New account registration is temporarily disabled.

THE MYTH OF GAMES AS ESCAPISM

Debunking misunderstandings of the medium and why it's important.

  • Sagitar
  • 05/22/2011 01:05 AM
  • 30876 views
When attempting to drive forward a medium, it's important to understand the trends and viewpoints that are holding it back. I've already likened games to theater and discussed why people have trouble calling them art, but in this post I'm going to dig a little deeper and attempt to disprove one of the troubling myths surrounding our culture and industry.

Many people think playing games is a form of indulgent escapism. Considering role-playing experiences like Dungeons & Dragons or World of Warcraft, it's easy to assume everyone involved is losing themselves so deeply in the game world to escape problems in the real world. They're called "role-playing games" because players take on the role of someone else—a deadly night elf, an interstellar commander, etc. These roles are so appealing because they give us a break from our responsibilities, right?


Wrong. In fact, they pile more responsibilities on us. Games are not a passive medium like film or literature; players don't have the luxury of watching some other hero save the world.

Games are interactive and engaging, and by definition provide obstacles to overcome. Perhaps gamers are escaping into other worlds, but often those worlds have more problems and challenges than our own. Players are accepting a responsibility in that very act of playing, willingly taking it upon themselves to put down a mutant apocalypse, escort a helpless child out of harm's way, or even just pile heaps of experience onto their avatar to hit that elusive next level.


Okay, so that's fine, but if a gamer's network of real-life relationships is in the crapper and bills are piling up at home, vanishing into that other world is still shirking responsibilities, isn't it? On some level, yes. But if players wanted to escape their problems, it doesn't make sense that they would take on even more in their spare time. They would love to be able to tackle those problems; most just don't know how to go about it. Enemies or obstacles in the game world then become manifestations of real-world challenges, ones with tangible goals and a clear (if not simple) path to victory. That's why overcoming them can feel like such an exhilarating accomplishment, even if it's as simple as beating a level of Angry Birds.

People act differently while they're playing games than they do in the real world. It's similar to internet culture in that regard—we feel safely distanced from ourselves and buffered by the blanket of apparent anonymity. You might think this means we're putting on a mask, but it's actually the opposite. The mask is what we wear every day in social situations where to express oneself honestly isn't always an acceptable option. Our masks actually come off when we play games or go online. This has consequences both bad (think YouTube commenters) and good: while society often demands conformity and cynicism from younger generations especially, games give us a venue where we are instead rewarded for expressing our creative selves with fiery pride and passion.


And therein lies our responsibility as developers. Our games must inspire players to take that pride and passion back into the real world and conquer their problems with the same willingness and vigor they displayed in the game world. It's not as daunting as it sounds! The lines between the physical and digital worlds are blurring more and more each day, with advances in smartphones, social media, augmented reality, etc. Be creative and you'll find getting your players to make that step is really pretty easy.

Once we've done that, we'll have broken the myth that gamer culture is entirely made up of lazy, unproductive basement-dwellers and the only use for our wonderfully powerful medium is to escape the trials of the real world—which is to ignore its abilities to inspire, educate, and unite people all around the globe.

Leave a comment if you agree or disagree!

Posts

Pages: first prev 123 last
chana
(Socrates would certainly not contadict me!)
1584
Didn't think of that, makes sense. In fact i remember thinking that the only thing worthwhile on tv as fiction goes were the cartoons (and i'm not exactly at an age where you watch cartoons!). Maybe also the technology involved in video games puts a lot of people off, this is all still quite new
author=Pokemaniac
author=Radnen
You are right, video games don't leave much to the imagination!
Like Minecraft, which allows you to build whatever you want based on the game's logic, or even your standard super-linear JRPG which sets up obstacles for you and forces you to interpret what is going on and react to it...

Video-games aren't art(although they totally are) because there were no video-games when the word art was made. I don't think that changes anything about how we should make them, or the impact they make.


Oh, well some games. I'm not discounting that games aren't art, fuck, I'm going to shut up now, how'd I ever get to talking about this shit? I should've stopped when I saw the word art in the same sentence as "games".

Anyways, the OP said games aren't escapism. The point of contention being: Does he include all games or just some. This is what we should be discussing.
Well, you certainly don't play Minesweeper to feel like a minesweeper. But you do play an aircraft simulator to feel like you're flying an aircraft. I find that definite statements in discussions about something as versatile as video games are always overturned.
chana
(Socrates would certainly not contadict me!)
1584
Maybe the difference is not so much in the games as in the way and in which circumstances you play them
Maybe it is an escape but one that is not devoid of interest........................... there are a lot of ways to escape reality, reading 24h/24 can also be an escape which would mean its all in the manner
author=chana
Maybe the difference is not so much in the games as in the way and in which circumstances you play them
Yep, I think that's pretty much it. I was going to post on this article like a week ago, but I thought, "What's arguing this going to achieve? What does it change for us when we're making games?" I think now we're getting to the point where this is in some way a productive discussion.

Browser games, mobile/iPod games, and light computer games are for escapism. Not always to escape work, maybe it's just because you're bored. The main points for these types of games are short play-sessions, and easy access to content.

Larger computer games and console games are for immersion. These games should be long, hearty games, with more tolerance for load times and things such as dialogue and tutorials. When you sit down to play one of these you're doing to play the game, and your full attention is on the game.

