Encoding Through Procedure: Unexpected Meaning in Serious Game Design William Robinson A Thesis in the Humanities Program Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Humanities) at Concordia University Montreal, Quebec, Canada June 2018 © William Robinson, 2018 CONCORDIA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES This is to certify that the thesis prepared By: William Robinson Entitled: Encoding Through Procedure: Unexpected Meaning in Serious Game Design and submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor Of Philosophy (Humanities) complies with the regulations of the University and meets the accepted standards with respect to originality and quality. Signed by the final examining committee: Chair Dr. Marc Steinberg External Examiner Dr. Cindy Poremba External to Program Dr. David Waddington Examiner Dr. Bart Simon Examiner Dr. Mia Consalvo Thesis Supervisor Dr. Darren Wershler Approved by Dr. Erin Manning, Graduate Program Director Friday, July 6, 2018 Dr. André Roy, Dean Faculty of Arts & Science Abstract Encoding Through Procedure: Unexpected Meaning in Serious Game Design William Robinson, PhD Concordia University, 2018 Encoding Through Procedure explores the creation and transmission of ideas through game design. I argue that rules have an agency that complicates current models of procedural rhetoric. In Chapter 1, drawing from Stuart Hall’s Encoding/Decoding model, I prepare a methodological foundation to demonstrate the unique possibilities and difficulties that game rules offer as a communicative medium. Using Kim Sawchuck and Owen Chapman’s work on research- creation, I deploy a game-design-based method of research. The last step explores Bruno Latour’s Actor Network-Theory both as a method of design and critique. In Chapter 2, I present a literature review of serious games and gamification. Here the field produces avenues for exploration, given the inconsistent positions it holds on serious games. In addressing these, I argue for the benefits of distinguishing gamification from serious games. Chapter 3 explores an additional set of literature interested in emergence and algorithmic representation. The argument here focuses on a lacuna in the field’s conception of procedural rhetoric. I agree with pre-existing literature, that emergent results can lead to convincing arguments. That said, there is no method to date for considering how designers might produce a work which reliably creates emergent results. Instead, I argue the field focuses on post-hoc readings of games successfully communicating authorial ideas. In Chapter 4, to address these concerns, I present my own design practices. I offer three examples of serious games I completed during my doctoral work. These demonstrate the various forces which alter the process of communicating across games. Each provides distinctly moments of my own practice conflicting with the agency of my games’ rules. iii Acknowledgements Thank you to Dr. Darren Wershler for introducing me to new and productive ways of thinking. Thank you doubly for helping me through the most difficult ideas I have ever encountered. Thank you to Dr. Mia Consalvo for fostering a caring community at the local and international level and welcoming me into it. Thank you to Dr. Bart Simon. Since my starting my master’s in 2010, you have been my mentor, confidant, strategist, role model and friend. Thank you to my parents, who gave me both the privilege and the idea to work on what I love. I dedicate this work to my partner, Sydney Warshaw. iv Contents 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1 2 Methodology – Encoding/Decoding & Research-Creation .................................................... 7 2.1 Stuart Hall’s Encoding/ Decoding Model ........................................................................ 9 2.1.1 Encoding – Tools for De-naturalizing .................................................................... 10 2.1.2 Decoding – Tools for Thinking About Resistance ................................................. 13 2.1.3 Adapting Hall’s Method to Games ......................................................................... 16 2.2 Chapman & Sawchuk on Research-Creation ................................................................. 24 2.2.1 Creation for Prototyping ......................................................................................... 28 2.3 Bruno Latour’s Actor-Network Theory ......................................................................... 30 2.3.1 Designing Through Actor-Network-Theory ........................................................... 33 2.3.2 Latour and Woolgar’s Laboratory Life ................................................................... 36 2.3.3 ANT Turns unto Itself ............................................................................................. 39 2.4 Gamification ................................................................................................................... 41 2.4.1 Example of Gamification ........................................................................................ 44 2.4.2 Critiques of Gamification ....................................................................................... 45 2.5 Serious Games ................................................................................................................ 51 2.5.1 Simulations and Games........................................................................................... 53 2.5.2 Procedurality and Communication ......................................................................... 58 2.5.3 Critiques of Serious Games .................................................................................... 61 2.6 On Differentiating Serious Games and Gamification .................................................... 64 2.6.1 Serious Games as Platform Agnostic ...................................................................... 69 2.6.2 Meta-Games as Gamified Games ........................................................................... 73 2.6.3 Examples of Gamified Learning ............................................................................. 76 3 Theoretical Analysis – Emergence and the Agency of Rules ............................................... 85 3.1 Emergence Explored ...................................................................................................... 86 3.1.1 Auteurs and Emergence .......................................................................................... 89 3.1.2 The Untested and Unrepresentative ........................................................................ 92 3.2 Simulation as Metaphor? Tetris ..................................................................................... 97 3.2.1 Metaphors in Game Studies Literature ................................................................. 101 3.2.2 The Witness .......................................................................................................... 107 v 3.2.3 Monarch ................................................................................................................ 110 3.3 From Rules to Meaning: MDA .................................................................................... 121 4 Research Creation Projects ................................................................................................. 126 4.1 Gets it Better: Poor, Ugly, Gay, Stupid, Sick ............................................................... 129 4.1.1 An Exploration of Procedural Betrayal ................................................................. 132 4.1.2 The Problems of Irrational Players and Game Literacy ........................................ 137 4.2 Cabinet Shuffle ............................................................................................................. 144 4.2.1 Easily Distributed, Quick to Play, and Professional in Appearance ..................... 145 4.2.2 Politics of Process and When Games Say Too Much ........................................... 147 4.2.3 Replayability, A Design Error .............................................................................. 152 4.2.4 Lessons from Cabinet Shuffle ............................................................................... 155 4.3 The Amalgamated ........................................................................................................ 156 4.3.1 A Networked History ............................................................................................ 157 4.3.2 The Difficulties in Designing Computationally Enabled Gestalts ........................ 158 4.3.3 Modeling a History ............................................................................................... 159 4.3.4 When Games Get Too Complicated ..................................................................... 161 4.3.5 Gameplay Arc and the Golden Path...................................................................... 163 5 Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 166 5.1 Contributions ................................................................................................................ 166 5.1.1 Emergent systems are exponentially more difficult to plot as with each added variable. 167 5.1.2 There is no standard for a “dominant playing”