From Matters of Play
Jump to: navigation, search


  • example quotation here... (copy the entire passage here and note the page number).
  • example question/comment here... (short question and comment)

[click "edit" at top of this page when logged in to add you Q&Q. Just copy this "Name" section and paste below, and replace this placeholder content with your own!]


“ The computer is the most capacious pattern-making medium we have ever had.” ( Pg. 19, Worlds at Play, Murry.)

This brings my thinking back to the Kelly reading What Technology Wants, in the synthesis of the pattern association that a human dose to make a since of understanding in the world and then from that understanding use language to convey something of personal value and necessity to said person, along with the development of ours self’s in accordance with the ever rising technologies and the adaptations and changes done in accordance with the available technology. In my view this fully collaborates with the boom of online games and there major popularity; because we one has full control over the desired result of the simulation, but can give it human like quality’s without a human really being involved at all, and in my view this was pushed not by the ones who made the games them self’s, but by the games and we the players are just catching up to the possibility of the games.


  • Tomasello's theory also suggests some of the core adaptive benefits of games, since they reinforce key benefits of joint attentional scenes:
    • An understanding of the self both as an agent and an object within a community of other intentional agent/objects.
    • The ability to shift perspective from one's own point of view to the point of view of others, to imagine what someone else is thinking, and to see oneself from the point of view of the other.
    • The ability to intentionally teach and learn, which is foundation of all human cultural development.
  • If the concept of joint attentional scenes are potentially so integral to human growth and relation, why are we not applying them in daily life? How can we use them in our schools? At work? How would our lives benefit from practicing joint attentional scenes?


  • "Mimetic games lead to greater social organization and closer attention to the world, which forwards causal thinking which leads to more complicated games, both of which produce a demand for more expressive language."

How does this apply to video games, if it does at all? It's clear to see the seemingly apparent attention to detail in more life like games; upgrades in graphics and physics engines to make the game world function and look (arguably) more realistically. We've gotten to the point where graphics far exceed what we're capable of noticing in real life, but they still improve upon them (30fps to 60+fps, 1080p to 4k, etc.). Would the increasing evolution of video games, both online and single player, bring us to a greater understanding of our world or the worlds we create?


  • "We seem hardwired to play, to exploring the simple pleasure of exercising our faculties and exploring the world in non-survival ways." (Pg 12)

The text talks about how and why we're ingrained to play from birth, I'm interested in how that looks in times of grief, hardship and trauma. Something that comes so easily to us and something that we have come to be able to do so naturally, has to have and had a history of emerging in a person and groups of people at very hard times, times where that would seem so grossly inappropriate but is understandable. What comes to mind on a huge scale is World War 1 when for Christmas of 1914 the German and British sides met in no man's land and played football. Only to, not long after, return to their respective trenches and commit atrocities to one another. What does that look like on a smaller scale? In the individual? In a community? You have native peoples who have been devastated by centuries of imperialist occupation but in turn not only still play games like Slahal but explain why in situations like this it is so important to do so. What does play look like in crisis and how has it been used?


  • "Culture is the key element here, because the human advantage over other species lies in our ability to share and transmit knowledge and patterns of behavior across historical time and in the raising of children."

I found this really interesting when thinking about how we as humans have tools for sharing culture like books and the Internet. Even though animals don't have that mass communication system animals still have shared behaviors in a species even if that species exists in more than one place. In that sense it almost seems like animals do have some capacity to relay knowledge to their offspring, albeit not on the same scale as humans.


  • "[Computer] games can be thought of as socializing us into a new cyborg order, establishing rituals of commonality with proceduralized artifacts" (p 19).
  • Because games played versus computers are inherently one-sided, and because humans create computers and the games within them, can one really say that computers are "socializing us into a new cyborg order"? Wouldn't it be more appropriate to say that we are socializing ourselves into this supposed new order? That is, if it is even appropriate at all, since many computer games are played with others who are also playing with you on their computers, while you can talk with them on a headset or through instant messenger? At best, this is creating a "cyborg by proxy" scenario.