knowing; it is epistemic” (Scott, 1967) and “everything, or virtually everything, can be described as ‘rhetorical’” (Schiappa, 2001). Rhetoric has become a “perspective, one that accounts for the production, circulation, reception, and interpretation of messages” (Zarefsky, 2008). It is this perspective, which is based on the influence and power of symbol systems, that shapes where I find meaning in games.
Meaning of Games
The first way that video games mean is in the sociocultural frame tied to their role as cultural objects and media products. Video games are an increasingly powerful and consumptive media form, with total revenues expected to grow to $81 billion worldwide by 2016 (Takahashi, 2011). The industry is a large enough social force that a hit video game can generate over a billion hours of play time over the course of a calendar year (Gaudiosi, 2012). The growth in the social relevance of video games creates a situation where the broad, social meaning of games is a crucial part of the discourse of video games. To this end, the meaning of games is typically tied to how “games function in broader on- and offline contemporary society as talk-about-able cultural objects for discussion of issues and problems that span far beyond the purview of such games themselves” (Steinkuehler, 2006, p. 100). The size and scope of video games make them culturally vital in a way that reaches far beyond the bounds of any particular game. Video games are meaningful as objects of play, analysis, monetary gain, social interaction, and in a host of other ways tied to their role as cultural objects. Recognizing the full importance of the meaning of games requires looking beyond games themselves and into larger debates about the role of games in society and the function of games in people’s lives. To this end, two examples of how the meaning of games can be seen in practice are discussions of video game addiction and the concept of the “magic circle.”
Discourse about video game addiction is plentiful and rapidly increasing as video games become a more prominent media form. Complete with pitches for treatment centers that feature stories of children and teens whose lives have been overtaken by the games they play (CRC Health Group, 2010) and documentaries about individual failures in the ability to balance video games and a broader life (Stuart, 2010), the discussion of addiction and gaming is a key piece of the meaning of video games. Likely driven by the increased money and time spent on games, concerns about gaming’s role in our lives parallels the moral and social concerns that come with the introduction of almost any media form. Emerging counter-narratives seeking to rearticulate questions of addiction further define the meaning of games. Efforts by gamers to reframe a discourse of addiction and focus on the unbalanced lives of certain individuals attempt to articulate the meaning of games in a manner concordant with video games as a potentially positive force in people’s lives while crafting a way to talk about certain behaviors as “problematic use,” rather than addiction (Nardi, 2010). The debate over whether or not video games are addictive is a key piece of the meaning of games, as we struggle to understand and define the implications of a newer media form.
Beyond the large, social debates about games, the meaning of games is also articulated in smaller disputes, such as the one between games researchers and developers over a concept called the “magic circle.” The notion dates to Homo Ludens (Huizinga, [1938] 1950), but was popularized and redefined in Rules of Play (Salen & Zimmerman, 2003) where the magic circle was defined as a bounded space for play that was separate from everyday life. The magic circle offers space to engage in experiences disconnected from the features of normal life that could inhibit certain actions within a game. This idea presents a conception of the meaning of games where video games are a distinct, refreshing, and different kind of activity that allow players to divorce themselves from the strictures of their everyday lives. However, many scholars critiqued the concept of a magic circle, arguing that cheating shows a kind of play where any idea of a magic circle breaks down (Consalvo, 2009) and with arguments contending that play consists of the assembly of myriad parts, none of which can be isolated from the others (Taylor, 2009). The criticism eventually led to a response by Zimmerman, who argued that the idea was never intended to create an orthodox, rigid viewpoint and that the idea of a magic circle was largely a tool for game designers (2012). For proponents, a magic circle opens up possibility spaces and promotes open, free-thinking about what games can be. For critics, the concept elides material conditions facing players and analysis of the worlds in which games are played. Regardless of whether or not we always actively consider the role of a magic circle in game development or criticism, these largely internal discussions about games help structure what games are made, how they are played, and how we think about them. The magic circle is not just an idle, academic debate, it is an example of how discussions about how games work shape meaning outside of the bounds of consideration for any specific game.
In presenting opposing views of what games can be, debates about addiction or problematic use and the magic circle illustrate how the meaning of video games can be different things to different people in different contexts. In addition to the larger, social implications of video games as a media form, the meaning of games is shaped through active debates by designers, scholars, and gamers who lay out ideas about how to better understand video games and how connected spaces for play are to everyday life. Complementing this broad notion of the macro understanding of meaning and games is a micro look at the meaning that can be found in games.
Meaning in Games
A seemingly straightforward, but exceptionally rich form of meaning can be found in the games themselves. Although questions of meaning in games does not provide a large, big picture background like the meaning of games, drilling down to specific games and how they are made to mean can offer particular, deep insights about how games work and their potential as a communicative media form. There are several ways of exploring meaning in games, but two powerful lenses for this kind of discussion are procedural rhetoric and the design and play of games in practice.
The notion of procedural rhetoric stems largely from the work of Ian Bogost, who contends that, for video games, “the main representational mode is procedural, rather than verbal” (Bogost, 2006, p. 168) and that when video games make arguments, they “do it not with oral speech, nor in writing, nor even with images. Rather video games make argument with processes” (Bogost, 2008, p. 125). In so doing, Bogost seeks the meaning in games by focusing on processes are used to “dictate how actions can and cannot be carried out” (Bogost, 2007, p. 3). This focus on procedures is a strong articulation of how meaning can be found in games, as focus is placed on a particular dynamic of video games and how it creates meaning. By examining games such as Hush (Jamie Antonisse and Devon Johnson, 2007), where players are placed in a position of a mother trying to soothe their child in the midst of the Rwandan genocide, Bogost demonstrates a mode of meaning making particular to games, one that is inextricably tied to the dynamics of games themselves and how they function as an expressive media form. Instead of relying on text and images to convey a story, as in a television report, Hush conveys information based on interaction with the rule-based systems that govern its computer program. For Bogost, video games are special because of their reliance on procedures, where communication is mediated through a computer program and its use of code. Parsing the processes of a game, much like a rhetorician might critically analyze the words of a speech, offers a clear route to examining the meaning in video games.
This perspective is quite useful, but it needs to be expanded to look at the other ways that meaning resides in games. Beyond the procedures, a broader conception of game design and specific examples of play in practice offer other points where meaning can be found in games. Questions of design stretch outside the code of the game, as part of the meaning in games can be found in how structural elements reach beyond the game’s code. An example of this can be seen in EVE Online (CCP Games, 2003), where the limited, vague instructions given in the new player experience forces players to either quit the game or seek out information beyond the bounds of the game itself (Paul, 2011a). The end result of EVE Online’s design choice is that the meaning within the game is determined by how words in tutorials, coded processes, and a community of players that may or may not aid new players in their effort to learn the game come together to define what the new player experience means. Meaning in EVE Online cannot be reduced to any of these parts, as it exists in the interaction of the pieces to form the whole of the game.
Another mode of meaning can be found in the practical play of games themselves. Meaning can be found in the interactions of players, as often the meaning in games is found in play. Motion-based games provide a perfect platform for how to see how play can be a window into the meaning in games. Wii Sports (Nintendo, 2006) and Johann Sebastian Joust (Die Gute Fabrik, 2011 for the alpha version) are excellent examples of how play can create meaning. Wii Sports builds from the previous experience most people have with certain sports to provide a gaming experience that takes off in the playing. As the rapid adoption of the console and its integration into the recreational habits of the elderly drove media coverage, meaning in Wii Sports is found in play. The Wii Sports version of bowling remade the game in a manner that did not require heaving a heavy ball down a lane, unlocking the potential of the game for a group of people who may have found difficulty with the offline bowling that dominated their recreational habits earlier in life (Paul, 2012). Differently, Johann Sebastian Joust takes the folk game Ninja into a motion-controlled world by using PlayStation Move controllers and Bach music. In abstract, the game simply requires moving in sync to the tempo of music, but the game takes off in play as players make the game their own. How the game plays out in practice and, by extension, what the game means is determined by the people playing and the environment in which the game is played. The meaning in Joust is clarified more in the play of the game than in its processes or design, even though the code of the game sets the table for the meaning that can be found in the interactions of those playing the game. Each group of players recontextualizes the game in accordance to the group with whom they are playing, and the highlight of the game is often when the least assuming player wins because everyone else leaves them alone until the bitter end of the round.
The specific meaning found within games is a crucial part of what they are. Shaped by both the processes of games and the design and play of them, part of the meaning of games resides within them. Beyond the specifics of games and the broader culture that helps determine the meaning of games, communities of players can shape the meaning that can be found around games.
