I have talked substantially over the past month and a half about the way in which social engagements in architecture in real life and in gaming is controlled, often by altering the perception of time for the user. We have seen how this control is done through clustering time into events and emphasizing these events so that they are memorable for the user. Likewise in architecture I have shown how by differentiating types of spaces in regard to the kind of engagement that is happening through the architectural language, meaningful and memorable spaces are created, and thus are also clustered into events in retrospective memory.
Games often use a kind of language as well in spaces, these can make the events seem unique, and therefore memorable. This whole phenomenon is very subtle and often not spoken of, but it is no secret and every good fps does differentiate between the events so that the game has a clear progression and that the movement through the spaces (levels) etc. is clear and the feeling of progress more satisfying.
I recently found a blog online where players were discussing the game “Fallout 3” by Bethesda Studios, there seemed to be a clear reference to the architecture in the game as they were discussing the overall experience.
Andrew B said “Playing the new fallout game has altered my perception of inhabitable spaces. A pile of junk could be home to vicious raiders.”
To which Cacapis replied “Haa! I'm an old time fan of fallout. It's really cool to see their interpretation of the post apocalyptic Washington and the way each significant structure has been appropriated. The Jefferson and Lincoln memorials, the pentagon, etc etc. I really hope there's a fallout 4.
I think some games really make you experience some form of architecture in a new way. In the end each type of play has maps modeled to suit their needs. For instance a map that's useful for a single player mission in an FPS is not quite suitable for a deathmatch.
I think that games just started to make a very rich experience in an architecture that has its own particular set of rules completely different from reality.”
It seems that a key theme here was that the game architecture in Fallout reinterpreted real architecture, through the alteration of iconic buildings and spaces that the players could relate to and by doing this changed the perception the players had with familiar spaces. This phenomenon was undoubtley well taken by the players and hence was clearly memorable. I mentioned in the beginning of this post how this control is done by emphasizing the events. In this case an emphasis was done by clearly tapping into the users existing memory of iconic buildings and emphasizing those spaces by creating a dramatic change to those buildings so that they are still recognizable, but in a way new and intriguing.
Obviously this is just one very specific device to emphasizing events, but like in any good game, the level design is made to support the gameplay, and fallout is a game which focuses on the post-apocalyptic future of Washington. That also implies that all the buildings were made to stage interesting and dynamic social engagements that revolve around that theme. As I mentioned in my previous post, and as Cacapis seemed to spot as well; by creating environments that are facilitative of the gameplay, it serves to host a completely different set of rules than reality. This is important, because here is the major difference between architecture in reality and in games in regard to the way both treat social engagements through events.
I will now introduce an extreme example to highlight what I have said. Take for instance the Nazi book burning memorial in Berlin. Here is a space that requires a very specific engagement between the user and the environment, a very direct way that has also carries symbolic and cultural significance. During the Nazi regime, many books were burned at this site in 1933; an artist interpretation was to create a little glass window on the spot where the users would have to kneel down to look through the hole.
Through the hole was a monochromatic space with empty bookcases symbolizing the “event” that happened many years ago. The kneeling down aspect of the place on behalf of the user, forces the user to pay respect to the tragic event. This space carries with it a very serious message; it commemorates an event that happened many years ago hence it is also very historical.
The actual movement of the users with the mechanics of space; the kneeling down and the observation is also significant in this space when we contrast movement capability in games. In gaming there is a different set of rules that revolve around the player in relation to the keyboard and mouse that is fabricated intentionally to limit movement capability and target specific actions that revolve around the gameplay, any action or movement in a game is no surprise, nor spontaneous, it is carefully mapped out and specified for the gameplay. In contrast, the specific movement of kneeling down in this space is borderline coincidental, it is created only physiologically targeting curiosity, and is actually signified by the fact that out of all the spontaneous movements and actions we may find between users in reality it succeeds in luring people to create one unified movement, the kneeling down. Thus the movement in this space is special because it is specific, where as in gaming, movements would perhaps be more special if they succeeded in being more spontaneous in relation to spaces.
Furthermore although both types of spaces are made to be memorable; the memorial, as a work of art, challenges the user on several levels that are much broader and complex, tapping into the culture and commemorating history. Where as in gaming the spaces have a very direct and subjective role as they revolve around a more targeted set of rules; rules that apply to only the gameplay. Any real depth, message and motive in most all commercial fps is directed towards play and thus the environments are treated as such, were as in this memorial, it is anything but that. Therefore the social engagement between the users of this space is rooted in respect to the tragic event, the kneeling down is also highly symbolic of that respect. Hence this space carries with it symbolism, cultural significance and respect. Although games may pose such a facade, they are still games, and therefore will aim to fulfill needs rooted in play.
Most importantly and perhaps the largest difference can be found in time. This space is timeless, it can be revisited over and over again and it will always remain the same, because it represents a single event that happened in the past. In a game, the game must eventually end, the interaction with the environments are grouped into singular events that are only there to progress the storyline. Therefore, the pages must keep turning and the spaces represent events that are of the presentence even if they pose a historical facade.
It is important to highlight this major difference, because it is these set of rules that define the way social encounters in spaces are experienced in the "event."
No comments:
Post a Comment