战斗。愈合。回顾刷任务游戏机制中的修辞手法

IF 1.5 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Sabrina A. Sgandurra
{"title":"战斗。愈合。回顾刷任务游戏机制中的修辞手法","authors":"Sabrina A. Sgandurra","doi":"10.1177/10468781221106487","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Common definitions of rhetoric in games such as Bogost’s ‘procedural rhetoric’ have their basis in the Aristotelian definition of rhetoric, which concerns itself with discovering all means of persuasion in language. Purpose Gaming rhetoric has more to do with inducing action in players, and therefore falls more in line with Kenneth Burke’s definition of rhetoric. Grinding is a gaming mechanic that can be analysed using rhetorical devices if Burke’s definition of rhetoric is held at the core of this understanding. This article posits that games that employ a particular game mechanic, that of ‘grinding’, are relying on a specific rhetorical device in their design known as ploke, which then persuades the player to continue to do an action multiple times over, and therefore persuade players to form attitudes that align with the designer’s rhetorical goals. Analysis An analysis of ploke was applied to three specific games: Runescape (2001), Hades (2018) and Animal Crossing: New Horizons (2020). These games were chosen based on the ability to look at multiple genres as well as multiple different points in modern game development history. Ploke provided the ability to understand the method in which grinding communicates with players, enticing and incentivizing them to continue to complete actions repeatedly, whether for story progression or skill enhancement. The rhetorical power of ploke is found in its repetition, and since ploke describes the use of repetition in rhetorical contexts, thus grinding’s rhetorical power can be explained through this rhetorical phenomenon. Conclusion Ploke is just one rhetorical device, and grinding is just one game mechanic. There are several other game mechanics that can be analysed through rhetorical devices. This analysis allows researchers in interdisciplinary fields of games and linguistics, communication or humanities to explore how games communicate and influence player decisions.","PeriodicalId":47521,"journal":{"name":"SIMULATION & GAMING","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fight. Heal. Repeat: A Look at Rhetorical Devices in Grinding Game Mechanics\",\"authors\":\"Sabrina A. Sgandurra\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10468781221106487\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background Common definitions of rhetoric in games such as Bogost’s ‘procedural rhetoric’ have their basis in the Aristotelian definition of rhetoric, which concerns itself with discovering all means of persuasion in language. Purpose Gaming rhetoric has more to do with inducing action in players, and therefore falls more in line with Kenneth Burke’s definition of rhetoric. Grinding is a gaming mechanic that can be analysed using rhetorical devices if Burke’s definition of rhetoric is held at the core of this understanding. This article posits that games that employ a particular game mechanic, that of ‘grinding’, are relying on a specific rhetorical device in their design known as ploke, which then persuades the player to continue to do an action multiple times over, and therefore persuade players to form attitudes that align with the designer’s rhetorical goals. Analysis An analysis of ploke was applied to three specific games: Runescape (2001), Hades (2018) and Animal Crossing: New Horizons (2020). These games were chosen based on the ability to look at multiple genres as well as multiple different points in modern game development history. Ploke provided the ability to understand the method in which grinding communicates with players, enticing and incentivizing them to continue to complete actions repeatedly, whether for story progression or skill enhancement. The rhetorical power of ploke is found in its repetition, and since ploke describes the use of repetition in rhetorical contexts, thus grinding’s rhetorical power can be explained through this rhetorical phenomenon. Conclusion Ploke is just one rhetorical device, and grinding is just one game mechanic. There are several other game mechanics that can be analysed through rhetorical devices. This analysis allows researchers in interdisciplinary fields of games and linguistics, communication or humanities to explore how games communicate and influence player decisions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47521,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"SIMULATION & GAMING\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"SIMULATION & GAMING\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10468781221106487\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SIMULATION & GAMING","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10468781221106487","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

背景游戏中常见的修辞定义,如波哥大的“程序修辞”,其基础是亚里士多德对修辞的定义,即发现语言中的所有说服手段。目的游戏修辞更多地与诱导玩家采取行动有关,因此更符合肯尼斯·伯克对修辞的定义。如果伯克对修辞的定义是这种理解的核心,那么研磨是一种可以使用修辞手段进行分析的游戏机制。这篇文章假设,使用特定游戏机制的游戏,即“研磨”,在设计中依赖于一种特定的修辞手段,称为ploke,然后说服玩家多次继续做一个动作,从而说服玩家形成与设计师的修辞目标一致的态度。分析对ploke的分析应用于三款特定游戏:Runescape(2001)、Hades(2018)和Animal Crossing:New Horizons(2020)。这些游戏的选择是基于对现代游戏发展史上多种类型以及多个不同点的审视。普洛克提供了理解研磨与玩家交流的方法的能力,吸引和激励他们继续重复完成动作,无论是为了故事进展还是技能提升。普洛克的修辞力量在于它的重复,而普洛克描述的是在修辞语境中重复的使用,因此磨的修辞力量可以通过这种修辞现象来解释。结论Ploke只是一种修辞手段,grinding只是一种游戏机制。还有其他几种游戏机制可以通过修辞手段进行分析。这一分析使游戏与语言学、传播学或人文学科等跨学科领域的研究人员能够探索游戏是如何交流和影响玩家决策的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Fight. Heal. Repeat: A Look at Rhetorical Devices in Grinding Game Mechanics
Background Common definitions of rhetoric in games such as Bogost’s ‘procedural rhetoric’ have their basis in the Aristotelian definition of rhetoric, which concerns itself with discovering all means of persuasion in language. Purpose Gaming rhetoric has more to do with inducing action in players, and therefore falls more in line with Kenneth Burke’s definition of rhetoric. Grinding is a gaming mechanic that can be analysed using rhetorical devices if Burke’s definition of rhetoric is held at the core of this understanding. This article posits that games that employ a particular game mechanic, that of ‘grinding’, are relying on a specific rhetorical device in their design known as ploke, which then persuades the player to continue to do an action multiple times over, and therefore persuade players to form attitudes that align with the designer’s rhetorical goals. Analysis An analysis of ploke was applied to three specific games: Runescape (2001), Hades (2018) and Animal Crossing: New Horizons (2020). These games were chosen based on the ability to look at multiple genres as well as multiple different points in modern game development history. Ploke provided the ability to understand the method in which grinding communicates with players, enticing and incentivizing them to continue to complete actions repeatedly, whether for story progression or skill enhancement. The rhetorical power of ploke is found in its repetition, and since ploke describes the use of repetition in rhetorical contexts, thus grinding’s rhetorical power can be explained through this rhetorical phenomenon. Conclusion Ploke is just one rhetorical device, and grinding is just one game mechanic. There are several other game mechanics that can be analysed through rhetorical devices. This analysis allows researchers in interdisciplinary fields of games and linguistics, communication or humanities to explore how games communicate and influence player decisions.
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
SIMULATION & GAMING
SIMULATION & GAMING EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
5.00%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Simulation & Gaming: An International Journal of Theory, Practice and Research contains articles examining academic and applied issues in the expanding fields of simulation, computerized simulation, gaming, modeling, play, role-play, debriefing, game design, experiential learning, and related methodologies. The broad scope and interdisciplinary nature of Simulation & Gaming are demonstrated by the wide variety of interests and disciplines of its readers, contributors, and editorial board members. Areas include: sociology, decision making, psychology, language training, cognition, learning theory, management, educational technologies, negotiation, peace and conflict studies, economics, international studies, research methodology.
×
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