The growing population of people playing games leads to a situation where meaning can be found in texts surrounding games. In addition to their role as broad, cultural objects, game communities can give additional, potentially more targeted meaning to the games they play akin to the interpretive communities that can be identified in other forms of textual criticism (Fish, 1980). The meaning in video games can also reach beyond games themselves, as groups of players help recontexutalize what a game is and what may be most meaningful about particular games or genres of games. A rich body of game studies literature focuses on analyzing the cultures that surround video games and supplements complementary work from disciplines such as film studies (Bordwell, 1989). Building from a variety of disciplinary backgrounds, this work often addresses how games are complex objects and how meaning can be developed outside of games. This meaning around games can be seen in the cultural practices of gaming and emergent behaviors of gamers.
Examinations of the cultural practices of gaming and gamers generally come in a few different forms. One perspective on this kind of approach can be found in Mia Consalvo’s analysis of cheating, where she demonstrates the many ways that cheating can be defined and analyzes how cheating possesses a contingent definition that is regularly defined and redefined based on the context of play and the gamers doing the playing (2007). In so doing, Consalvo is effectively making arguments about how meaning can be found around games. Although influenced by larger social structures and context, arguments about cheating and the social context in which the term is defined are less about the meaning of games and more of an investigation into the rich culture around games and how meaning making is found in the analysis of what happens on one of the many platforms for analysis that games provide.
Ethnographic studies of games and gamers are also a way to chart how meaning can be found around games. Books by T. L. Taylor about EverQuest (Sony Online Entertainment, 1999) (Taylor, 2006) and professional gaming (Taylor, 2012) address the dynamics of the cultures that have emerged around particular games and practices of gaming. Her work about online games details how the games produce large, vibrant cultures where analyzing the processes or play of the video game would only scratch the surface of the rich webs of meaning produced by games such as EverQuest. Her work about professional play is similar and analyzes how the professionalization of play intersects with a number of cultural practices and material affordances that parallel existing cultures in sports, music, and business. Both of these books take games as a starting point for analysis, yet frequently find their most salient arguments resting in how meaning can be found around the games and in the practices of power gamers or the stakes and implications of sanctioning certain games for professional competition instead of others.
Meaning around games can also be found in the discursive practices of players and designers. Intersecting with the meaning that can be found in games, meaning around games can stem from the adoption of a term such as “welfare epics” (Paul, 2010), debates over the realism of sports games (Baerg, 2008), or the development of mathematical models such as “theorycraft” and other player-driven practices to optimize game play (Paul, 2011b). These studies take the emergent practices of gamers as a subject for analysis and then leverage the findings from the discourse around games to make arguments about game design and game culture. The emergence and prominent use of the term “welfare epics” offered insight to the reward structure in online games, while the search for realism in simulated Madden NFL (EA Tiburon, 1993–present) games gives a fresh perspective on what a sports game is and can be. Finally, the development and mass adoption of theorycraft prompted changes to World of Warcraft (Blizzard Entertainment, 2004) that were made to challenge theorycrafters, effectively making theorycrafting a required extra-curricular activity for a large number of players.
Focusing on the larger cultural implication of games or the particular meaning that can be found in a given game leaves out a primary way in which games are meaningful. The meaning around games is a rich location for inquiry where quality investigations often have collateral benefits to understanding the design of games and the cultural role of video games. The growth and popularity of games, in combination with other sociotechnical innovations, creates a culture around gaming that is a substantial factor in how video games are meaningful.
Investigating Meaning
The meaning of video games stretches beyond games themselves into general society and subcultures developed around video games. The meaning of games is typically framed by large cultural implications, as video games have become a massive media industry that is meaningful in terms of its financial and social impact. The meaning of games is connected to their role as cultural objects, where both specific games and games in general are subject to questions of meaning that reach beyond the bounds of what can be found in games or game culture. There is also meaning to be found in particular games. The processes, design, and play of games offer places where meaning can be found and analyzed. The growth of emergent cultures and practices of gamers also means that there is meaning to be found around games, as professional gaming and emergent discursive practices demonstrate how the meaning of games can exist outside of games themselves.
