All Work and Play - Game Invaders: The Theory and Understanding of Computer Games - page 158

THE WORK OF MEANING
We are so used to reading topics and magazines that we usually do not give any
thought to the kind of effort we have to expend to make the process of signifi cation
possible. In reading a novel we have to scan the lines of text left to right and top to
bottom and then move to the page on the right or turn the page and repeat this
process. All this just to uncover the presence of signifi ers (symbols in this case) that
we still have to construct signifi cations for. The scanning of pages would of course
be different if we were reading in Arabic or Chinese, for instance, but the process
of meaning making would be very much the same and the lack of conscious attention
given to the work of reading just the same. Of course, this is only the beginning of
the meaning-making process that constitutes reading a novel.
For some types of communication media this work is more important than in
others. Some media such as feature fi lms do not appear to require any more work
than the exercise of concentration. However, we have to decode fi lms just as we do
any other text and we are able to do so because we have become adept at recogniz-
ing and interpreting the codes around which fi lms are constructed. The Hollywood
feature fi lm is at once so highly stylized and yet so embedded in our cultural
experience—if you are a westerner, that is—that it is easy to think that we are being
presented with something natural, a simulation of reality even. In this sense the
Hollywood style of fi lmic storytelling is a myth; something so seemingly natural we
do not question it. Yet there are many other fi lm traditions around the world which
seem equally natural to their intended audiences; Bollywood is a good example. The
apparent naturalness of the various fi lmic traditions of the world—for their intended
audiences—mask the amount of work people have to do to make a coherent set of
meanings, a story, out of them. Even in watching a fi lm we are working; we are
doing the work of meaning. Watching Memento , for instance, requires considerable
effort if you are to make sense of it.
In playing computer games we appear to be doing a lot more work. What is the
work of Pac-Man for instance? In the fi rst instance, when the game starts, I assess
where Pac-Man is and where the ghosts are. At this stage the ghosts will be few and
far away. There are various directions I can send Pac-Man in to get him started
eating; lines of food are the initial attractors. I choose one and form an intention to
get Pac-Man to move off down a corridor. The perceivable consequence is that Pac-
Man does as he is told. The reward is that he starts to accumulate points. I might
form the intention to direct Pac-Man to one of the four food items that signify a
power-up. I might have to form an alternative intention to avoid the ghosts that are
approaching, to make sure that I do not get Pac-Man into a situation where he will
be trapped and lose a life. My intentions must be fl exible. I have to be very careful
where I send Pac-Man.
I have skipped over something here! I've mentioned attractors and rewards,
intentions and perceivable consequences, but these all make up signs— how, we ' ll
see in a few pages time—the game engine offers me to interpret. I've glossed over
the fact of my being able to “send Pac-Man off” in various directions. I have not
talked about this or how our theories might help explain what is going on here.