Game studies

G|A|M|E – n. 3/2014
Issue 3, 2014 – Video game subcultures: Playing at the periphery of mainstream culture
Edited by M. B. Carbone & P. Ruffino

M. B. Carbone & P. Ruffino – Introduction: games and subcultural theory

G. Zhang – The stroller in the virtual city: spatial practice of Hong Kong players in Sleeping Dogs

R. Gallagher – From camp to kitsch? A queer eye on console fandom

T. Plothe – “I’m a rogue night elf”. Avatars, gaming and The Big Bang Theory

I. Márquez – Playing new music with old games: The chiptune subculture

G. Menotti – Videorec as gameplay: Recording of playthroughs and video game engagement

A. Harvey – Twine’s revolution: Democratization, depoliticization, and the queering of game design

H. Tyni & O. Sotamaa – Assembling a game development scene?  Uncovering Finland’s largest demo party

Cover Art: KINSHASA vs AKIHABARA (Giovanni Fredi – http://kinshasavsakihabara.com)

Vol. 2 – Critical notes (non-peer reviewed)

M. Fuchs – Nordic game subcultures: between LARPers and avant-garde

T. Oliveira, E. Ferreira, L. Carvalho & A. Boechat – Tribute and Resistance: Participation and affective engagement in Brazilian  fangame makers and modders’ subcultures

R. Sampugnaro, S. Mica, S. Fallica, A. Bonaiuto & M. Mingrino – Participation at the Global Game Jam event: a bridge between consumer and producer worlds in digital entertainment

Cover Art: Contradictions (Filippo Minelli – http://www.filippominelli.com/contradictions/)

Commercial "war" games in a post-1989 setting are popular among a large audience. They offer players an enjoyable gameplay experience, while also referring to contemporary Bwar^ scenarios. As such, they have been studied in several ways, e.g., concerning the "realistic" nature of how they depict warfare. However, little is still known about the way in which the notion of "war" is conceptualized in these games. To fill this gap, this article offers a systematic analysis of the narrative content of 15 popular "war" games set after 1989, as well as their promotional descriptions, as these provide insight into how publishers respond to the interests of players. This is done based on the conceptual framework of conflict/war offered by the Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP).

The need for literacy and the English curriculum to attend to digital literacies in the twenty-first century is well established. Although studies in digital literacies have examined the inclusion of computer games in schools, there has not been an extended study of English teachers incorporating computer games into their teaching and learning through action research projects. This paper outlines the structure and progress of a research project exploring the uses of computer games in English classrooms. We argue that much can be learned about the teaching of both print and digital literacies from examining computer games and young people’s engagement in online digital culture in the world beyond school.

Carly Kocurek and I originally wrote this chapter after #1reasonwhy to interrogate the game industry's resistance to women in the workforce. We look to the discursive practices around women as consumers, as journalists, and as producers of content to define cultural practices of exclusion as well as economic and social oppression. Shifts in the industry, we argue, need to first engage with these discourses and ideology to see positive change and workplace equality.

Call for Papers:  Representation of race, ethnicity and culture in digital games

Asia Pacific Media Educator (Volume 26:1, June 2016) will explore the issues of race, cultural diversity, cross-cultural representations and inter-cultural dynamics in digital games.  This thematic issue will address three topic areas:
1) Representation in digital games:
Games like the Global Conflict series have been used to simulate the media’s role in fostering understanding and awareness of racial and ethnic conflicts.  One such example is Global Palestine in which Israeli students play as Palestinians, and Palestinian students play as Israelis.  What is the future of such games that deliberate on issues of political conflicts driven by race and ethnicity? Can games be used to foster cross-cultural understanding and enhance tolerance/acceptance of diversity in race and religion?  How do digital games incite racial hatred?  Besides entertainment, what other functions do games play in contemporary multicultural societies?

