Author: Khandoker (Page 1 of 2)

Dunn, Ben. “The Problem With Ludonarrative Dissonance.” SUPERJUMP, 16 Aug. 2020, https://medium.com/super-jump/the-problem-with-ludonarrative-dissonance-625e7c67ed2. Accessed 3 Nov. 2022. 

qBen Dunn talks about how he feels the term ludonarrative dissonance is often being used incorrectly and objectively with the tagline “At what point does narrative consistency become more important than having fun?”. He describes several video games and explains how ludonarrative dissonance applies to those video games. He explains how some games do merit this criticism due to the story often saying things completely opposite to what we have been doing while playing, but plenty of games do not really warrant it due to the world or universe of that game not necessarily reflecting reality or the way we perceive things in the real world. He proceeds to talk about how ‘open-world’ games allowing us to do certain things does not necessarily make them ludonarratively dissonant since they are at the behest of the player and not the game itself and addressing this issue would mean the removal of the players mean to interact and experiment with the game world, citing the Grand Theft Auto series to be a common victim of this due to its open ended nature. Ben Dunn says while ludonarrative dissonance is a topic which does warrant discussion, throwing it around to objectively describe games people do not like only serves to make it meaningless in the long run.

Freelance writer and avid gamer Ben Dunn writes about ludonarrative dissonance with various examples and brings up some very valid points about the argument I had not really thought of. The tagline of his article “At what point does narrative consistency become more important than having fun?” is a question which brings the usage of this concept to critique video games into perspective. Video games being an interactive medium cannot help but allow its players to do with the world as they see fit. This will undoubtedly introduce many actions which may necessarily not agree or with the plot. Games being ludonarratively dissonant is has been a very contentious topic but I think it mostly applies to story-driven games and games which are trying to portray reality. Incorrectly using the term is also something he addresses and I feel is important as it would otherwise dilute its value and relegate it to the various other terms people use to insult video game they do not like.

Dunn also addresses plenty of video games which have been critiqued or even reviewed as being ludonarratively dissonant. He brings up Tomb Raider, which does indeed aim to portray the main character Lara Croft as a frightened and inexperienced adventurer but in many sections of the game we have no choice but to mow down hordes of human enemies, which completely flips the narrative on its head. He also compares this to another similar game Uncharted which is also often critiqued for being ludonarratively dissonant. The point he makes about the world of Uncharted being different to ours and not reflecting real world perspectives is valid, but the same can be said for Tomb Raider, both worlds being supernatural and mystical in their own rights. Despite this I think the point he is trying to make is still quite valid that games require ludonarrative consistency when they are trying to realistically portray the real world.

Talking about the Grand Theft Auto games, especially GTA IV, is something very contentious but I think Dunn has explained his perspective on it very well. The game is very gritty and tells the story of a broken man trying to stray away from life’s horrors. As dark as the narrative is, the players are still in control and can do almost anything they want, let loose in a fictional but realistic rendition of New York City. The GTA franchise is known for its open world and giving the player complete freedom with very minimal restrictions, so removing this aspect of the gameplay just to fit the narrative is impossible, and as Dunn puts it, the actions of the player are completely their own, especially if they are not being forced to choose between any styles of play, and should be seen as completely separate from the narrative. If the player however does choose to follow the narrative without deviating from it in gameplay they will find their actions very much coinciding with the narrative and can actually experience the game for what it was meant to be. This brings up another point that games are not necessarily just a story-telling medium but an experience as well, allowing us to do things many of us would normally not even consider, like in this case skydiving from the Empire State building or driving a car inside the subway.

Franklin, Chris. The Debate That Never Took Place. YouTube, Errant Signal, 30 Jan. 2015, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBN3R0m31bA. Accessed 2 Nov. 2022.

