Gonzalo Frasca “Videogames of the Oppressed”

Frasca makes the thesis that video games can be oppressive to the players in this essay. He starts the argument by stating people learn from video games by simulation after engaging in interactivity. This is very similar to Bogost’s theory of procedural rhetoric. With this theory applied one can see the argument since very few games actually allow for multiple ways of beating the game. One must beat the game in the designated plan of gameplay. When thinking of violent video games this is the argument people can use. The player only sees violence so learns it through interpretation. Personally I see and understand this argument as it has been made a lot throughout my childhood as games took off at an extraordinary rate of success than and still are today. It makes sense, but I like to think of games as a place to act out our biological need to kill instead of teach it. I’ll always remember the comedian Marcus Brigstocke’s take on the idea, “If video games had affected us then Pacman would have made us run round in dark rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive electronic music.”

The second argument Frasca makes is that some games don’t allow everything into them forcing the players to act a certain way. This is seen with the Sims and alcohol. The Sims is supposed to represent reality in the virtual world, but only allows people to live life a certain way. This way could be seen as cosmos in the thinking of Eliade. With this games are oppressing players into following social norms without explicitly showing it.

All together I found Frasca’s paper to be very interesting but I didn’t agree with it all together. His ideas all together seemed like a stretch to me, but I can see many people and theorists agreeing with him.

~ by bmill1 on April 30, 2008.