Adam Brackin will be here to discuss all things ARG.
For class begin by reading this Quick Start Guide and then the wikipedia article Alternative Reality Games. Next you should sign up for an account and take a look around Adam’s current game, Conspiracy Asylum. If you are interested his previous game was called Deus City.
Once you have a sense of what ARGs are all about, you should read two short articles by Jane McGonigal (she is one of the creators behind the famous I Love Bees). “This Is Not a Game: Immersive Aesthetics & Collective Play” and “The Puppet Master Problem” are both available for download from her website. Finally, you might want to take a look The Lost Ring her latest game, designed for the Olympics-this is a high quality production project with people participating from numerous countries and at least eight different languages.
If you are looking for more information on ARGs the two most important internet sites are ARGNet and unfiction.
posting now so I can spend time on my proposal.
As I read about all these different type of interactive games it was interesting to me how trusting humans really are. We are willing to follow the direction (at least be persuaded to take action) by people we don’t know. I would love to see one of these games turned into something like a Punk’d where you ask people to just do something funny and do it in large numbers and then Punk them.
Secondly, the discussion about control or who is in control was interesting. It seems like control in people’s minds when reading this in the past with games falls into the hands of a person and usually that is not the case. No one really has “control”. There is a give and take and with these type of alternative games there are lots of individuals all contributing but it doesn’t seem like control even plays are “real” role. Maybe intent would be better or set forth the first domino in the pile but I don’t understand the length of discussion on control because really, is there such a thing? All action will encounter an action or lack of action. I guess what these readings showed me is the level of emotions these types of games bring about (trust and control) and how in our real lives we struggle often times with these types of emotion, maybe the alternative world offers these types of emotions and fills a void that we may not have in our everyday life, now that would be interesting to talk about – how ARG’s create trust and involve new interactions behavioral amongst people.
Outside of the reference on a “Numbers” episode (called “Primacy,” if anyone cares), I had not heard of alternative reality gaming until this class. From what we’ve read, I can see jumping in with both feet and never coming up for air. Which makes me wonder how many other addictive personalities there are and how they deal with the separation between game and life.
While reading McGonigal’s article “This Is Not a Game…” I couldn’t help but think of Michael Douglas’s 1997 movie, “The Game.” With the exception of his not knowing he was playing, that game was as immersive as it gets. Actually, not knowing was part of his game, but that brought me to think of how many people get confused. How many start playing and end up living their games.
If the goal of ARGs is, as McGonigal states in her articles, to immerse the player so deeply into the game that the game world overlays everyday life, where does it end? Her Cloudmaker quotes about seeing clues for months to come and not wanting to stop are good. They show reasonable people coming to terms with a break in their new collective reality. But what about people who can’t make that disconnect with the grace and ease of a Cloudmaker?
Look at Tom Hanks’s character in “Mazes and Monsters” (1982). He couldn’t separate his D&D game from reality and went over the edge fighting rats in a sewer. So that was fiction. But check out any number of parental action groups that blame Ozzy for teenage suicide and video games for school shootings. An remember that sometime in the 1990’s (I’ve lost the date) a gunman reenacted the opening level of Duke Nukem in a Brazilian theater. Obviously, not everyone recognizes the split between different realities. So what, if anything, do we do about those players? Are there scripts written into the ARGs to kind of taper people off? Do writers expect them to just get it and move on? Or are ARGs transparent enough (or maybe the real-world environment is strong enough) to keep players grounded even while immersed in becoming an active part of the game?
It’s interesting that the previous post brought up “The Game,” as I remember talking about this film in a game theory class about it being an early adaptation of the ARG. Good to know I’m not the only one who’s seen the film. XD I wanted to bring this movie up, prior to seeing the other two posts, because I didn’t see the articles by McGonigal confronting the sociological aspects of the ARG.
What happens when someone becomes so immersed in the game that it becomes reality (the first thing that comes to mind is the World of Warcraft episode of “South Park”)? We can discuss all that we want to about the puppet master, the meta, and the framework, but in trying to convince the user that this ARG is real, what happens to their perception of reality?
