Ludo-narrativism as Bogost’s proceduralism in the light of the ludology-narratology debate

Marcin Petrowicz

doi:10.18778/2391-8551.1.09

Autor

Marcin Petrowicz Uniwersytet Jagielloński

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/2391-8551.1.09

Słowa kluczowe:

ludology vs narratology debate, Ian Bogost , proceduralism

Abstrakt

The ludology-narratology dispute has been dismissed and neglected by many researchers. Theorists on both sides of the conflict created theories assimilating the concepts of their opponents. However, in my opinion, Ian Bogost — a scientist not involved in the dispute — has the most interesting solution to the problem. Bogost’s basic concepts — unit operations comparative criticism and procedural rhetoric theory – combine interpretations of game rules with those of narratives. The achievements of Bogost seem less known and appreciated in the Polish game studies. In this article, I will present the basic theories from Bogost’s main books: Unit Operations: An Approach to Videogame Criticism and Persuasive Games: The Expressive Power of Videogames in the context of ludology versus narratology debate.

Biogram autora

Marcin Petrowicz - Uniwersytet Jagielloński

mgr Marcin Petrowicz — doktorant w Instytucie Sztuk Audiowizualnych Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, przewodniczący krakowskiego Koła Polskiego Towarzystwa Badania Gier, naukowo zajmuje się grami – nie tylko komputerowymi, przede wszystkim w zakresie projektowania reguł i mechaniki.

Bibliografia

Aarseth, Espen, 2001, Computer Game Studies, Year One, „Game Studies” http://www.gamestudies.org/0101/editorial.html

Aarseth, Espen, 2010, Badanie zabawy: metodologia analizy gier, przeł. M. Filiciak, [w:] Filiciak Mirosław (red.) Światy z pikseli. Antologia studiów nad grami komputerowymi, Warszawa: Wydawnictwo SWPS Academica.

Bogost, Ian, 2006, Unit operations. An approach to videogame criticism, Cambridge: MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6997.001.0001

Bogost, Ian, 2007, Persuasive Games. The Expressive Power of Videogames, Cambridge: MIT Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/5334.001.0001

Eskelinen, Markku, 2001, The Gaming Situation, „Game Studies” http://www.gamestudies.org/0101/eskelinen/

Frasca, Gonzalo, 1999, Ludology meet Narratology: Similitude and differences between (video) games and narrative, http://www.ludology.org/articles/ludology.htm.

Frasca, Gonzalo, 2003, Ludologist love stories too, Digital Games Research Conference 2003 Proceedings, http://www.ludology.org/articles/frasca_levelUp2003.pdf

Juul, Jesper, 2008, Co potrafią, a czego nie potrafią gry komputerowe, przeł. Piotr Wojcieszuk, “Wiedza i Edukacja”,

Juul, Jesper, 2001, Games Telling stories? – A brief note on games and narratives, „Game Studies”, http://www.gamestudies.org/0101/juul-gts/

Manovich, Lev, 2006, Język nowych mediów, przeł. P. Cypryański, Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Akademickie i Profesjonalne.

Murray, Janet, 1998, Hamlet on the Holodeck: The Future of Narrative in Cyberspace, Cambridge: MIT Press.

Pearce, Celia, 2003, Towards a Game Theory of Games, [w:] Pat Harrigan i Noah Wardrip-Fruin (red.), First Person. New Media as Story, Performance, and Game, Cambridge: MIT Press.

Pearce, Celia, 2005, Theory Wars: An Argument Against Arguments in the so-called Ludology/Narratology Debate, http://lmc.gatech.edu/~cpearce3/PearcePubs/PearceDiGRA05.pdf

Ryan, Marie-Laure, 2001, Beyond Myth and Metaphor* — The Case of Narrative in Digital Media, „Game Studies”, http://www.gamestudies.org/0101/ryan/

Sicart, Miguel, 2011, Against Procedurality, „Game Studies”, http://gamestudies.org/1103/articles/sicart_ap.

Aleksiej Pażytnow, 1989, Tetris [GameBoy], USA: Nintendo.

Maxis, 2000, The Sims [PC], USA: Electronic Arts.

Maxis, 2001, The Sims: Hot Date [PC], USA: Electronic Arts.

Nintendo, 1985, Super Mario Bros [NES], USA: Nintendo.