(Begins April 20 - Ends April 27)
Read Ender's Game, Chapters 1 and 2, and respond to these questions:
Chapter 1:
“Ender doodled on his desk, drawing contour maps of mountainous islands and then telling his desk to display them n three dimensions from every angle.” (Card, 4)
1) Considering the quote above, is this a game? Is this play?
2) When the other children bully up on Ender, is this a game? Is this play?
3) What do you think of Ender’s strategy? What is fair play? How do we, as game designers, ensure fair play? Should we?
Chapter 2
“Peter opened his bottom drawer and took out the bugger mask. Mother had got upset at him when Peter bought it, but Dad had pointed out that the war wouldn’t go away just because you hid bugger masks and wouldn’t let your kids play with make-believe laser guns. Better to play the war games, and have a better chance of surviving when the buggers came again.
“If I survive the games, thought Ender.” (Card, 11)
1) What is the relationship between games and reality? Does violence in reality validate violence in games? Under what circumstances is violence in games acceptable? Can games go too far?
2) Who is the “bad guy” in Peter and Ender’s game? Why would you argue this?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Testing!
ReplyDeletehello is anyone there??
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTesting...
ReplyDeleteIt works?
ReplyDeleteChapter 1
ReplyDelete1)What Ender is doing is playing, much like a child in this time would with legos.
2)I feel this is a game that the other students are playing with Ender. It seems to be a game of strength versus brains. There is a defined winner and loser.
3)I think Ender's strategy was a great one. Take down the leader of the pack, and the pack falls in line. I think this was fair play, and it is very important that game designers keep fairness in mind. If a game is too hard or seems winnable, the player will burn out quickly.
Chapter 2
1)Games reflect reality. Violence, I think, validates violence in video games, it exists in this world and isn't something that is going away any time soon. I think there are many places where violence is appropriate, but there is a line between useful violence and gratuitous bloodshed.
2)I would say the Army is the bad guy in this situation. The testing and failing of Peter to be a super brilliant savior caused him to be very bitter towards Ender. Peter feels that his failure to pass the testing is the reason for Ender's birth, and he is extremely jealous that his younger sibling could surpass him in brilliance.
1) I think ender is mostly just board and playing these little games to pass the time
ReplyDelete2) I think when the other children bully ender they consider it play to pick on a small kid.
3) I think ender played fair, because he was the one being ganged up on and did the only logical thing to get him out of this cituation. As A game designer I think we should have a good sense of fair play just so we know how not to play fair.
chapter 2
1) the basic relation ship between game and realitay is something we can relate to. thus if we can relate to it chances are we will like it. I think most violence in games is acceptable. because violence is one of the most basic forms of conflict. I think games can go to far with violence when its just a simple and stupid hate messages.
Chapter 1:
ReplyDelete1) I don’t think doodling/drawing falls under the category of a game. There is no defined goal or objective, and any intended result would be too subjective to measure by absolute standards. It’s interaction, which is found in gameplay, but it isn’t a complete game. It would probably qualify as “play”, however.
2) I tend to think it isn’t a game for the same reasons listed above. Neither side in the conflict had a specific goal in mind (until Ender decided to try and proactively dissuade any future aggressors), and I believe it’s specifically stated in the book that the bullies weren’t intending any other than random harassment, and certainly weren’t expecting Ender to challenge them in any way, so this specific conflict is different from boxing, or a street fight, were you have two volitional opponents with exacting goals (knock down the other guy). It is play, though, just not a complete “game”.
3) Enders strategy was a long-term tactical maneuver that sacrificed short-term safety for what he hoped would be a major payoff. He was balanced a very high risk/reward scenario, gambling for the chance of being permanently left alone, with the very real possibility that he might just get the living snot beat out of him. This applies to us as designers in the aspect that we might sometimes set up intentionally unfair scenarios (Ender against an older, bigger, stronger group) to give the player a chance to risk it all for major results.