This video by Chris Franklin owner of the YouTube page Errant Signal provides a brief history of video game criticism particularly on the debate, or nondebate as he puts it, between ludology and narratology in video games. The study of storytelling falls under various fields of study and thus, narratology combines these elements into a single study. Similarly, ludology had been coined by senior video game developer Gonzalo Frasca, “We will propose the term ludology (from ludis, the Latin word for ‘game’), to refer to the yet non-existent ‘discipline that studies game and play activities’. Just like narratology, ludology should also be independent from the medium that supports the activity.” But at some point ludology and narratology were misinterpreted to be at odds with each other and there seems to have been a pseudo debate ever since. This misunderstanding seems to stem from the idea that looking at games as a system opposes the idea of looking at games as a story or that they must be at harmony with each other for a game to be proper. Despite this being long debunked, the fall out from it still remained and critiques, reviewers and even players had gotten into the habit of distinguishing between gameplay and narrative when judging games. Franklin also references Clint Hockings original blog post about BioShock, which brought the term ‘Ludonarrative dissonance’ into public use, saying how it has been reduced to a joke term due to its continued misuse and overuse. He states looking at a game’s system and its story separately is unfair and unjustified, since we do not do so with any other medium, like films or books. He also states how this way of thinking has become increasingly prevalent, given terms like ludocentrism / ludofundamentalism have been coming up and are being used to talk about games that focus more on gameplay rather than story. Franklin states we do not compare the cinematography of a film and its narrative against each other when judging them and it should be the same for video games. He believes pitting story and gameplay in opposition to one another might actually be detrimental in the long term since games should not be defined or restricted by terms like these because afterall, video games are a medium of their own and should be allowed to grow and flourish in its own way.

Chris Franklin provides a well informed analysis about the history of this debate and provides a great perspective on the matter. I believe his title already says a lot, referencing how it is a debate that never took place but people still believe in. As Franklin says in the video we don’t compare the cinematography of a film and its narrative against each other and the same should also apply to video games, which I also believe is true. . Video games are a separate medium and we should not look at it the same way we look at other forms of media, since video games have the unique element of interactivity. Video games also do not yet have a very long history as a medium so limiting it to be defined by terms like this will ultimately not allow it to flourish, discouraging experimentation and creativity. The fact that not all games are not set out to accomplish the same goal also makes this a point of contention. Some games purely focus on being a good experience not really focusing on the story, while there are others games which play out more like a movie than a game, as well as all the other types in between. This video really got me thinking about my perspective on ludonarrative dissonance. While maintaining ludic and narrative harmony might be important for games that wish to tell a compelling and powerful narrative, not every game needs to follow this. Being too focused on merging gameplay and narrative together might ultimately make video games as a whole lose its identity.

Hocking, Clint. “Ludonarrative Dissonance in Bioshock.” Click Nothing, 7 Oct. 2007, https://clicknothing.typepad.com/click_nothing/2007/10/ludonarrative-d.html. Accessed 31 Oct. 2022.

This is a post from the personal blog of prominent game designer and director Clint Hocking, who has worked on critically acclaimed video games such as the Splinter Cell and Far Cry 2, and has also been a part of industry giants like Ubisoft and Valve. He has also served on the Advisory Board for Game Developers Conference and is known for promoting games as an emerging medium and art form. This blog post is primarily a critique of the critically acclaimed video game BioShock. While the game has been critically acclaimed in reviews, Hocking critiques it on the notion that he feels the gameplay interactions do not coincide with the narrative interactions of the game. He believes the gameplay, or ludic aspect of the game, encourages the player to strengthen themselves and act selfishly, following a ‘Randian Objectivism’ ideology. The idea “seek power and you will progress” is the driving theme of the gameplay, according to Hocking, but key moments of the game allow the option to oppose this idea. Hocking’s gripe with the game is that the narrative or plot of the game does the complete opposite and urges that the player is selfless and strives to save the people around him. It tells a story critiquing an Objectivism mindset and how a society built upon such an ideology is doomed to fail, shown by the game’s premise. This ultimately puts the gameplay and the narrative at odds with each other. The thing Hocking finds insulting in all of this is that, whereas we have at least some choice in gameplay the narrative allows no such freedom, especially given that near the ending the player character is shown to have repercussions for his narrative choices, ones the player had no control over. He feels this breaks the internal consistency of the game not just as a video game but as a work of art, stating, ”The leveraging of the game’s narrative structure against its ludic structure all but destroys the player’s ability to feel connected to either”. He mentions how he feels video games as a narrative medium is still quite in its infancy and future games could learn from games like BioShock and successfully merge the narrative and ludic aspects in video games to truly create a compelling and powerful narrative. He compares video game narratives with the movie Citizen Kane which is considered one of the greatest and most significant pieces of storytelling in cinema history, and feels someday video games may yet find a similar piece to refer to.