Handheld consoles, I feel, sit somewhere in the middle. On the one hand, they can be very immersive, but they also have the advantage of portability. If you look at the library of DS games, you'll find probably the most varied collection of any other gaming machine, except maybe PCs.

The importance of this is in knowing what sort of game you are making, and what sort of technology it belongs on, although we RPG Makers have to look at it the other way around.

RPG Maker games have to be downloaded, and is for making RPGs, which I feel are very much immersive games. So, yes, RPG Maker games are probably more for immersion than escapism.
chana
(Socrates would certainly not contadict me!)
1584
I would say the immersive games are the ones some people get most addicted to and they allow for much greater escape
This said i also have the feeling we're getting somewheres, but i would say (maybe) its that all video games players (you're speaking strictly from the makers's side) are not "escapors" or/and not always, as obvious as it may seem, i think its something that is not totally acquired today.
So, Oblivion = great immersion, and perhaps escapism?
author=chana
I would say the immersive games are the ones some people get most addicted to and they allow for much greater escape
This said i also have the feeling we're getting somewheres, but i would say (maybe) its that all video games players (you're speaking strictly from the makers's side) are not "escapors" or/and not always, as obvious as it may seem, i think its something that is not totally acquired today.
I think using an immersive game to escape is a much larger jump, though. Think about it; if you're at work, playing Solitaire when you're bored isn't weird at all, but going for a raid on World of Warcraft is like a big fuck-you to your boss(also note that Solitaire is a lot easier to walk away from, with no penalties for just leaving it sitting while you talk to a customer, wheras if you leave WoW sitting you'll probably die). Right now, I'm writing this instead of doing an assignment about diabetes. But I'm not off playing LA Noire, because that would basically be showing I have no intention of doing my assignment at all. I suppose if I said "screw it" and went and played LA Noire right now, you could say I'm addicted to LA Noire. Is me writing this me being addicted to RMN? I don't really know(also I think we're flying off-track again).
Also this is totally ignoring games that are for socialisation, like Mario Kart and same-console multi-player and stuff.
chana
(Socrates would certainly not contadict me!)
1584
Yes, i don't know how it works, but, i also have the impression we're "flying off-track again"! i intended to stop posting for that reason, but reading that made me laugh(true!)! Maybe the subject is to wide to embrace, but in fact i had , from a different angle, somewhat the same idea : i wanted to add : it depends how, but it also depends what game(i was thinking in terms of good or bad, i don't want to offend you, Radnen, but particularly, in terms of creative or not, lets say, arty or not), but, right there's the social video game like any other social game, video or not!!!
As far as I'm concerned, whether or not something is escapism depends on the mindset of whoever uses the medium, not on the medium itself. Basically, what the game is for is totally irrelevant in determining whether or not someone playing it is practicing a form of escapism. Of course, some games may be more "escapism friendly" than others, but that just determines the likelihood of any given player to be using it as escapism.
author=Crystalgate
As far as I'm concerned, whether or not something is escapism depends on the mindset of whoever uses the medium, not on the medium itself. Basically, what the game is for is totally irrelevant in determining whether or not someone playing it is practicing a form of escapism. Of course, some games may be more "escapism friendly" than others, but that just determines the likelihood of any given player to be using it as escapism.

True, but when making games, you have to consider either the average player, or the average player in your niche. This is assuming you want as many people as possible to play/buy your game.
this is such a misguided argument. its purely subjective whether you find games to be art, escapism or whatever. All I see is a bunch of people forcing their opinions onto others whilst trying to be philosophical about it all.
It is pretty preachy, but I'm open to it as another perspective behind what drives the creation of new ideas.
chana
(Socrates would certainly not contadict me!)
1584
author=nahor23
this is such a misguided argument. its purely subjective whether you find games to be art, escapism or whatever. All I see is a bunch of people forcing their opinions onto others whilst trying to be philosophical about it all.

Totally unlike you! sorry, but seriously, read yourself............!
author=chana
author=nahor23
this is such a misguided argument. its purely subjective whether you find games to be art, escapism or whatever. All I see is a bunch of people forcing their opinions onto others whilst trying to be philosophical about it all.
Totally unlike you! sorry, but seriously, read yourself............!


And thus the paradox was born. From a pair of doxes.
you're not obligated in any way to save the world in rpgs. even if you do, you can do it at your own pace, and if you lose you can simply give up and go do something. if you just get bored, you can go and do something else. that's not a responsibility, although some people may kid themselves into thinking it is.
I realize this is dead, but I feel there is a very valid point to be taken there.

That is, in games, players will be rewarded for their own skills - their thinking, their tenacity. Which is especially rewarding for those who feel their skills in real life are either ignored, or don't pay off.
It creates a space where they can get a reward similar to the one you would get in real life - in WoW some people even have raid calenders where they HAVE to show up to, where they have to clear their schedule and adapt accordingly.

But in a smilar way, this is what I feel escapismn actually means for the player. Not the act of being a super-strong elf or imagining to be an orc all of a sudden (there are games with a bigger focus on that, too, but seriously, I haven't encountered anyone playing games with this mindset. And I've met many people playing games.)
Escapismn in this sense means getting similar satisfaction to real life work, or any work, and getting validation for their own sets of skills. When they in fact could use this very diligence in real life and fare well with it. When they could enjoy it directly.

.. nevertheless. Crystalgates thinking is really spot-on. In the end, it's the player. Some games give it just more easily.
Pages: first prev 123 last