Thinking <-> Human
Modding <-> Game
Experiences <-> World
Gee begins by stating we use our past experiences in real life to build model simulators of the real world, which then produce meaning. These model simulators are accumulations of different situations and used in the context of particular situations, prepare people for action in the outside world, and have specific meanings based on their actions. These model simulators are created to make sense of specific texts and capture a certain viewpoint, that resembles our own and changes with context. We can also make simulations that are from another point of view or that encompass nothing of our own perspectives. The player chooses their virtual character (avatar) which becomes their surrogate mind and body interactions. This surrogate has goals to reach in the virtual world. The virtual world is designed to be attuned to these goals, to “mesh”. The virtual mind/body has specific powers and limitations, which either make it difficult or easy to complete said goals. The player, embodying the virtual character, now shares these goals. With the surrogate and player having the same goals, the player can then apply meaning towards his actions in the real world. He concludes that these goals relate to our self-image, our identity. This identity is parallel to our actions in the real world.
Game Studies 
I really like how deep you got into the definitions of this all. Meshing with the virtual world might be one of the more interesting facets of this weeks readings to me. Even though I’m a film major, how we interact with these worlds is what makes video games so important to my life as opposed to film. Some look at this meshing as escapism, but I like that Gee didn’t take that bait. It isn’t all about immersion (and we later learn that we are dancing on this fine line of the real world and the virtual according to Crick).
It’s funny to look at how we use the avatar in games to correspond with the real world. Now this doesn’t happen all the time (I’m looking at all of you that have gone on a murdering rampage in Grand Theft Auto), but I find myself always having to be the good guy. These games that sell you on a good vs evil choice system never quite grab me, because I can’t find myself to be the bad guy. I got the platinum trophy (get every achievement / trophy for one game) in Infamous Second Son and I hated having to go through the evil story. I felt like I was actually bad even if it’s a video game. I guess I want to apply my real world identity into these virtual worlds, even if there are no consequences.
LikeLike
Yayaya.. you know you stole cars to sell drugs and run over and kill people (at least once). Just kidding. No but seriously, if that game was a test of our identity then I guess I fail, but I had fun 🙂
LikeLike
I’m the same way. any game with a dialogue option to be evil, I can’t do it. I get so immersed into the game that I can’t hurt the feelings of these virtual characters. I embody myself into the game, and just like in real life, don’t want to come off as a douchebag. The only time I don’t choose a nice option, was in Fallout 4 where they give you sarcastic options. This only goes to show my embodiment even more based on my sense of humor.
LikeLike
Oh I’m not saying I feel that way….nah if GTA (for example) is any reflection of who I am or my values in real life, then I am one horrible person hahaha
Get Outlook for Android
________________________________
LikeLike