This blog by Clint Hocking is widely considered to have brought the concept of ludonarrative dissonance to the general consensus and is in fact the where the term was coined, even though the concept has been around for much longer. This was put out at a time when regular people were not as well acquainted with the idea of ludonarrative dissonance and served to make this concept a hot topic when discussing games for a long time. Looking at the narrative and gameplay separately is an interesting perspective but it is not something we often do when discussing other type of media. It would be like comparing the cinematography and the narrative of a film at the same time. The game was very popular and highly acclaimed when this was written making this a hot take, something I believe Hocking was aware of, explaining how his writing is a critique and not a review. Hocking explains his thoughts and concepts in great detail, introducing a lot of interesting and fascinating ideas many would not think of. Despite this I believe it might be a little unfair to judge a game solely on story and gameplay dissonance, especially given the ramifications Hockings’s critique would have, even though he couldn’t have possibly predicted it. Having played the game myself, the idea that the gameplay encourages seeking power and being self-serving is something I had not considered before and made quite a lot of sense when I thought about it. Throughout the game we are given the opportunity to sacrifice characters which seem to be the most beneficial choice for the player, providing them with more resources and making them stronger, but the story (without spoiling it) greatly emphasises that doing so would not be the best choice and to spare them instead. We later learn this choice was in fact a narrative trap designed to steer the player into a bad ending. I would quote Hocking on this since he puts it better than I can, “the notion that rational self-interest is moral or good is a trap, and that the ‘power’ we derive from complete and unchecked freedom necessarily corrupts, and ultimately destroys us.” Allowing the player this freedom of choice served to enhance the narrative I believe and is a great commentary on the concept of Randian Objectivism. Given I am not an expert on video game design, I do not believe it ruins the experience as much as Hocking makes it out to be, saying he wanted to stop playing the game in protest, but I won’t say he is wrong in his perspective. Hocking being an acclaimed game designer and director makes his argument more compelling, but I believe games should be scrutinised by this concept only if they are trying to portray reality or telling a compelling narrative, which admittedly BioShock is trying to be.

Old source:
Carter, Thom J. “What Gaming Does to Your Brain—and How You Might Benefit.” Wired, June 2021.
https://www.wired.com/story/what-gaming-does-to-your-brain-how-you-might-benefit/.

The article by Thom James Carter for the “Wired” magazine explores the many aspects of video games on our mental health. Carter portrays his own perspective on the matter having struggled with gaming addiction while playing the MMO game “World of Warcraft”, and poses us with the question how gaming affects our heads and whether our minds can actually benefit from any of it despite potential drawbacks. He talks about gaming addiction quoting many sources and states that gaming addiction is just like any other addiction, how pleasant stimuli and rewards systems reinforce or encourage certain behaviours. He goes on to state how different genres of games are different and possibly have different effects on the brain. He uses the widely popular game “Fortnite” not only as an example for fast paced games but also because it is very popular with kids and younger players. While stating how the game can be addictive he also states some of the good points about playing fast faced games like shooters such as developing better spatial reasoning, decision-making and improving attention spans. He also states how the positive stress we feel from playing these games can actually be good for our brains by increasing our ability to focus. Carter follows this up with how the affects of video games on the mind are not yet very well known given its very short history. He shows some of the benefits researchers have found playing action games, such as improved reflexes, better focus, better at recognising and picking out colours and many more. He concludes that playing video games can be good for us as long as it is in moderation.

Carter quotes many people to make his points like cognitive neuro scientist Marc Palaus, who has a PhD from the Open University of Catalonia and Environmental psychologist Lee Chambers, as well as quoting many magazines and articles like from Polygon, UCI News, Scientific American, Men’s Health and many more. He also uses his personal experience playing games to facilitate his points as well.

Being a avid fan of video games and presenting his own problems playing video games makes Thom J. Carter seem very credible to talk about this topic. He seems to focus on gaming addiction quite a lot throughout the article due his own struggles with it and presents anecdotes often throughout the article. As a person who plays games himself I can understand most of the things Carter is saying but some of the terms and ways he says things may be difficult to understand for people not familiar with gaming. He provides some very extreme examples as well. The mixing of quotes with citations is actually done pretty well. Having played games for a long time Carter’s quote, “is often played up for headlines more than it is an actual mental health threat on its face.” is something I agree with. Media and news have often not been very kind towards video games in general and stories related to it often blown out of proportion.

The part about games like Fortnite is particularly useful to my research since it also mentions how it affects children. The game being particularly popular with kids games it a great source to explore when trying to find the effects of video games on the minds of young children. The example about a young child wetting herself due to her gaming addiction which I found very interesting since it shows how children could be particularly prone to gaming addiction. Being experienced with games, Cartier’s quote, “They can, however, have the potential to suck us in to a degree that isn’t healthy, which could potentially manifest as video game addiction.” His own experiences struggling with addiction allows him to make meaningful observation on everything he has written.