IT University of Copenhagen Center for Computer Games Research Games and Metaphor – A critical analysis of the metaphor discourse in game studies Sebastian Martin Möring This dissertation is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) at IT University of Copenhagen. Candidate: Sebastian Martin Möring Dalføret 11 2300 Copenhagen S Denmark +45 50122497 [email protected] Supervisor: Espen Aarseth September 2013 2 3 Abstract This doctoral dissertation critically investigates how the concept of metaphor is used with regard to games in game studies. The goal is to provide the field with a self-understanding of its metaphor discourse which has not been researched so far. The thesis departs from the observation that the notion of metaphor has been present in the discourse of game studies since it emerged as an academic field and focuses on questions such as: What are the motivations and effects of calling games metaphors in the game studies discourse? Which problems arise from that with regard to other established concepts in game studies such as simulation and procedural rhetoric? How do concepts and insights of contemporary metaphor theory affect the applicability of the notion of metaphor with regard to games? Drawing on concepts from metaphor theory (in particular the cognitive linguistic view on metaphor), play and game theory, cultural theory, semiotics, linguistics, philosophy, and game studies it investigates the metaphor discourse of game studies in the fashion of a meta-study. The main part of this thesis is devoted to three particular problems which have been derived from observations in the overview of the current use of the notion of metaphor in game studies. Firstly, this thesis investigates is the conceptual relationship between the notions of metaphor, representation, and play. It therefore accounts for observations such that all three notions are present in non-computer game and play theory, theory of representation and art which all influenced game studies and argues for an equiprimordial relation between these three concepts. Secondly, this thesis deals with what is termed the metaphor-simulation dilemma which accounts for the observation that in game studies the notion of metaphor is very often used in close conceptual proximity with the concept of simulation to the extent that they become conceptually indistinguishable. The two notions are reconciled through the notion of the model and a case study will demonstrate that it is possible to think of simulations as based on metaphorically structured models. Thirdly, thesis deals with the observation that the concept of metaphor is referred to in game studies in particular when games are interpreted in terms of some existential topic. Usually addressed from the perspective of (procedural) game rhetoric games are called metaphors for struggle, life, death, love. On the basis of a criticism of procedural rhetoric this thesis will suggest a distinction between a textual hermeneutic and an existential hermeneutic of games in which the latter is primary. It suggests furthermore that metaphoric interpretation of games is usually a sort of text interpretation. This supports the argument of a general de-metaphorization of alleged metaphoric computer games. 4 5 Acknowledgements Without question, the most enjoyable part to write in this doctoral thesis is the acknowledgements section, as this is the place to account for all people who have influenced and supported this work in one way or another. It is also the place to reflect on the long journey I have embarked on since I attended my first lecture at an academic institution in 2003. And, clearly, it is the place to say "thank you" to people who have been academically and personally important to me. Keen as I am, I am trying a completionist approach and I know I can only fail. Those names which shall remain missing are still in mind – just, perhaps, not in the moment of writing this piece. I first would like to thank my academic mentors, without whose criticism, support and encouragement I might have already taken an exit from the academic highway. These are my Bachelor’s supervisors Mathias Rothe and Peter Rosenberg at the European University Viadrina Frankfurt (Oder). I have learned a good amount of my studying skills and interests from you. The persons who got me interested in the study of computer games and who took the first steps with me are my Master’s supervisors Stephan Günzel and Heiko Christians at the University of Potsdam), and my former colleague at the Digital Games Research Center in Potsdam (DIGAREC), Michael Liebe. Your influence on this thesis can only be estimated in retrospect: it appears huge. I sincerely wish to thank my supervisor, Espen Aarseth, at the Center for Computer Games Research at the IT University of Copenhagen for your criticism, your encouragement and particularly for the time you took to listen. I wish to thank my office mates at the IT University over the years – Héctor Pérez Martìnez, Corrado Grappiolo, and Florian Berger – for their wit, their ears, and their thoughts. You have become way more than colleagues to me. In particular I want to mention Daniel Vella, who generously proof-read most of my work, including this thesis, and who has become an invaluable intellectual partner, office mate and friend. I wish to thank my former, current, and temporary colleagues at the Center for Computer Games Research for the open and productive atmosphere which materialized in spontaneous and engaged discussions on often not even half-baked ideas which could only evolve thanks to that: Mark Nelson, Miguel Sicart, Douglas Wilson, Alessandro Canossa, Gordon Calleja, Emma Witkowski, Isaac Lenhart, Hans-Joachim Backe, Paolo Burelli, Tobias Mahlmann, Yun-Gyung Cheong, Noor Shaker, Vehli-Matti Karhulathi, William Robinson, Julian Togelius, Georgios Yannakakis, Rilla Khaled, Pippin Barr, Christopher Holmgård, Rune Nielsen, Antonios Liapis, T.L. Taylor. A special "thank you" goes to Jason Begy (Concordia University Montreal) for our ongoing e-mail conversations on the topic of metaphor and games, and for your never-ending commitment to the discussion. Another special "thank you" goes to my academic brother, Olli Leino, and Hanna Wirman. You made my research stay abroad at the School of Creative Media at the City University of Hong Kong so much more than just a research stay. I wish to thank all the participants of the Ludotopia workshops in 2010 in Copenhagen and in 2011 in Manchester, for being a really inspiring group of academically interested and very capable people from whom I luckily can still learn so much: Niklas Schrape, Souvik 6 Mukherjee, Sebastian Domsch, Matthias Fuchs, Alison Gazzard, Bjarke Liboriussen, Michael Nitsche, Karla Höß, Paul Martin, Stephan Schwingeler. I wish to thank all other conference and workshop participants, reviewers, and opponents who have engaged in one way or another with my work over the last three years and provided useful comments and constructive feedback. An academic life is worth little without a strong personal backbone: friends. Thank you Ulli, Andreas (Ernst), Caro, Ken, Jessica, Ivo, Pia, Karla, Maggi, Helene, Sebastian, Valentina, Lea, Nele, Marcin, Daniel, Rune, Shamik, Arun, Ines, Marie, Henrike. Not all of you were always physically present (and neither was I) but you were always there when I needed you. Clearly, I also thank my family: most of all my grandparents, my brother and his mother. Particularly I want to thank my mother and my father. You have given me the chance to choose the direction of my life freely, a choice you did not really have. You supported my way with all trust in my abilities and all possible commitment. This work is dedicated to you. A final and very personal "thank you" goes to Lisa, a very important academic and emotional companion over the last seven years for your unconditional generosity to give. 7 Content Chapter 1 - Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................ 13 1 The metaphor discourse of game studies ...................................................................................... 13 1.1 Literature review ............................................................................................................................ 21 1.2 Game ontology – Metaphor between semiotics and mechanics ............................................ 23 1.2.1 Games are always somehow metaphoric ................................................................................ 24 1.2.2 Some aspects make games metaphoric ................................................................................... 26 1.3 Game interfaces as metaphors ..................................................................................................... 33 1.4 Game meaning – Rhetoric and hermeneutics ........................................................................... 40 1.4.1 Internal game rhetoric ............................................................................................................... 42 1.4.2 External game rhetoric .............................................................................................................. 45 1.5 Metaphoric game experience ....................................................................................................... 51 1.6 Game language and discourse.....................................................................................................