On the Relevance of Video Gaming in Human & Social Sciences – Interview with Sébastien Genvo, game design expert
Sébastien Genvo: Over the course of our talks, I had emphasized to him the need to place the interface at the heart of the game so as to satisfy the player’s objectives without mimicking reality. And David heeded my advice. If an interface can be replaced with a mouse or a keyboard, then it is not indispensable. For instance, you cannot play Dance Dance Revolution without the interactive dance platform; otherwise, the game would lose all interest. However, should you play Doom using a keyboard and mouse, the game will be even more enjoyable than with a gun. