Games as Texts

A Practical Application of Textual Analysis to Games

Alayna Cole, Dakoda Barker

• Publisher: CRC Press
• Year: 2020
• Topic: Literature
• eBook ISBN:
  9781000329735
• Subtopic: Computer Science General
• Index: Literature

Games as Texts provides an overview and practical steps for analysing games in terms of their representations of social structures, class, power, race, sexuality, gender, animals, nature, and ability. Each chapter applies a traditional literary theory to the narrative and mechanics of games and explores the social commentary the games encourage. This approach demonstrates to players, researchers, games media, and non-gamers how they can engage with these cultural artefacts through both critical reading and theoretical interpretations.

Key Features:

• Explores games through various literary and theoretical lenses
• Provides exemplar analysis and guiding questions to help readers think critically about games
• Highlights the social commentary that all texts can reveal—including games—and how this impacts narrative and mechanics

CHAPTER 1

Games and Universal Truths

Liberal humanism is interested in the foundations of a medium, and the foundations of the human story. This theory—or meta-theory—is the basis for all critical analysis of texts. It encourages us to see how all texts have the power to reveal universal human truths (Barry 2009: 17–18). By examining modern texts through this lens, their content can be distilled to reveal the similar themes of the human condition that have always influenced our stories.

Studies suggest that, despite being dressed up in different ways, there are only a small number of plots that are repeated over and over across different mediums of storytelling. There have been many hand-coded and—more recently—computer-coded attempts to trace the similarities between the ‘shapes’ of plots. Hand-coded attempts have found three (Foster-Harris 1959), seven (Booker 2004), twenty (Tobias 1993), or thirty-six (Polti 1895) common plots. Reagan et al. (2016) completed a thorough computer analysis and found six main emotional arcs and connected these back to oral histories and early folk stories.

No matter the number of similar plots, the important point is that commonalities exist between the stories we tell now and have told throughout history. Although games differ from traditional linear narratives in many ways, liberal humanism suggests that humans have prioritised the same essential ideas throughout history and that these commonalities are more important than the innovations of a medium or of a particular text within that medium (Barry 2009: 17–18).

Liberal humanism invites us to look at commonalities between texts and between people. In doing so, this allows us to remember that we are all human and, despite variations in the specifics of our experiences, we all have the capacity to feel empathy for the fundamental truths underpinning the lives of others. Many of the literary theories we are exploring in this book focus on the differences between social groups and the way that the representations of those identities within texts can reflect reality; these theories are a rebellion against the liberal humanist idea that everybody experiences the world in the same way.

However, in our approach to liberal humanism, we suggest that this theory is not claiming that human beings and their experiences are homogenous but, instead, that focusing on similarities is more important than focusing on differences. This includes the similarities between texts and the ways that they elicit emotion from an audience. For literature, this typically refers to poetic devices. Poetic devices are simply the techniques used by an author to create meaning; you have probably heard of some more common poetic devices like metaphors, similes, personification, alliteration, and so on.

Language can be used to ‘enact’ what it depicts by taking advantage of the connection between form and meaning (Barry 2009: 19). In literature, this refers to the way that the poetic devices within a text can help to create the meaning of that text. This approach to textual analysis sits parallel to the concept of ‘ludonarrative harmony’ in game studies, whereby designers try to develop a strong connection between the narrative (meaning) of a game and the mechanics (form) through which that narrative is told (Pynenberg 2012).

Liberal humanism is interested in the ways that language (and mechanics) can enact meaning. As a result, this theoretical approach values the way that a text is ‘showing and demonstrating’ ideas rather than ‘explaining or saying’ them (Barry 2017: 19). Many writers have heard this put more simply: ‘show, don’t tell’. In game design, this idiom is taken one step further and designers are told, ‘do, don’t show’. This approach to design suggests that, where possible, players should be able to interact with a text—or ‘do’—rather than be shown content by the designer in the form of cutscenes, dialogue sequences, and so on. Player agency—or the ability for a player to ‘do’—is valued by many developers, and this agency allows players to be the cause within ‘the cause-and-effect process that drives a narrative arc’ (Cole 2018a).