I know that with a good number of ARG’s, “Lost” (the tv show with an ARG that plays in the show and online) and Halo 2 that there is a means to an end. The story tapers off into some form of a conclusion, so that gamers are not left in a disillusioned state (I can’t imagine an anime ARG, I bet that would be torture). But like “The Game” what if that ARG becomes so much apart of reality that the user can not differentiate the two? How does the user gain back control of the perception of reality outside of the game? I’m trying to not view this in a negative light, but they are important questions to think about for a narrative. What I like about “The Game” is that you are in this constant questioning of what’s reality and what’s apart of the game. Can we, convincingly, say that ARG’s are more closely related to reality then the present real world that we are living in?
Let me preface my post by saying I have never been a fan of MMORGs or any multiplayer game for that matter. I never enjoyed D&D or games where someone else, another player or “game master”, gave out instructions or a set of rules to follow. That is just my personality type, I have authority issues
As well, I have always enjoyed trying to solve problems on my own rather than in a collective setting.
Regardless of all that, I am interested in game development in general and therefore I try not to discount any genre. My biggest interest after reading these articles and Wikipedia’s entry for ARGs (which was the first I had ever heard of them as well) is simply, why? Is reality lacking that much interest to where we have to have “alternate reality”? I see some pretty serious areas of concern in the blurring of the boundaries of “gaming” and reality to any kind of extreme measure. As McGonigal points out we must consider the “potentially negative consequences” of long-term collective game-play. Are some people more trusting than others? Yes, of course. Sometimes people are ignorant and trusting enough to a jaw-dropping degree. This isn’t something that came about with the inception of ARG’s. I’m convinced that akin to everything else, gaming involves both introvert and extrovert players. Therefore, it is no surprise to me with something as powerful and fast as the internet and cell phones driving communication that “collective intelligence” moves forward at warp speed for the extroverts. It will always be debatable though whether collective intelligence equals better intelligence. In some instances perhaps it is … other times it is not. Again, the issue is not what is “better”. Balance is key here. Extremes are dangerous in many contexts.
I do not remember who said it, but one of my favorite quotes is, “Playing a game is like going swimming; if you don’t stop once in a while you get wrinkly.”
Interpretations welcome
Human behavior is such an unpredictable enigma that when it is introduced to something new and enticing it needs even further research and study of how people react socially and psychologically. Take for instance the alternate reality games such as “I Love Bees”, “The Beast” and “Big Urban Game” where players participate in the game and naturally form social communities to complete both online and offline. It is surprising how people are willing to do to be fully “immersed” in the game, maybe thay want to be in something that would distract them from the mundane or physically perform tasks that accomplishes golas and rewards in real life rather than spending hours just exercising the old controller thumbs.
The keyword is “real time” it seems to be an integral part of the immersive experience. Players experience the game as it is happening now as it involves a part of their life. I really really encourage everybody to watch THE GAME with Michael Douglas, I say this is a great example of an alternate reality game and a excellent resource for study.
The idea of collective intelligence is an interesting concept because what attracts these players are the ideas of immersion, empowerment and social interaction. The 9/11 story is perhaps an example of how one social group reacts to an event as catastrophic as this one. while others cry, write expressions of sadness on New York streets or become charitable; the Cloudmakers investigate the event as if it was some kind of puzzle. I guess it is kind of like a wounded fish in the water, sharks senses the motion in the water and they all hungrily strike at the prey in unison. The collective intelligence is kind of the same way.
Does that mean that KateModern is an alternate reality game rather than a digital narrative? I mean there is immersion, a sense of player control and a collective intelligence all in one website at bebo.com. KateModern members become involved by emailing the characters and posting comments as part of their own investigation and fans become involved in the gnome search. Watching Conspiracy Asylum does remind me of KateModern’s own style of suspense.
I never really got into alternate reality games, there were more discussions on social networks, blogs and Second Life from the classes that I have taken. It seems like an excellent research tool on social behavior and networking.
Jane McGonigal makes a good case for collective action and problem solving ability of gaming groups such as the Cloudmakers. In this article she specifically looks at the Cloudmakers response to the aftermath of 9/11 and the willing spirit of this group to try to solve the crime in finding Osama, using the same tools they used to solve the Beast. It is impressive that so many people can virtually collaborate in a digital environment on a project and produce the kind of results they achieved in solving the puzzle of the Beast.
