Studying

Video Games
Who Studies Video Games?
How Do You Study Video Games?
Types of Analysis
Schools of Thought

Grand Theft Auto III: Vice City (2001) took the

new millennium by storm

Right at this moment, millions of people around the world are playing video
games. One obvious way in which this matters is financial. The rising popu-
larity of games translates into astounding amounts of cash. The game indus-
try is quickly becoming a financial juggernaut. Our research may help make
even better games, may help large companies increase their profits, or may
offer a critical perspective on the social workings and effects of the game
industry. Either way, the very size of the industry justifies our attention. But
it isn’t just the money that’s important.
Video games warrant attention for their cultural and aesthetic elements.
The aesthetic developments of game design are intense, constant, and thrill-
ing; this explosive evolution of creative possibility is beginning to influence
significantly other types of expression. It is clear by now, after the Matrix
trilogy, after the Grand Theft Auto, Uncharted, and Red Dead Redemption
games, that movies and games are borrowing from each other’s arsenals.
For the younger generations, especially, games are crucial to the way they
express themselves artistically and, presumably, in the way they conceive of
the world. What does it mean, for instance, when a person’s self-expression
moves away from linear representations, such as books and films, and
they find more meaning in interactive, nonlinear systems where outcomes

7
8 Studying Video Games

depend on player choices? Maybe it doesn’t mean anything. Maybe it means

a lot of small changes are happening but no revolution should be expected.
And maybe it means that in a decade or two, video games will be so essential
to the creation of culture that teenagers will be unable to imagine a world
before video games existed. And most likely, perhaps, is some combination
of all three scenarios. Regardless, such questions need to be investigated
systematically.

WHO STUDIES VIDEO GAMES?

Science is the building upon a foundation of experience, the abandonment of
old theories, and the revision of earlier hypotheses. The study of video games
is not different, but we still have a fragmented and emerging research field.1
Is game research a science in this sense? On the one hand, people who
claim to be doing game research clearly do not always live up to the highest
standards of the scientific method (true for any field); further, there is even
some disagreement about how to actually do game research. On the other
hand, if we take science to mean the systematic, rigorous, and self-critical
production of knowledge, game research can and should be a scientific
discipline.
So who are game researchers? In general, they are professionals predom-
inantly occupied with the study of video games. Undergraduates can now
major in video games. PhD programs have emerged. Dedicated journals are
available and distinct conferences are held. In the larger academic scale of
things, all of this is still new; however, Espen Aarseth, editor of the Game
Studies journal, noted that “2001 can be seen as the Year One of Computer
Game Studies as an emerging, viable, international, academic field.”2
A new generation of researchers considers video games their primary
research interest. But the struggle for acceptance and academic credibility
can still be considerable. Still looking back just ten years, we now have more
credible and respected academic journals dedicated to the study of video
games that can provide scholars with the necessary platform for advancing
their thinking. The classic Simulation & Gaming journal published for the
first time more than 40 years ago was at the start of the millennium joined
by Game Studies. Today we also have several other peer-reviewed journals
like Games and Culture, International Journal of Gaming and Computer-
Mediated Simulations, Computer Games Journal, and International Journal
of Game-Based Learning.
We study video games, not a phenomenon that epitomizes highbrow cul-
tural expression. While we should acknowledge that our field of research
may be frowned upon, we must also avoid any sort of paranoia. If our
research is not accepted, we should not comfort ourselves with conspiracy
theories nor view other fields as populated by enemies. We should instead
raise our internal standards.
A series of very important developments has helped put game studies on
the road to becoming a viable field. For instance, the last few decades have
 Studying Video Games 9

witnessed a general rehabilitation of popular culture as a worthy topic of

study. Also, many scholars have grown up with video games and see no rea-
son why they should be exempt from enquiry. But more importantly, games
have grown highly complex—as has their development—inviting serious
attention and creating the need for highly trained game graduates. Over the
years, DiGRA as an association has grown with multiple regional chapters.
It has become quite obvious that many fields can contribute to the study
of games, and game researchers are an eclectic bunch with a multidisci-
plinary background. Humanist scholars with film or literature backgrounds
constitute a large group, but game research conferences are also attended
by social scientists (mostly sociologists), by computer scientists, and, very
importantly, by game designers. The presence of the latter group, who are
typically not academics, is noteworthy. For the time being at least, there is
a relatively close relationship between game researchers and game design-
ers. This may sound obvious but is in fact quite a special situation. In older
research fields—such as film and literary studies—the distance between
scholars and practitioners can loom large, and it seems at times that the two
groups barely speak the same language. This may sometimes seem to be the
case in our field as well, but at least both sides are committed to making an
effort.

HOW DO YOU STUDY VIDEO GAMES?