Viewing game systems through the lens of liberal humanism encourages us to see how the player’s actions and interactions are inextricably linked to the messages that a game conveys, in the same way that poetic devices and content are connected in traditional linear narratives. Liberal humanism asks us to look at games through the eyes of the individual interacting with them and, more than that, through the greater human experience and the ‘universal truths’ presented by them (Barry 2009: 17–18).

Archetypes and the Monomyth

Archetypes in literature are recurring symbols, characters, and ideas that occur throughout the history of human storytelling. Liberal humanism focuses on connecting modern texts to the archetypes established in foundational stories, thereby situating all texts within the same continuum of storytelling. Thus, having an understanding of different archetypes and being able to identify them in modern texts is an integral aspect of liberal humanist analysis—and remains an important tool when performing all forms of textual analysis.

One of the most well-known archetypal plot structures is the ‘monomyth’ or ‘hero’s journey’. In his 1949 book The Hero with a Thousand Faces, Joseph Campbell defines the monomyth as a seventeen-stage journey. In short, the monomyth describes a hero’s call to adventure, the trials they face on their journey, and their return to their normal life as a changed person. Campbell codified this ur-narrative structure after tracing similarities across mythological stories from around the world. Although the monomyth concerns itself only with early foundational narratives, the structure continues to influence or materialise in modern stories—intentionally and otherwise.

The monomyth is not the only structure by which we can design a game narrative, but those who recommend this story arc praise its ‘simplicity’ (Dunniway 2000). By scaffolding a game using a narrative structure that everybody is familiar with—either explicitly or implicitly—games can spend ‘less time explaining’ and move into action quicker (Dunniway 2000). The aptly named Journey (Thatgamecompany 2020) was explicitly designed with this in mind (Chen, in Ohannessian 2012). The game relies on the monomyth to guide the player, giving them no explicit instructions about their purpose for traversing the landscape. The landscape itself—more specifically, its topography—mirrors the rise and fall of the hero’s journey as it appears when it is drawn as a diagram of rising and falling tension (Figures 1.1 and 1.2).

FIGURE 1.1 A visual depiction of the different stages in the hero’s journey (Sundberg 2013).

FIGURE 1.2 The player reaches the climax of Journey after climbing both a literal and metaphorical mountain (Edwards 2013).

One of the reasons Journey is so effective is that the player-character receives guidance from an ally. This ally comes in the form of another player who can only communicate with you using body language and short musical sounds. They can choose to guide you through your adventure, showing you the path and extra secrets along the way. An ‘ally’ is one of several recurring characters within the monomyth narrative structure. Vogler (1998) interpreted the monomyth to define eight character archetypes: hero, mentor, threshold guardian, herald, shapeshifter, shadow, ally, and trickster. Each of these can be found in games, and can be used to guide an analysis through a liberal humanist lens.

For example, early games in the Pokémon series (Game Freak 2019) follow this archetypal model closely. In Red and Blue (1998), the player-character is the ‘hero’, and they are given the task of adventuring through Kanto to collect Pokémon and eventually defeat the Champion. The task is given by Professor Oak, the ‘herald’, who also acts as an ongoing ‘mentor’ for the adventure. Oak’s grandson is the player-character’s rival and appears intermittently throughout the game, first as an ‘ally’, but also as a ‘shapeshifter’ as he reveals himself to be the Champion that the player ultimately has to defeat to win the game. Along the journey, the player-character must gain gym badges from gym leaders—the ‘threshold guardians’—and must also defeat members of Team Rocket, who act as the narrative’s ‘shadow’.

More than a decade later, the Pokémon series is still releasing games featuring characters that map to many of the same archetypes, but that also surprise the player by subverting the established archetypes in unexpected ways. In Sword and Shield (2019), the game still features a professor, but her granddaughter better maps to the ‘mentor’ archetype throughout the story and becomes a professor at the end of her story arc. This game still has a ‘team’ of apparent antagonists (this time it’s Team Yell), but it turns out they aren’t trying to steal Pokémon; their goal is to enthusiastically cheer for one of the other gym challengers and prevent you from stealing her spotlight. Chairman Rose seems like an ‘ally’ for most of the story, but he is actually a ‘shapeshifter’ who turns out to be the villain, and his minions are the real ‘shadow’ of the story.