2) Discourse on race and culture in teaching journalism:
How can media academics recognise and respond to the discourse about race, religion, ethnicity and politics in digital games? What are the educational trends in teaching about multiculturalism in games? How are the issues of cultural diversity in digital games discussed in media studies and journalism courses?  What are the innovative practices in teaching cultural diversity with digital games?

3) Development of multicultural digital games
While the majority of high-profile titles are developed and distributed from the US and Japan,  the drive to reduce production costs has meant that development is frequently outsourced to countries  such as Indonesia, India, Vietnam, Poland, the Czech Republic and Russia. However, while game development is increasingly becoming a global enterprise, questions remain over the extent to which this diversity of production is reflected in the game content.

Commentaries and Q&As
This thematic issue also welcomes commentaries and book reviews, which take the form of Q&As with the book authors.  Book reviewers should inform the guest editors the books to be reviewed and whether the book authors are contactable for a Q&A. 

Deadlines are as follows:
Abstract for consideration:  30 September 2015
Paper for double blind peer review: 30 November 2015
Peer review period: November – December 2015
Submission of final paper:  15 January 2016

The word lengths for full papers are:
• Commentaries (3000 – 3500 words)
• Research papers (6000 words max including references)
• Book reviews (Q&A with book author) (1500 words max)

This issue will be guest edited by Dr Mark Finn (Swinburne University of Technology) and Dr Wajeehah Aayeshah (Charles Sturt University). 
Please email abstracts and paper to wajeehah@gmail.com, and copy to the Editor-in-Chief, Dr Eric Loo (University of Wollongong) at:  eloo@uow.edu.au

This article is concerned with attempts to pose videogames as solutions to systemic racism. The mobile app, Everyday Racism, is one such game. Its method is to directly address players as subjects of racism interpellating them as victims of racist language and behaviour within Australian society, implicating the impact of racism on mental health and wellbeing. While the game has politically laudable goals, its effectiveness is undermined by several issues themselves attributable to the dynamics of race and games. This paper will spell out those issues by addressing three separate facets of the game: the problematic relationship between the player and their elected avatar; the pedagogic compromises that are made in modelling racism as a game; finally, the superliminal narrative that attempts to transcend the limited diegetic world of the game.

'Press X to pay respects' is an instruction in 'Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare' (Activision, 2014) and 'Batman: Arkham City' (Rocksteady Studios, 2011), a contextual action that seems to be included to give depth to the game events. But what is really happening in these interactions? Are they designed in a way that encourages the recognition of those whom we are paying respects to, or do they act as simple requirements to progress? What's the role of the (virtual) Other in ludofictional worlds? In this paper, we aim to study the encounter with virtual agents and the possibilities it opens for recognition and compassion. Authors like Sicart (2013), Mortensen (2004), and Zagal (2011) have shown that games can encourage ethical reflection, and established frameworks to analyse ethical gameplay design. Here we contribute to this discussion by proposing an ethical model based on the concepts of recognition, as discussed by Hegel, Appiah, Butler or Frankfurt, among others, and of suffering and compassion, as described in Buddhist philosophy. This model distinguishes two levels of suffering in games: ludic and narrative-thematic. It is this second level what can lead to compassionate play. We believe this model illustrates some vital parts of the act of playing and can help conscientious designers (as described by Flanagan and Nissenbaum, 2014), scholars, and players, to discuss and design ethical design. 1. Playing in second person with the Invisible Gamemaster We never play alone: there is always some perceived Other, be it virtual agents, other players (in leader boards, gamerscores, tutorials, and even Let's Play videos) or the game system itself. In the latter, we can guess the gamemakers' intentions (as intentio auctoris, Eco, 1987) or the abstract meaning of the work (as intentio operis), but also perceive an Invisible Gamemaster (IG) that conflates the ruleset, the code, and the operations of the machine to act as the organizer and arbiter of play. The IG is the higher authority that watches our movements, automatizes the rules and makes sure they are observed, and sanctions our actions. In this regard, our relationships to the game reminds of the mythical origin of the self-awareness