{"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}
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.
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.