If the social agency and empowerment could be taken several steps further, as McGonigal suggests, to make real-world differences through social and political action, what kinds of real differences could be made in the world? Could some group devise a TING that would inspire the collective action of a group to end world hunger, create world peace, or some other altruistic goal that would actually improve the world in a way that politicians seem to be incapable of or unwilling to do? It seems that it would be necessary to present and produce the project in such a way that people don’t really know what they are working toward, some key factors of the Beast, highlighted by McGonigal, were that there were “a series of digitally distributed clues and narratives that seemed to be some kind of a game, but one without clear rules, objectives or rewards.” What would it take to produce a game that would in the end actually help people in some meaningful way? Who could pull off the production of a project like this? Would it really be possible to inspire people to do good on a grand scale. Or could the collective project be internally motivated, such as the gamers “Think Tank,” dedicated to addressing “corruption and waste in U.S. federal government spending” truly produce tangible real-world results.
I would think that beehive mentality is a real concern—it reminds me of the Cyborgs of StarTrek—if the collective mind can be used for good, it could also be used for bad. What if our government or some other government began playing (from behind the curtain) these types of games? It’s a scary thought.
ARG as Remediation
Even to the casual observer, it is evident humanity’s proclivity to team-up and follow orders is a blessing and a curse. This innate tendency to organize around a set of expectations propels civilization to achievement, occasional destruction, empowerment and restriction. Hopefully, an educated populous makes wise choices, not only from self-interest, but also minimally from an ethical appreciation of the community at large. OK, we know all that, the point is people have also been joining groups and activities for fun for a long time. Include in that list rituals, festivals, parades, sports and all manner of participatory events. We can speculate that throughout time these events are always sponsored by governments, special interests and enterprises of all kinds, realizing people like to join groups, belong to groups, act in groups and that these activities sustain the group in powerful ways. There have always been “puppet masters” and there has always been at least a translucent “behind the curtain,” opaque to the extent necessary to support the desired experience. Marketing, so to speak, has also always been a part of sponsored group events, promoting ideas, group loyalty and commerce. What is new is leveraging digital technology, enabling groups to form around common tastes for entertainment across political, geographic and demographic boundaries and accomplishing this in record time with minimal investment.
The power to create strong emotional ties to virtual organizations was demonstrated by comments from the Cloudmakers following the 9/11 disaster, ARG participants from a game created to promote a movie. What is striking about this is to realize that almost anyone can now instigate a global movement from anywhere with little investment. If the narrative they create is compelling enough… “to make people believe is to make them act.” This fact must be keeping civic leaders up a night, but rather than worry about an evil genius manipulating an over-medicated and over-mediated populous, is it not our right to use the digital tools at our disposal for the “pursuit of happiness?” (I say yes it is, but let us hire some guys at DHS to watch our backs regarding the evil geniuses, and then form some citizen groups to keep an eye on them.)
Anyway, my one question for next class is about the interesting deniability element that reportedly enhances the game. Certainly solving a mystery is a big part of these games, but “the curtain” also seems to afford the sponsoring organization some legal distance. One of the instructions for pervasive play described in The Puppet Master Problem demonstrated the unpredictability inherent in these mob gatherings. Is the curtain a deliberate attempt to distance a sponsor from unintended consequences? Do the puppet master companies function as a shield against responsibility for the sponsors?
Like many in this class, I wasn’t intimately familiar with ARG’s before this class. Yes, I’d heard and read about them in passing and in the media, but most of my experience with games is tied to either old-school video games like” Mario Brothers” and “Tetris” or role playing games, of which I know even less about.
What intrigued me the most about McGonical’s article entitled “‘This is not a game…” is the idea that people really think that ARG’s aren’t games. If they aren’t games, what are they? And couldn’t someone argue that all of life is in fact a game? Is it possible that nothing is more than a simple game controlled by unknown entity? This leads to discussions and questions about faith, which I won’t get into here, but it’s in some ways hard to discuss where reality begins and ends without discussing faith as it really depends on what a person believes in.
I happen to think this idea is a bit far-fetched and that ARG’s are in fact games. They may be more like the children’s game ‘Mother May I’ but as long as some entity is providing guidance—albeit absent guidance—and people are following the instructions, albeit ‘playing the game,’ then it’s a game. This question may be impossible to answer, but I think it’s worth looking into where the quote unquote real world begins and ends as it pertains to game play. What makes a game a game?
The cinematic experience of alternate reality games and hunger in a determinate country.
