Digital Karma’s blog

In Steven Johnson’s Everything Bad is Good for You, he explains how unfair today’s video games are criticized and why most negative opinions are influenced on superstition and not from research. He explains the cognitive benefits of reading, and compares them with the benefits of video games. And concludes that video games are as cognitively beneficial has reading, but just affect different parts of the brain. Johnson proceeds to discuss why video games may become addictive, with explanations of the science behind the brains pleasure system. He basically states that we all seek reward, we all need it. That if rewards are clearly defined and presented, people will be attracted to it, no matter the tediousness or struggles that it may come with.

In the second half of the chapter, Johnson talks about the two behaviors that gamers go through when they start to play a video game: probing and telescoping. Probing is a process best compared to the scientific method, where the player is constantly through a process of creating hypothesis’ and rethinking the consequences; a process that is constantly practiced throughout a game. This practice cause players to always eventually find flaws to exploited. His second term, “telescoping”, is described as the mental process we go through to keep track the multiple tasks that need to be done to complete an objective. Not to be confused with multitasking which comprises of unlinked task; telescoping are multiple tasks that link together and cannot be achieved without doing the others. These two behaviors of probing and telescoping are skills that gamers today have as a second nature, and have improved their ability to intake an abundant amount of information and process it quick enough to understand the environment around them. Johnson states that people who are unfamiliar with the game hobby are turned off because they have not yet developed these behaviors, because they are used to doing tasks that are superficial that serve no challenge or ultimate purpose.

I basically agreed with all the ideas and perspectives have presented in this chapter. I believe that critics of video games are usually people who don’t play video games and have no personally done research on the effects on gaming. They judge something that they have no understanding on, other than the negative attention that gets spread by other sources of ignorance. I have over the years personally have seen the benefits of gaming on people. Kids become more adapted to learning new technologies quicker, and expand their imagination even further than the children of pasts. Video games also bring a sense of excitement and challenge that real life activities lack. His explanation of probing and telescoping is very true among gamer behaviors. We without notice are always analyzing ways to accomplish things before, during, and after game play. We make it a habit, to always look for the most efficient way to complete a game to our desire. And the process of telescoping has created a behavior that has improved minds to be able to take on complicated, long challenges with ease. I believe these habits produce people more adept to handle complex situations, to create more intricate complex ideas that have advanced our technology so quickly and faster than ever before.

In the “One Laptop per Child . . .” reading, the first article started out with a brief introduction of the OLPC program. The OLPC goals are to distribute 150 million laptops to needy children worldwide in five years. There hopes are to motivate, inspire, and educate children with this new tool to help increase the poor food and economic situations in other countries. Some companies have volunteered to help out with the program providing developers and programs to have on the laptop.

The middle and bulk of the reading is an article written by Binyavanga Wainaina, who uses examples of what the OLPC program could do for underdeveloped countries. His/her examples come in the form of stories that most consist of someone learning an invaluable skill or inspired by a new idea. And what the consequence of these ideas delivers is a profound effect on the community and how productive they have become. In ending his/her article, Wainaina concludes that a laptop per child is a tool that will share and inspire new ideas that will benefit in the growth of communities, cities, and countries.

The last article gave a solid review of the actual 100 dollar laptop to be distributed to the world. Written by a well versed 12 year old, he gives an overall good score for the laptop, underlying that the only problem was battery time and computing speed. Other than those 2 flaws, the laptop was sturdy, strong, easy to use, easy to learn, and contains a substantial amount of content.

First of all, in my opinion, the review by the 12-year old was outstandingly written. I was impressed and glad to see youth education is still going strong in certain areas. The writer writes better than my 22 year old brother. Anyway, I initially heard of the OLPC program through a commercial, and first had some criticisms. One particular problem I had was, “why are we giving them laptops when they need food. It just seemed like a waste of money.” But after reading these articles, I understand more of why the movement can be of worldwide value, beyond what my former ignorance could comprehend. Just another example that you should really research all perspectives of an argument before you pass judgment. Not that I completely have faith in the OLPC program, but its movement is inspiring nonetheless. I think the movement could definitely have potential to increase and update underdeveloped countries to think about new and efficient ideas like we do in America. Why give them food and money, when we can teach them to sustain a food source and help develop their economy. And the way to do this is to educate and inspire. I guess the best traditional quote to all this would be “Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and feed him for a lifetime.” I personally wouldn’t mind buying/getting my hands on this $100 dollar laptop and maybe analyzing what kind of impact this product could induce; and then donate it back to the cause. From the viewpoint of my gamer side, I see this as an example of the endless possibilities of what the digital and gaming age can be apart of, which only makes the future of this industry look brighter. From a worldwide standpoint, the OLPC is an inspiring example that there is still goodwill and hope out there.