Pokémon demonstrates a way that many modern stories are inspired by narrative structures and archetypal characters but don’t necessarily use every single archetype from a particular model. The series also shows how archetypes can be deliberately subverted, combined, or otherwise modified. By using techniques such as conflating archetypes (so that one character plays multiple roles) or switching archetypes (so that a character you expect to be one archetype turns out to be another), the Pokémon series is able to follow a familiar and comfortable formula, while making each story fresh and interesting to a return player.

Familiar Faces in Unfamiliar Places

Analysing Mass Effect through a Liberal Humanist Lens

Mass Effect (BioWare 2007) uses familiar archetypal characters to allow the player to better connect with a narrative set in unfamiliar galaxies. This analysis will identify the ‘hero’, ‘mentor’, ‘shadow’, and ‘threshold guardian’ in the story—based on the model developed by Vogler (1998)—as well as explore the purpose of these archetypes within the text.

The hero of Mass Effect is Shepard, the player-character and protagonist. Shepard is the first human ‘Spectre’, who are agents given power to maintain stability throughout the galaxy however they deem necessary. By being the first of their species to be granted this power, Shepard becomes a type of ‘Chosen One’, as is typical of a character adhering to the hero archetype.

Shepard can have a range of backgrounds based on player choice; however, many of these allow Shepard to adhere to the stereotypical heroic trajectory regardless of the customisation option that the player selects. Shepard may have been the sole survivor of an attack, an orphan raised on the streets, a brave war hero, or a refugee from a destroyed colony; regardless of the origin story that the player chooses, Shepard is established as a character who has faced adversity and risen above it.

As the hero, the archetypes of other characters are defined through their relationships with Shepard. Captain David Anderson plays the role of ‘mentor’ to Shepard, and originally was supposed to play the role of Chosen One—the first human Spectre—before being sabotaged and is instead preparing Shepard for the job. Anderson acts as an unwavering supporter of Shepard throughout the game, risking both his career and his life to assist Shepard in their heroic quest. The relationship between Shepard and Anderson is deliberately unambiguous to contrast with the unfamiliar aspects of the setting and institutions—including the Spectres—that the audience needs to understand. This allows the audience to learn about the universe in which Mass Effect is set without also immediately being challenged by complicated relationships between characters.

Although supporting Shepard in all aspects of their role as a Spectre, Anderson particularly puts himself at risk to assist them in their pursuit of the narrative’s ‘shadow’. The ‘shadow’ role is occupied by two characters—Saren, who is considered a villain from the beginning of the game, and Sovereign, who the player discovers has been influencing Saren to assist with their own mission to eradicate all life in the galaxy.

Both Saren and Sovereign can be considered a ‘shadow’ to Shepard; however, each serve a different purpose for the audience. Saren is a tangible individual—a straightforward face of the narrative’s antagonist that Shepard (and therefore the player) can pursue. Saren is responsible for the betrayal that sabotaged Anderson’s attempt to become the first human Spectre, and so the player can easily and unquestioningly be positioned in opposition to Saren from the beginning of the game. He is also established as a foil to Shepard, as the two of them are the only individuals known to have interacted with an ancient and advanced piece of technology called the ‘Prothean Beacon’ without being killed or losing their sanity.

The tangibility of ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half-Title
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• CHAPTER 1 Games and Universal Truths
• CHAPTER 2 Games and Structure
• CHAPTER 3 Games and Class
• CHAPTER 4 Games and Women
• CHAPTER 5 Games and Queerness
• CHAPTER 6 Games and Race
• CHAPTER 7 Games and Chronic Health Conditions
• CHAPTER 8 Games and the Environment
• INTERSECTIONALITY
• GAMES CITED
• REFERENCES
• INDEX