电脑游戏中的表征类型

P. Grabarczyk
{"title":"电脑游戏中的表征类型","authors":"P. Grabarczyk","doi":"10.5617/jpg.2926","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this paper is to explore how Peirce’s trichotomy of symbolic, indexical and iconic representations can be applied to computer games. I argue that if we use this classification, we gain the ability to make distinctions that game studies often ignore, or do not adequately grasp. To increase the descriptive power of Peirce’s trichotomy, I suggest two additional distinctions: the difference between external and internal representations, and the difference between diegetic and non-diegetic representations. I combine all of these distinctions to construct a typology of representations in computer games. I argue that the application of this typology to particular elements of games (instead of games understood as a whole) enables us to solve some of the problems caused by the relationship of games to the external world. A case study I use to illustrate how my typology helps to improve game studies discourse, is LocoRoco—an abstract game accused of containing racist imagery. I argue that the game publisher’s response to the controversy was inadequate, since the game content, due to the application of representational mechanisms, can be seen as racist even if its developers had no intention of creating such a racist content.","PeriodicalId":360694,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Philosophy of Games","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Typology of Representations in Computer Games\",\"authors\":\"P. Grabarczyk\",\"doi\":\"10.5617/jpg.2926\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The aim of this paper is to explore how Peirce’s trichotomy of symbolic, indexical and iconic representations can be applied to computer games. I argue that if we use this classification, we gain the ability to make distinctions that game studies often ignore, or do not adequately grasp. To increase the descriptive power of Peirce’s trichotomy, I suggest two additional distinctions: the difference between external and internal representations, and the difference between diegetic and non-diegetic representations. I combine all of these distinctions to construct a typology of representations in computer games. I argue that the application of this typology to particular elements of games (instead of games understood as a whole) enables us to solve some of the problems caused by the relationship of games to the external world. A case study I use to illustrate how my typology helps to improve game studies discourse, is LocoRoco—an abstract game accused of containing racist imagery. I argue that the game publisher’s response to the controversy was inadequate, since the game content, due to the application of representational mechanisms, can be seen as racist even if its developers had no intention of creating such a racist content.\",\"PeriodicalId\":360694,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Philosophy of Games\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Philosophy of Games\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5617/jpg.2926\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Philosophy of Games","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5617/jpg.2926","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文旨在探讨Peirce的符号、索引和符号表征三分法如何应用于电脑游戏。我认为,如果我们使用这种分类,我们就能够区分出游戏研究经常忽略或无法充分把握的区别。为了增强皮尔斯三分法的描述能力,我提出了两个额外的区别:外部表征和内部表征的区别,叙事表征和非叙事表征的区别。我将所有这些区别结合起来,构建了电脑游戏中的表现类型。我认为将这种类型学应用于游戏的特定元素(而不是作为整体来理解游戏)能够帮助我们解决由游戏与外部世界的关系所导致的一些问题。我用《locoroco》这个案例来说明我的类型学如何有助于改善游戏研究的论述,这是一款被指责包含种族主义意象的抽象游戏。我认为游戏发行商对争议的回应是不充分的,因为游戏内容,由于代表性机制的应用,可以被视为种族主义,即使它的开发者无意创造这样的种族主义内容。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Typology of Representations in Computer Games
The aim of this paper is to explore how Peirce’s trichotomy of symbolic, indexical and iconic representations can be applied to computer games. I argue that if we use this classification, we gain the ability to make distinctions that game studies often ignore, or do not adequately grasp. To increase the descriptive power of Peirce’s trichotomy, I suggest two additional distinctions: the difference between external and internal representations, and the difference between diegetic and non-diegetic representations. I combine all of these distinctions to construct a typology of representations in computer games. I argue that the application of this typology to particular elements of games (instead of games understood as a whole) enables us to solve some of the problems caused by the relationship of games to the external world. A case study I use to illustrate how my typology helps to improve game studies discourse, is LocoRoco—an abstract game accused of containing racist imagery. I argue that the game publisher’s response to the controversy was inadequate, since the game content, due to the application of representational mechanisms, can be seen as racist even if its developers had no intention of creating such a racist content.
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
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信