Chapter 2:
1) The game that Ender and Peter played was made more invigorating and stimulating because it was anchored in a real-life conflict. Kids play cops and robbers, not purple squares and killer bookshelves, because they can relate to the themes that actually occur in real life between policemen and criminals. This relates just as easily to games like Grand Theft Auto, which I believe crosses the line when it encourages the player to commit explicitly immoral or unethical acts for enjoyment. My personal opinion is that violence in games is acceptable when it’s in a clearly moral context (saving humanity from aliens, storming Normandy beach, or infiltrating a cold-war Russian sleeper cell, for example), and unacceptable when it endorses immoral behavior (things like assassinating JFK, or sniping at police officers or innocent citizens). So yes, games can go too far, and I believe they often do.
2) Peter is the antagonist in their game, because he uses authoritarian force (his size/strength) to hurt and frighten Ender, who neither instigated or wanted to participate in the conflict.
Chapter I
ReplyDelete1. I think Ender doodling on his desk is play rather than a game. To me a game, usually has rules of what is acceptable and what is not, to achieve the goal of the game. The quote did not indicate if the drawing was part of a game, since there is no mention of rules. Making me assume that he is drawing simply as a way to entertain himself.
2. The kids bullying Ender could be playing or it could be a game to them. It can be play because the bullies can randomly come up to Ender at anytime no matter what he is doing, just to bother him because they are bored. It can also be a game to the bullies if they bully Ender for specific reasons. Like if Ender does something that leads to consequences for the bullying. The Bullies make sure Ender doesn’t across a certain boundary and if he does he pays for it. That being said the bullying can be a game to the bullies themselves.
3. I don’t have enough information to form an opinion on Ender’s strategy based on the first quote. I’m not sure if he’s in play or in a game he has to doodle on his desk for. Fair play would be where there would be a good balance between what is acceptable in a game and what is not. Game designers, I think ensure fair game play by making sure there are not too many complicated rules, taking the fun element out of the game. I also think they have to make sure a game isn’t super easy either. I think the element of being challenged makes the player want to conquer whatever obstacle they have encountered in the game. In that sense, game designers should be concerned about fair game play.
Chapter II
1. In my opinion, games are sometimes an extension and over exaggerated version of reality. Games like Final Fantasy, have a fantasy like setting in their games but the characters usually act according to the obstacles they have, just like real people do in real life. Then we have old games like Pac man and Atari, that don’t seem to have an connection to reality at all. The games of today seem to aim more for a realistic point of view than the games of the past. Violence in games does mirror real violence is society, particularly the games that involve war. For thousands of years humans have always had conflicts with other humans, sometimes leading to violence and destruction. Even fairy tales with moral lessons sometimes had violent endings. Violence is apart of life, it always has been. I think games can only go too far if what they put in the game is not acceptable for their target audience. For example Grand Theft Auto being marketed to children would be going too far, especially when the game has many adult related themes. Themes that are culturally inappropriate for children.
2. I didn’t really understand that the passage very much but the impression I got was that the buggers were the bad guys and the non buggers, humans I assume were at war with these bug like creatures. It seems the Mom is upset that the kids are playing war like games and figured if she hid the war like toys, they would stop playing war games. So In a way I guess the Mom can be the bad guy to the kids because she doesn’t want the kids to play games like that.
- Tasliym Rivera
1. I would consider this play. Ender isn’t having to abide by any set of rules nor does he have a particular objective that he is working toward. He is simply using the desk as a tool no different than if anyone were to doodle on a stack of post-its and flip through it to animate it.
ReplyDelete2. I would consider this a game. While the rules would be difficult to distinguish there is a clear objective and that is to antagonize ender. And while ender is the victim he still has his own objective and that is to defend himself in any way he sees fit.