            The article from The Theater of the Oppressed, starts out explaining different ways to use theater as a language. The first way is to allow spectators to intervene and view several solutions to an issue or problem in an act. A second way is nonverbal and for everyone to act out physically a three part transitional subject. The last way is to allow the spectator to replace an actor and act out a solution themselves. This allows the spectator to realize the effectiveness of his chosen solution, and maybe an understanding of the consequences. It also is a great way to view all possible solutions acted out.

The second half of the reading discusses theater as a discourse. There are 7 different forms discussed. The first is newspaper-theater where non dramatic news topics are acted out. Second is invisible theater where actors play out an act among a public crowd that is unaware that of the actors. Third is “photo-romance”, where people are given a general plotline from story, and are requested to act out their interpretation of the plot. The fourth form is breaking of repression where the protagonist reenacts a life experience of repression and then follow up with the same act but this time make the opposite choices. This act gives the protagonist perspective to analyze their actions. The remaining forms are myth-theater, analytical theater, and rituals & masks. Conclusively, the article talks about the role of a spectator should not be followed. A spectator should become an actor instead, for it will bring forth reflection and analysis of actions.

This article was quite a confusing read, since it was apparent that the introduction of the subject matter was missing. When initially reading about the different forms of theater, I could not help but think the article was a long list of examples and explanations of the art of theater. Towards the end of the article, you get more of a sense that these theater forms are used to reenact real life situations to help focus and analyze problems and understand unique perspectives. The forms being discussed almost felt like therapeutic exercises to instill understanding and confidence, or to solve a problem. I think every form discussed have interesting techniques to involve the spectators, to be more involved. These rehearsals appear to be help people (spectators) be prepared for certain situations or to be able to realize past choices. One of my favorite forms explained was the “invisible theater”, because not only would it bring understanding to how certain people would act socially in specific situations, but it also sounds quite entertaining, and possibly mischievous. I would love to try this form of theater study sometime with my friends, although if we think about it, I’m sure we have all done something like this in one way or another.

            In the article, “Video Games Go to Washington”, the developers of the “Howard Dean for Iowa Game” talk about their design process before the Christmas holidays. They give comparisons with commercial games and the affects their game had on the Iowa caucus. The article explains how time constraints helped them pave the way the game look and displayed; essentially becoming a motivational aspect. They made sure to cover there grounds with the look and content of the game to attract and not offend the general audience. They decided on a comic look common in newspapers and generated characters that covered all ages, races, and sizes. They explain how all games really have some sort of political agenda in the broad sense, and that within the games are also subtle, indirect messages that can have effects. The developers strongly feel that games will eventually play a large role outside the entertainment industry and have major effects in other areas such as the political campaigns.

            First off, the whole talk about the process of their design process more geared towards people who don’t understand the process; so I felt like some of their experiences and processes were obvious and expected. The part I did find more interesting was the talk about how all games have certain political agendas, whether apparent or hidden within. Like for example, GTA III had the goal of shocking the world with its improved type of sandbox game play as well as the obvious controversy of its content. I mean you can’t tell me that they didn’t see the drama coming. Games with agendas make for easier criticism and discussion. It generates free marketing, and can place your game in the history books. That’s the real goal to all successful game developers; is to make a game that can stamp there name in the gaming world. And the little games that get produced are usually constructed for personal agenda or gain, whether it’s an educational agenda, or a business profit gain. Now of course there are exceptions to every statement, but you can’t deny it isn’t somewhat true. Last bit of intriguing statements in the article, come when the developers state that video games will eventually be an effective tool for political campaigning. I totally agree with this because the genre is so open with possibilities, it’s hard to say “no it won’t have an effect”. What political marketing developers need to do is what the entertainment industry does; which is to design a product that is bigger and better than the last. We may one day encounter a political game that has effects that may mirror the effects GTA did. It really is only a matter of time and probably from some less conservative politicians to initiate a movement.