To say that there is more than one way to approach video games is to put
it mildly. Most researchers, at least at present, choose to adopt methods
and approaches from their primary fields. Ethnographers tend to observe
players. Those trained in film studies tend to analyze the games themselves
and communication scholars tend to analyze interactions between play-
ers. There is nothing inherently wrong with this tendency as long as one
acknowledges the more general ideal that one should use the methodology
best suited to answer the question at hand.
In order to give you a better sense of how to approach games academi-
cally, let’s examine a few noteworthy studies and discuss the methodological
approaches that they represent.
We will start with Dmitri Williams’s study of how video games have been
represented in US news media over a 30-year period.3 In order to under-
stand the function of video games in public discourse and the relationship
between the portrayal of video games and more general cultural currents,
Williams searched the archives of Time, Newsweek and US News and World
Report. He analyzed 119 articles, which fit his criteria, and concluded that:

Consistent with prior new media technologies, video games passed

through marked phases of vilification followed by partial redemption.
Also consistent with prior media, games served as touchstones for larger
struggles within the culture—so much so that perhaps “lightning rod” is
a better term.4
10 Studying Video Games

We should note that Williams tackled not games themselves or even players
but rather secondary texts that he subjected to content analysis.
In another study, Nicolas Ducheneaut, Robert J. Moore, and Eric Nickell
explored the ways in which Star Wars Galaxies: An Empire Divided—a mas-
sively multiplayer online game set in George Lucas’s Star Wars universe—
encourages sociability among players.5 In particular, they were interested
in how players interacted in the game’s “cantinas”—locations where players
could meet and socialize. The observed behavior was analyzed to determine
if it conformed to sociologist Ray Oldenburg’s notion of “the third place,” a
term used for informal public places like bars and general stores.
Ducheneaut, Moore, and Nickell chose to combine various methodolo-
gies. They began by conducting a “virtual ethnography,” that is, they spent
time in the field (in the game) systematically observing social interactions in
the cantinas. They also videotaped their entire game sessions (with a camera
plugged into the graphics card). Finally, they recorded a log of all the inter-
actions that occurred between players as tracked by the game and analyzed
it using specially designed software. Among other things, the authors con-
cluded that while the cantinas did not serve as particularly sociable spaces,
Mechanics: Ambiguous the entire game, due to more subtle mechanics than just these intentionally
term o!en referring designed social spaces, was in fact quite sociable.
to events or actions
Susana Pajares Tosca performed a “close reading” of Resident Evil Code:
that the game design
allows for; for instance, Veronica X,6 a “survival horror” game, where players have to fight zom-
driving, regaining bies and monsters and solve puzzles in order to escape from an altogether
health, or shooting. May unpleasant island. Tosca’s study harnessed the techniques of “reader-
be thought of as the
response criticism.” She employed textual analysis, closely examining the
“verbs” of a game, i.e.
what the player can do. work, looking for noteworthy properties of the game’s structure, and teasing
out the meaning of the game’s story. Tosca’s research is primarily concerned
with using this specific theoretical toolset to explore the text of the game.
Surprisingly, given the number of humanist scholars in the field, this is one
of just a few detailed analyses of an individual game title.
Finally, Jesper Juul has pursued the philosophical and ontological foun-
dations of games.7 His main goals have been to provide a definition of video
games that highlights their special properties, and to explore the relation-
ship between video games and traditional games. In order to do this, Juul
examined noteworthy former attempts and arrived at a “classical game
model” (see Chapter 3), which enumerates the features necessary for an
activity to be considered a game. The method employed by Juul is a mix-
ture of logical deduction and induction, laying bare the assumptions, which
often go unnoticed when games are discussed or studied.

TYPES OF ANALYSIS
As we have seen, games can be approached from a wide range of academic
perspectives and by employing a number of different methodologies. Salen
and Zimmerman, in their detailed exploration of game design, suggest that
games may be approached with a focus on rules (the design of the game),
 Studying Video Games 11

play (the human experience of playing the game), or culture (the larger
contexts engaged with and inhabited by the game).8 To these three units of
analysis we add those of ontology and metrics, to arrive at these five main
perspectives:

1. The game: Here, one or more particular games are subjected to analysis.
The point is to look at games in themselves and say something about their
structure and how they employ certain techniques—of player reward,
of player representation in the game world, and so on—to achieve the
player experience that the game designer aims for. This is often the type
of analysis chosen by those with a background in comparative literature
or other aesthetic disciplines.9
2. The players: Sometimes the activity of playing games is more important
than the games themselves. Studies focusing on the players usually wish
to explore how players use games as a type of medium or as a social space.
Sociologists and ethnographers tend to favor this type of analysis.10
3. The culture: Moving still further from the games themselves, we can
choose to focus on the wider culture that games are part of. Here, we
wish to understand how games and gaming interact with wider cultural
patterns. For instance, we may be interested in the subcultures that
evolve around gaming or in the discourses surrounding gaming, looking
at public outrage over violent games as compared to earlier “media pan-
ics.” Methodologically, such studies often turn to secondary sources like
news media or advertising.11
4. Ontology: Meanwhile, some studies examine the philosophical founda-
tions of games. These studies usually seek to present general statements
that apply to all games, and may enable us to understand, for example,

