I just finished playing the McDonald computer game. After being fired multiple times for too many activists or lawsuits or lack of healthy cows and who knows what else, I found that there was a limit to how far I could advance. The laws governing the game continued to add more and more algorithms during the course of the game to gradually (or quickly depending on how fast you advanced) increase the difficulty. This concept of procedurality that Bogost discusses interprets my gaming experience in the fullest extent. The programming controlling the game and determined the consequences or rewards for each action I made. This left me with a new set of choices to make to further make or break the McDonald Corporation. It is not hard to believe that there are also rules in society that encourage certain actions or behavior in the people of that society. Corporations are a perfect example of these rules. Corporations act with the primary motive to increase profits. Certain protocols are made to achieve this goal of achieving maximum profit. There are divisions for customer relation, productivity and marketing that are all under a strict set of regulations. There are return policies and guarantees to keep customer loyalty, quotas that must be filled under threat of a change in management and the constant denials of anything that may put their corporation in a bad light.
There are also the rules that exist for everyday people in our society. Although the rules may not be quite as strict as they are for the corporations or McDonald video game, they definitely do exist. For example, a person can choose what clothes they wear today, but they don not have the choice of going out without any clothes. These are the rules that maintain the coherence and order in society by putting a limit to what is acceptable. Bogost then transitions from procedurality to Rhetoric in regards to the boundaries of both society and games and defines Rhetoric as an expression that is effective and persuasive. However, I think it could be argued that procedurality is also an effective and persuasive expression. People must obey these certain rules in society in order to be part of the community. The idea is that if someone acts in a certain manner for long enough, that they will eventually begin to think in the same manner. This reality has helped spread a good amount of beliefs and ideals through the people that make up our society. Games are like that today as well, acting as an educational tool (Reader Rabbit) for children going to complex social interactions in massive online games influencing the countless people that are part of the “Gamer Generation”.
It may be simplistic to compare the intricate and complex workings of society to a video game like the McDonald Corporation, but they are both based off of rules. Whether it is algorithms or socially acceptable practices, games are created to be a model of reality—determining and establishing the boundaries of what their rules allow them to do. Speaking of boundaries, I think I am going to try to get further in the McDonald Corporation…
Kevin Campbell
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Kevin: I'm a little puzzled by the "however" in your post, because it seems like you and Bogost agree on the importance of procedural expression. You're right to point out that procedurality is by no means limited just to video games, or even computer software. We follow procedures every time we register for classes, pay our bills, or buy groceries at the store. The difference, perhaps, is that social procedures tend to get dictated either by those in power or collectively, through tacit and historical social agreement (e.g. it's rude to cut in front of someone in line), while videogame procedures are dictated by the game designer (more often, a team).
ReplyDelete