These three types of meaning are not an exclusive list of how games are meaningful. Scholars interested in questions of meaning and games should continue to chart the field of video games and how games are made to mean. These are also categories likely to crop up in combination, as the meaning of particular games is almost always shaped by their cultural context, and cases such as theorycraft demonstrate how the meaning around games can help restructure the meaning in a given game. Leveraging the areas of overlap offers a chance to press deeper and reaches a greater level of understanding about why games and their meanings matter. These three categories are designed as areas of investigation, as places to start looking for and assessing the notable ways and places where meaning can be found. Charting what is found and developing the case studies to articulate why a specific case is interesting, compelling, and/or notable for gamers, designers, and scholars gives all of us a better chance to understand why games matter and how they mean.
References
Baerg, A. (2008). “It’s (not) in the game”: The quest for quantitative realism and the Madden football fan. In L. W. Hugenberg, P. M. Haridakis, & A. C. Earnheardt (Eds.), Sports mania: Essays on fandom and the media in the 21st century (pp. 218–228). Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company.
Bogost, I. (2006). Videogames and ideological frames. Popular Communication, 4(3), 165–183.
Bogost, I. (2007). Persuasive games: The expressive power of videogames. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Bogost, I. (2008). The rhetoric of video games. In K. Salen (Ed.), The ecology of games: Connecting youth, games and learning (pp. 117–139). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Bordwell, D. (1989). Making meaning: Inference and rhetoric in the interpretation of cinema. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Burke, K. (1966). Language as symbolic action: Essays on life, literature and method. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Campbell, K. K., & Huxman, S. S. (2009). The rhetorical act: Thinking, speaking and writing critically. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Consalvo, M. (2007). Cheaters: Gaining advantage in videogames. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Consalvo, M. (2009). There is no magic circle. Games and Culture, 4(4), 408–417.
CRC Health Group. (2010). Video game addiction. Retrieved December 9, 2010, from www.video-game-addiction.org/.
Fish, S. (1980). Is there a text in this class?: The authority of interpretive communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Gaudiosi, J. (2012, July 11). Riot games’ League of Legends officially becomes most played PC game in the world. Retrieved July 15, 2012, from www.forbes.com/sites/johngaudiosi/2012/07/11/riot-games-league-of-legends-officially-becomes-most-played-pc-game-in-the-world/.
Huizinga, J. [1938] (1950). Homo ludens: A study of the play element in culture. Boston: Beacon.
Nardi, B. (2010). My life as a night elf priest: An anthropological account of World of Warcraft. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Paul, C. A. (2010). Welfare epics?: The rhetoric of rewards in World of Warcraft. Games and Culture, 5(2), 158–176.
Paul, C. A. (2011a). Don’t play me: EVE Online, new players, and rhetoric. Paper presented at the FDG ’11, Bordeaux.
Paul, C. A. (2011b). Optimizing play: How theorycraft changes gameplay and design. Game Studies, 11(2).
Paul, C. A. (2012). Wordplay and the discourse of video games: Analyzing words, design, and play. New York: Routledge.
Salen, K., & Zimmerman, E. (2003). Rules of play: Game design fundamentals. Boston: The MIT Press.
Schiappa, E. (2001). Second thoughts on the critiques of big rhetoric. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 34(3), 260–274.
Scott, R. L. (1967). On viewing rhetoric as epistemic. Central States Speech Journal, 18, 9–17.
Steinkuehler, C. A. (2006). Why game (culture) studies now? Games and Culture, 1(1), 97–102.
Stuart, K. (2010, December 6). Panorama discovers games addiction: Did we really need to be told this? Retrieved December 9, 2010, from www.guardian.co.uk/technology/gamesblog/2010/dec/06/bbc-panorama-games-addiction-review.
Takahashi, D. (2011, September 7). With online sales growing, video game market to hit $81B by 2016. Retrieved July 15, 2012, from http://venturebeat.com/2011/09/07/with-online-sales-growing-video-game-market-to-hit-81b-by-2016-exclusive/.
Taylor, T. L. (2006). Play between worlds: Exploring online game culture. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Taylor, T. L. (2009). The assemblage of play. Games and Culture, 4(4), 331–339.
Taylor, T. L. (2012). Raising the stakes: E-Sports and the professionalization of computer gaming. Boston: The MIT Press.
Zarefsky, D. (2008). Knowledge claims in rhetorical criticism. Journal of Communication, 58, 629–640.
Zimmerman, E. (2012, February 7). Jerked around by the magic circle—clearing the air ten years later. Retrieved July 15, 2012, from www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/135063/jerked_around_by_the_magic_circle_.php.