Table 1.1 The five major types of analysis and their characteristics

Type of Common Theoretical Inspiration Common Interest

Analysis Methodologies
Game Textual analysis Comparative literature, Design choices,
film studies meaning
Player Observation, Sociology, Use of games, game
interviews, surveys ethnography, cultural communities
studies
Culture Interviews, textual Cultural studies, Games as cultural
analysis sociology objects, games as part
of the media ecology
Ontology Philosophical Various, e.g. Logical/philosophical
enquiry philosophy, cultural foundations of games
history, literary and gaming
criticism
Metrics Statistical analysis Software development, Game design
of logged data behavioral psychology
12 Studying Video Games

the relationship between rules, fiction, and the player.12 Such scholarship
builds on logical analysis, which is typically grounded in concrete exam-
ples but is not interested in individual titles per se.
5. Metrics: Finally, recent years have seen a growing interest in data-driven
design research, focusing on “metrics” (i.e. quantitative measures of
player behavior). Such studies often examine the relationship between
game design and player behavior (or sentiment), for instance, to help
developers improve the player experience.13

Actual studies, of course, often disrespect such neat reductionism and

span multiple categories. The preceding scheme indicates general trends,
but we must remember that a certain set of methodologies and a certain set
of theories need not always go together.

SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT
To speak of schools of thought within game studies may be an overstate-
ment, as these groupings do not usually self-identify themselves as groups,
nor indeed as “schools.” Nevertheless, certain perspectives do stand out as
particularly stable.
First of all, two research communities currently perform game research
on a significant scale. The first of these we can call the “simulation com-
munity.” Researchers within this group focus on all forms of simulations—
including nonelectronic ones—but also consistently study video games.
This group is well established and has its own conferences and journals like
Simulation & Gaming. The second and much newer “video game studies
community” sprang into existence around the year 2000; it represents what
we refer to as “game studies” in this book. The video game studies com-
munity presently revolves around the Digital Games Research Association
(DiGRA) and journals like Game Studies and Games and Culture. Com-
munication and collaboration between the simulation community and the
video game studies community is still rare.

Formalism
Within the video game studies community, two general approaches can be
identified, though most researchers do not resort solely to one or the other.
A “formalist group” tends to use game analysis or ontological analysis. They
represent a humanistic approach to media and focus on the works them-
selves or philosophical questions related to the nature or use of those works.
Similar approaches are found in fields such as art or film studies.
Within the formalist group a division sprang up early on, as much was
made of the difference between prioritizing representation and prioritizing
rules. These subgroups were known as “narratologists” and “ludologists,”
respectively (see Chapter 7), and differed in their opinion as to which part
 Studying Video Games 13

of the game product was most worthy of study. Narratologists saw fit to
approach games as one might a movie or novel, whereas ludologists, often
arguing that narrative was a mere trapping, felt that game studies should be Narrative: A string
the study of systems of rules. of connected events
making up a story.
Whereas examples of actual narratologists—people who would claim
that narrative was most important—are tellingly difficult to find, ludolo-
gists were quite vocal. For instance, game designer/thinker Raph Koster
claimed that “the stories in most video games serve the same purpose
as calling the über-checker a ‘king.’ It adds interesting shading to the
game but the game at its core is unchanged.”14 And game theorist Espen
Aarseth claimed that “the dimensions of Lara Croft’s body, already ana-
lyzed to death by film theorists, are irrelevant to me as a player, because a
different-looking body would not make me play differently. When I play,
I don’t even see her body, but see through it and past it.”15 In other words,
the fictional layer—the characters and the plot—is merely an interface for Interface: The
the rules, the actual core game. graphical or textual
form of interaction
between user and
Situationism so!ware. Through the
interface the user may
The situationist group is generally interested in analysis of game players or give commands to
the culture at large. They are not interested in all-encompassing statements the so!ware that are
then translated into
that do not take context and variation into account. They search less for instructions that the
general patterns or laws and more for analysis and descriptions of specific computer can interpret.
events or social practices.
In this camp we often find not just the suggestion that games can fruit-
fully be studied as socially situated play but also a clear discomfort with
the formalist approach. Anthropologist Thomas M. Malaby, for instance,
has warned against “concluding from categories” (i.e. formalism), prefer-
ring “reasoning from actual experience” (i.e. situationism).16 In a similar
vein, game researchers Ermi and Mäyrä have noted that “if we want to
understand what a game is, we need to understand what happens in the
act of playing, and we need to understand the player and the experience of
gameplay.”17 Gameplay: Ambiguous
On the whole, however, game studies have so far been an inclusive field. term for the total
effect of all active
It is unified by a certain pioneering spirit, and the understanding that the
game elements. Refers
underexplored nature of games leaves room for all those interested. It is also to the holistic game
unified in the belief that in order to understand most aspects of video games, experience and the
you need to play them. So we wholeheartedly encourage you, as someone ability of the game to
who wants to understand video games, to seek out video game classics and command the a$ention
of the player.
simply to familiarize yourself with as many genres as possible. Always ask
yourself the following questions: Why does this work? Why was it done in
this manner? How else might it have been done? And why do players act in
this way in this particular game? Love of games is obviously no requirement,
but it certainly doesn’t hurt when entering the world of game research. And
it is to this world that we now turn.