Recently I acquired the soundtrack to one of my favorite films of all times, “Fellini’s 8½”, and as I listened, I couldn’t help but noticing how wonderful and surreal life appeared to be simply by embedding into my reality this music that I have long associated with a certain story and visual imagery. Everything I experienced in the following days was perceived through the lens provided by the particular frame of mind created by this music. And I cannot begin to tell you how peculiar life seemed once I got my ears into the soundtrack of Woody Allen’s “Bananas”.
This almost inconsequential paragraph with which I began is not entirely different from the accounts given by individuals devoted to alternate reality games (the word devoted is not used lightly here), although their experiences are amplified by the inclusion of a story or a mystery (to decipher) and real life tasks to perform within the frame of the fictional story. And this is the factor that I believe is essential in the success (or rise) of this kind of entertainment, by allowing people to participate directly in a fictional puzzle, by presenting them with opportunities to perform in real life, as they would if they were characters in a movie, they become more involved in the game, with the difference that they are not really playing a character other than themselves. However strange or fantastic the story is they will remain as they are (whatever they are is a whole different issue, and it informs the type of game they choose to play), that is human beings devoid of any supernatural powers, other than their brains, everyday tools, and their capacity to interact or come together with other individuals to generate solutions.
Whether or not this kind of games could be used to generate changes in a society (the kind of changes society consider as useful or beneficial) is an interesting question; let’s say for sake of the argument there’s the game of solving hunger in a determinate country, is it appropriate to consider someone else’s real suffering a game? By means of playing a game are we closing in on the gap that separates us from feeling empathy with individuals with such problems or are we adding yet another layer to distance us from the problem at hand? And ultimately, will this matter if indeed the hunger-game in the example accomplishes a real and satisfactory solution?
What a fantastic idea. Of the concepts thus far, this one really struck me as most provoking. After a going through a very intense job interview process about a year ago, I found out that I am an “X”. That is, I have strong enough personality characteristics of introvert and extrovert, that I could not be categorized as either. (which I think Professor Dave, would say, “no, the categories of introvert and extrovert are not enough”). I love the idea of being able to join in with a group and pursuing the story together, but also, being able to separate myself from the group and be freed to pursue the story by myself. It is interesting (to me) that at first I was thinking of ARG as Second Life, not as narrative that exists in both analog and digital format. It almost seems that this could be called Parallel Reality Gaming as both worlds are “cruising along” at the same pace, but only intersecting when a participant moves from one layer or reality to the parallel reality. The hive mind is part of this attraction as well. Not understanding a text would be relative to investment in the hive. I would be free to make my own interpretations, but if confused about a problem, the hive would be there to help link any strands in the narrative that are broken or weak (broken or weak relative to my comprehension). But in this instance the hive does not control the story, only the consumption. The “whispers” from the Puppet Masters, still have the control of what the narrative is, so that the meaning is never commandeered.
I wasn’t entirely sure about this subject until the research papers folded flash mobs in to the equation. I had to give it a little time to sink in. That was my ah-ha moment. I replayed the flash mob-style reports and videos I had seen, like Improv Everywhere’s Best Buy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utkkXCF8ZVc) and Frozen Grand Central (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwMj3PJDxuo). In both of these examples, I find myself entertained not necessarily by the story itself, but by outside witnesses’ reactions and observations. So it’s not the flash mob that makes me smile, it’s the effect of the flash mob.
With flash mobs, it may be easier to get involved. (If you hear about one forming and find instructions, that is.) The flash mob also seems more isolated, not part of some bigger story. From the McGonigal paper, flash mobs also appear as just one small part of a bigger ARG. McGonigal even describes a part where the players misinterpreted instructions and in turn functioned as a flash mob performing and acting out those instructions.
For me, I don’t feel like I could get hooked on ARGs. I like more stop-and-start types of stories, where I can join at my leisure. Like Eloy stated, players and join and drop at any moment. That may be true, but the experience of the game would most likely be different based on participation.
After reading the McGonigal articles, I realize that my experience with ARG’s is a little more pronounced than I had thought. My take on these sites was that they were interesting clusters of background information, providing sort of a Derridean supplement to the text. I participated (with limited involvement) in Push, Nevada, AI and also one of Michael Crichton’s books “Next”, which was more of a viral marketing effort than an actual game.
