Keywords for Video Game Studies

chid 496i, autumn 2010

Critical Game Review

Problem

One of the most ubiquitous forms of critical writing on video games is the review. Unfortunately, this genre has largely stagnated as it tends to take the form of a consumer recommendation. We end up seeing the same categories (graphics, story, replayablity) appear in almost every version coupled with the seemingly-required numerical score.

Because they tend to focus on whether or not the prospective player should buy a game, the review genre often ignores important qualities of games. We know Bioshock has great graphics but what about its significance in relation to the historical context in which it was released? We know World of Warcraft offers umpteen options for customizing our own personal avatars, but what about the ramifications of those choices or the identities we construct? We know Mass Effect 2 is a 96 on Metacritics, but how is it a reflection and expression of the society that made it?

These are the kinds of questions the typical industry review does not address. While the answers may not be marketing fodder, they are relevant, even necessary, to a broader evaluation of a game as not just a commodity, but as a valuable cultural artifact (dare I saw, work of art) worth taking seriously.

Solution

Invent our own evaluation rubrics that can assess a game as a culturally significant object by mapping it against the critical conversations in the field of video game studies.

Procedure

  1. Research: In weeks 2 and 3 we will look at examples of game reviews, some standard, some with other goals, to get an image of the genre and what we are aiming for. The following weeks we will cover some central critical concepts related to gaming including play, immersion, RPG, avatar, and so on. The readings and play experiences from the quarter will help us to understand what is at stake in gaming and what kinds of criteria we want to judge games by.
  2. Develop: Near the end of the quarter, you will identify a game you want to review and create an evaluation rubric that presents that game in terms of the keywords discussed over the course of the quarter. A standard rubric will take the form of the industry versions with 3-4 categories and some scale of evaluation, typically numerical, though you are welcome to be more creative. The key will be how you synthesize the quarter's research into a few salient areas of critique, opening the review genre to a broader consideration of your chosen example.
  3. Present: The last week of class you will share with the class the rubric you developed, explaining how you came to settling on the design and how it applies to game you've chosen to review.
  4. Apply: For finals week, you will write a 300-500 word review of your game that uses your customized rubric. Successful reviews will have a rubric grounded in the course research, make an analysis of the example game applying their rubric criteria, and be well-written.
  5. Submit: You will turn in your finished review by December 10th via the CollectIt (link). *Bonus* These reviews have an opportunity to be submitted to be published as a part of the CGP's new regular review column in the Daily. After they are scored for credit in this course, they will be passed on to CGP committee and the Daily editors to select reviews worthy of publication.

CHID 496 I

Title:
Keywords for Video Game Studies

Meeting:
Thurs.| 2:30-4:20 |SAV 139

Instructors:
Ed Chang & Timothy Welsh

Syllabuspdf

Links



Creative Commons License