在虚拟灭绝的边缘:在开放世界电子游戏中猎杀动物

E. van Ooijen
{"title":"在虚拟灭绝的边缘:在开放世界电子游戏中猎杀动物","authors":"E. van Ooijen","doi":"10.7557/23.6164","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article focuses on the underlying structures evaluating acts of violence against different bodies in games. Taking the hunting mechanics of open-world games as its point of discussion, it looks at how game design manifests procedural arguments on the ideological aspects of animal violence. Whereas there are instances of explicit violence in these games, the article argues that the explicitness of such depictions serves to emphasize the “messiness” of producing animal goods, thus impeding the “carnist” ideological view of meat as pure commodity. By considering how games distinguish humans from animals, it looks at what violent acts are rendered acceptable or unacceptable, and notes distinctions between what bodies are protected by, or exempt from, moral and legal rights.Finally, the article considers how the algorithmic nature of spawning makes digital animals immune to extinction. Interestingly enough, the article nevertheless notices how a game may intentionally diverge from this logic in order to defamiliarize its established logic.Among the games discussed are Rockstar’s Red Dead Redemption (2010), and Ubisoft’s Assassin’s Creed III (2012) and Far Cry 3 (2012).","PeriodicalId":247562,"journal":{"name":"Eludamos: Journal for Computer Game Culture","volume":"98 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"On the Brink of Virtual Extinction: Hunting and Killing Animals in Open World Video Games\",\"authors\":\"E. van Ooijen\",\"doi\":\"10.7557/23.6164\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article focuses on the underlying structures evaluating acts of violence against different bodies in games. Taking the hunting mechanics of open-world games as its point of discussion, it looks at how game design manifests procedural arguments on the ideological aspects of animal violence. Whereas there are instances of explicit violence in these games, the article argues that the explicitness of such depictions serves to emphasize the “messiness” of producing animal goods, thus impeding the “carnist” ideological view of meat as pure commodity. By considering how games distinguish humans from animals, it looks at what violent acts are rendered acceptable or unacceptable, and notes distinctions between what bodies are protected by, or exempt from, moral and legal rights.Finally, the article considers how the algorithmic nature of spawning makes digital animals immune to extinction. Interestingly enough, the article nevertheless notices how a game may intentionally diverge from this logic in order to defamiliarize its established logic.Among the games discussed are Rockstar’s Red Dead Redemption (2010), and Ubisoft’s Assassin’s Creed III (2012) and Far Cry 3 (2012).\",\"PeriodicalId\":247562,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Eludamos: Journal for Computer Game Culture\",\"volume\":\"98 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Eludamos: Journal for Computer Game Culture\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7557/23.6164\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eludamos: Journal for Computer Game Culture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7557/23.6164","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文关注的是评估游戏中针对不同身体的暴力行为的基本结构。本文以开放世界游戏的狩猎机制为讨论点,探讨了游戏设计如何在动物暴力的意识形态方面体现程序论证。尽管这些游戏中确实存在明显的暴力元素,但这篇文章认为,这种直白的描述强调了生产动物产品的“混乱”,从而阻碍了将肉类视为纯粹商品的“食肉主义者”意识形态观点。通过考虑游戏如何区分人类和动物,它着眼于哪些暴力行为是可接受的或不可接受的,并注意到哪些身体受道德和法律权利的保护或豁免之间的区别。最后,文章考虑了产卵的算法性质如何使数字动物免于灭绝。有趣的是,这篇文章还注意到,游戏可能会故意偏离这种逻辑,以使其不熟悉已建立的逻辑。讨论的游戏包括Rockstar的《荒野大镖客:救赎》(2010),育碧的《刺客信条3》(2012)和《孤岛惊魂3》(2012)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
On the Brink of Virtual Extinction: Hunting and Killing Animals in Open World Video Games
The article focuses on the underlying structures evaluating acts of violence against different bodies in games. Taking the hunting mechanics of open-world games as its point of discussion, it looks at how game design manifests procedural arguments on the ideological aspects of animal violence. Whereas there are instances of explicit violence in these games, the article argues that the explicitness of such depictions serves to emphasize the “messiness” of producing animal goods, thus impeding the “carnist” ideological view of meat as pure commodity. By considering how games distinguish humans from animals, it looks at what violent acts are rendered acceptable or unacceptable, and notes distinctions between what bodies are protected by, or exempt from, moral and legal rights.Finally, the article considers how the algorithmic nature of spawning makes digital animals immune to extinction. Interestingly enough, the article nevertheless notices how a game may intentionally diverge from this logic in order to defamiliarize its established logic.Among the games discussed are Rockstar’s Red Dead Redemption (2010), and Ubisoft’s Assassin’s Creed III (2012) and Far Cry 3 (2012).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信