The response of the Shove group after Push jumped the shark (“It’s not over!”) is both funny and sad. The lingering effects of the game are interesting. For the most part, it could be similar to reading a long book (although it would perhaps be less interactive.) In “This is Not a Game,” the gamer guide claimed that after the endgame, one is “waking up as if from a long sleep. Your marriage or relationship maybe in tatters. Your job may be on the brink of the void, or gone completely.” This isn’t really new. Lots of people become immersed with literature and the escape provides an interesting pastime, during which all sorts of things could happen. The difference here would be real time involvement. Just as you surf the web in your work, play and so on, these games use the same everyday effects (websites, faxes, telephone conversations, etc) that are used in reality. If played by a person with a psychotic disorder, it might take a while to bring her/him back!
As a content creator, I wonder how all of the cleverness of a puppetmaster could be used for creating games involving nonfiction or some other educational devices. An example would be remediation of documentary films. If Ken Burns came up with a Civil War ARG, I’d read it. There’s no doubt that he came across thousands of documents that could not be included for purposes of length. All of that other information could entertain for months. Placing it on the web with viral marketing could increase the gameness of the game. If the information is proprietary and it has enough nodes, I could see this as another way to create nonfiction film.
Once again, technology and enterprise have outpaced the consumer. It will be interesting to see how this use of technology plays out.
Of all the examples of alternative reality games given, the only one I have tried is the one having to do with the TV series Lost, called the Lost Experience. This particular game drew me in because it seemed like a good way to uncover some of the secrets of the show. What I didn’t realize is that the game really just served as a promotional tool and little else. Sure, new facts about the show’s universe could be discovered, but these turned out to be very insignificant relative to the amount of work needed to uncover it. In the end it just wasn’t worth it, in my mind.
That isn’t to say that the game is bad or worthless. It just wasn’t for me. I did appreciate the effort to make the series seem to coincide with the real world. It blurs the line between fiction and reality, as most would say. I would say that reality is reality, but it makes fiction seem more like reality.
There are some alternative reality games, which are referred to as “happenings” or “power plays,” that I don’t claim to understand at all. For example, today at 12:30 PM, dozens of people went to the food court at NorthPark Center, used bananas as if they were cell phones, then ate the bananas. A friend of mine participated, and when questioned about it, he didn’t have any idea what the point was! Why do it, then? I don’t know. To see something out of the ordinary? If there was ever a game that you play just for the sake of playing it, this is it.
Before reading the other posts, I, too, thought of the movie “The Game” with Michael Douglas, getting immersed in a situation, thinking it is real, then finding it was only a game to make someone appreciate life more. In the “This is Not a Game” article, I was intrigued by the 9-11 discussions, and that some people found it very offensive to treat that situation as a puzzle to solve. Everyone deals with tragedy in their own way, and considering that 9-11 was on everyone’s mind at the time it occurred, I don’t see the problem with discussing it, or trying to work out why that situation happened in any means that makes people feel productive or helps them in some way to become involved and try to make sense of it all. That being said, I have to say that having checked out that game on conspiracy asylum, it didn’t really draw my interest. I guess some things depend on mood, as sometimes I am more likely to follow links on Wikipedia and become immersed in finding new information and piecing things together, but i guess for some reason, I just didn’t get it this time. I do like the idea of blurring reality and fiction and I thought of Kate Modern and how cool it would be to see that series in this type of format, where the audience really does get to try to solve the mysteries and participate on a much deeper level. Perhaps the subject matter would need to be different to catch my eye, but I sometimes find that I have a sensor that tells me when things are going to be time-consuming at moments in life when i have no time to go down that road. For this reason, I have always avoided RPG’s and this may fall into that type of category, when I might be interested, if I had the time to absorb to the cause. But I think sometime, when I have more time to spend, I might like to sink some time into an ARG, and really see what it is all about, as it seems to be a very interesting genre and one where people become obsessed with figuring things out. I hope that day comes soon!
….well…isn’t that fine and dandy. I can’t seem to find my post here.
Good thing I came back to look up a link for a friend otherwise I would have never noticed.
If I remember correctly, my post was about how the readings seem to lack acknowledging the sociological issues. It was also in response to candiluu comments about The Game. With the ARG is it moving towards a complete immersion of the user? Is there a way for a user to differentiate between the ARG and reality? What happens when the ARG becomes reality?
Argh…so mad that the post isn’t here! >_< If I can recall everything I’ll make another posting with more details. Many apologies.