Or Torrill Mortensen's thesis (all 410 pages here) describing the MUD, Dragon RealmsDrMortensen's critical focus is as much on player understandings of the play experience as it is an attempt to understand the game "authorship" of the adminsThe best way to put the assertion (and this is all it is at this point; and again, please keep in mind that there are a number of familiar exceptions) is that the practice of game software development generates a way of seeing and defining problems (as essentially precise, logical, and algorithmic), and creating solutions (through linear, text-defined code) that makes other ways of accounting for what happens in VWs seem at worst nonsensical and at best irrelevant or quixotic.  

They looked friendly enough--at least, no one had fruit ready to throw at usIt was simply kind of surreal, after reading the comments on TN this past week and hearing other things at the conference about the problems with game studies and developer/academic relations

After our "high energy" presentation, the questions were even strangerSomeone asked why humanities research got left out, and we had to say that we couldn't find it to be directly relevant on our top 10 list of bulleted pointsIan made the point, and I agreed, that doing the research for this panel made us think differently about academic researchWhile I'm not going to say that what we've done personally has no value, it was a definite challenge to try and make it *directly relevant* in a BULLETED POINT for developersAnd there are huge gaps in what we don't knowWhere is the research about sports games, to take just one example? Anyway, the point is, I enjoyed the exercise, and learned a lot from itI hope the audience did as well

But overall, I like to think that the attendance demonstrates that developers are interested in what academics might be able to tell them (again I will point out: no fruit was thrown)And all week, I talked with developers who were interested in what was going on with research, from the smallest to the largest companiesMaybe the issue is the "larger" communityIt's always easy to abstract and oversimplify at that levelBut I know that on an individual level, there are real conversations and collaborations going onI don't want this to turn into some rosy "it's better than we think" or "can't we all just get along" thing, but I do think that perhaps the situation is not as dire as it's hyped to beBut then again, I haven't gotte my evals back yet.No doubt Cheap SWG Creditsis the best choice, for spending less gain moreTrust the effect of us as well as to show you excellent feelingBuy SWG Creditskeep you wellIn this case a TreeMapWe have huge quantity of SWG Creditsfor sale!

Here is just one quick example of this kind of disposition in action: Billmonk, which Constance posted about hereThe site promises to help you keep track of your obligations throughout your social network precisely (using any of a number of imaginable currencies)It is double-entry bookeeping for your friendships, and thereby prompts you to conceive of these obligations in exact termsThis is a perfect example of a code-based solution to a code-defined problem: People's moral obligations are essentially precise and monetary, and they therefore need a precise tool to manage them(And this approach is not just applied externally; within software companies one frequently sees similar efforts to address organizational issues with precise and enumerated systems that can be, above all, measured.) Heather Kelly, one of the developers on a panel on Monday asked a great question about game development that she hoped researchers could help answer: Why does money trump everything? The answer lies in the remarkably good 'fit' between the market and code, and in the existence of a lot of well-trained people who can find ways to exploit it.

This is why the concept of the auteur can be a good fit for the design of virtual worlds, but a bad fit for the interpretation and theorization of virtual worlds once they go liveI think it's also why the Social Software All-Stars find virtual worlds much more interesting than standard video gamesVirtual worlds have art, story, and game-play -- so the IF/New Media theorists and game critics have a lot to contribute to understanding virtual worldsBut they are digtial societies as well, which is very novel (well, at least *as* novel as MUDs have always been)We don't usually think of society as a form of art, but perhaps, in this case, we need toThe game code level is very important to understanding Combat, in Nick's opinion, because it reveals the design constraints under which the authors operatedBut in MMORPGs and MUDs, I think the reception level is probably more important--and perhaps it is a mistake to even think about what players do in MUDs or MUSHes as "reception" And I don't think this is much of a new or radical idea: take Liz Klastrup's suggestion of a Poetics of Virtual Worlds, which focuses not upon unearthing a designer's authorial intent but upon understanding player narratives of experience.