3.Personally I think Enders strategy was very effective. Typically if you remove the leader the rest of the group is not as effective and this is something that will keep reoccurring throughout Enders story. I would actually not consider it fair play but the bullys were not playing fair either since they out numbered ender. Which then in turn makes it fair. Fair play is something to always be considering when designing a game but that does not necessarily that the game must always play fairly. Sometimes a game can be designed to where players must face overwhelming odds which do not seem fair. But then what makes it fair is that the players have access to a certain game play mechanic that balances it out. Fair play does not mean that the game has to play the same for everyone. But rather that all sides are balanced. I hope that makes sense…..
1.I personally see games as an escape from reality. A place to live out actions and ideas that would most likely not be acceptable in the real world. In my opinion there should be a distinct line between games and reality. Violence in the real world does not necessarily validate in games however violence is a common theme in games because games are usually about over coming some kind of obstacle to meet and objective and as humans our most natural response to adversity is violence. Violence is totally acceptable in games as long as it serves the greater purpose of the game itself and the objective the players are trying to reach. And yes games can take violence too far. Just like with any art form, things can be done distastefully in games. Gimmicks like these are usually pretty easy to spot and tend to give games a bad name and negatively affects the publics opinion of them. While violence in a game can be an effective means to an end, it has to be done tastefully and with a specific purpose in mind.
2. While on the surface you could say that the Buggers are the bad guys, it truth its Peter who is the villain in this case. Throughout their childhood Peter has antagonized and bullied Ender simply because he is bigger and older than he is.
Chapter 1:
ReplyDeleteReading the quote, it seems to me that it was more play than game. A game would at least give certain rules to follow in order to play, but it was like Ender just went off of imagination and made up something random to follow. However, when the other children come to bully Ender, that seemed more like a game. I disagree somewhat Dave, because although it seemed like random harassment, they did have an intended goal in mind; giving Ender a hard time. They had their rules, and Ender was the main component of their challenge of skills amungst each other. Now, I do not deny that there was play involved in this, but it was a game until a certain point for these bullies.
As for Ender's stategy, I believe for it to be a successful example of brain v. brawn. But if we take this aspect to determine weither or not this was fair play, I believe it was; the bullies have their brawn while Ender used his brain. Fair play comes with the beta-testing, as the players will feel too overwhelmed, frustrated, or uninterested in general if they are not given some sort of platform to push off of.
Chapter 2:
The relationship between games and reality is that games are a learning process for reality; a way to practice, and a way to hone skills for 'life', a final game before we pass on. The games that are made reflect the reality that we experience, and in this sense, violence in games is validated by it. Our culture has become violent, and the games that we make are the reflections of it.
Chapter 1:
ReplyDelete1) Not a defined game, simply actions at play.
2) Again, not a defined game, bully at play.
3) When in a defensive position I tend to consider most anything fair play. For game designers it depends on the situation; for example in war nobody plays fair, you have to be better, you can't prevent one army from being better equipped than the other because it's not fair. However, selling a game with impossible odds doesn't always work out. Designers have to allow the player some control, or ability to succeed.
Chapter 2
1) Games are just that, they can mimic reality, however, any mentally strong individual can tell the difference.
2) The bad guys in life can come in many forms, we can share a common enemy, but humanity tends to turn on it self, in this case Peter can be seen as a threat.
Karinza
ReplyDeleteChapter 1:
1. This is play, in my opinion, because Ender is simply playing something that is not structured.
2. When the children bully up, it seems like that is more of a game than play, because they are attempting to elicit an emotion from Ender; some response or goal.
3. I thought Ender’s strategy was acceptable. It was very fair because he was being intimidated and ganged up upon, that requires strategy. Game designers generally require intensive strategy from players in order to make the odds fair – AI has a collective intelligence and more can be expected from the individual.
Chapter 2
1. Games are limited within a paradigm of code and rules, while life is not (Not contributing the social, political or behavioral structures or laws like gravity... The biggest difference though is that games are inconsequential.
2. Peter is the “bad guy.” He is a force of negative eliciting things. Period.