Perhaps the strangest feature of some current MMORPGs which are based on Medieval backgrounds (eg Lineage, Everquest) is that players can sell or gift their in-game items which practically function as production goods / goverment licenses in modern world without any restraint. In the Middle Ages, it is hard to imagine that one could sell or otherwise transfer one’s fiefdom(eg castle)/ one's peerage to someone with no blood relation. Feudal property law simply forbade or regulated this type of activity. Regulars might remember that back in March I posted Simulating terror, which sparked of a lively discussion on the use of Virtual Worlds in understanding terrorism, I still think that there are insights and I’d really like to go to this conference (especially given that I work in central London just outside Parliament - so I’m very interested in the ability to predict terrorist behaviour); but I doubt I can make it over so feedback from any of the TN community will be very welcome.
It is a view which recognizes that which is scripted, modeled, or otherwise generated according to the practice of software development as seemingly both the (only) site of creativity and (therefore) the ultimate locus of value. Cheap FFXI Gil are on hot sale on all servers, especially on American servers. They looked friendly enough--at least, no one had fruit ready to throw at us. It was simply kind of surreal, after reading the comments on TN this past week and hearing other things at the conference about the problems with game studies and developer/academic relations.
In case you missed it, the next DAC (digital arts & culture) conference will take place December 1-3 at the IT University of Copenhagen. DAC has long been a host to game studies work so definitely consider submitting and coming out for it. Deadline for papers and workshop proposals is August 8. Full info can be found at the conference website. Anyway forget the pretentious ‘inclusive’ title. Don’t worry it’s all about the game. This year’s format seems pretty much the same as last year.
You’ve got to be quick for this one: it’s in DC, it’s on Thursday at 14 hundred hours; it looks great if you have a uniform fetish – well it's hosted by the US Navy and it's called: Innovation at the Edge: The New Capabilities, Applications, Threats and Opportunities Unleashed by Global Technology Convergence and Proliferation.
It's always easy to abstract and oversimplify at that level. But I know that on an individual level, there are real conversations and collaborations going on. I don't want this to turn into some rosy "it's better than we think" or "can't we all just get along" thing, but I do think that perhaps the situation is not as dire as it's hyped to be. But then again, I haven't gotte my evals back yet.
It's always easy to abstract and oversimplify at that level. But I know that on an individual level, there are real conversations and collaborations going on. I don't want this to turn into some rosy "it's better than we think" or "can't we all just get along" thing, but I do think that perhaps the situation is not as dire as it's hyped to be. But then again, I haven't gotte my evals back yet.
It's always easy to abstract and oversimplify at that level. But I know that on an individual level, there are real conversations and collaborations going on. I don't want this to turn into some rosy "it's better than we think" or "can't we all just get along" thing, but I do think that perhaps the situation is not as dire as it's hyped to be. But then again, I haven't gotte my evals back yet.
After our "high energy" presentation, the questions were even stranger. Someone asked why humanities research got left out, and we had to say that we couldn't find it to be directly relevant on our top 10 list of bulleted points. Ian made the point, and I agreed, that doing the research for this panel made us think differently about academic research. While I'm not going to say that what we've done personally has no value, it was a definite challenge to try and make it *directly relevant* in a BULLETED POINT for developers. And there are huge gaps in what we don't know. Where is the research about sports games, to take just one example? Anyway, the point is, I enjoyed the exercise, and learned a lot from it. I hope the audience did as well.
After our "high energy" presentation, the questions were even stranger. Someone asked why humanities research got left out, and we had to say that we couldn't find it to be directly relevant on our top 10 list of bulleted points. Ian made the point, and I agreed, that doing the research for this panel made us think differently about academic research. While I'm not going to say that what we've done personally has no value, it was a definite challenge to try and make it *directly relevant* in a BULLETED POINT for developers. And there are huge gaps in what we don't know. Where is the research about sports games, to take just one example? Anyway, the point is, I enjoyed the exercise, and learned a lot from it. I hope the audience did as well.
After our "high energy" presentation, the questions were even stranger. Someone asked why humanities research got left out, and we had to say that we couldn't find it to be directly relevant on our top 10 list of bulleted points. Ian made the point, and I agreed, that doing the research for this panel made us think differently about academic research. While I'm not going to say that what we've done personally has no value, it was a definite challenge to try and make it *directly relevant* in a BULLETED POINT for developers. And there are huge gaps in what we don't know. Where is the research about sports games, to take just one example? Anyway, the point is, I enjoyed the exercise, and learned a lot from it. I hope the audience did as well.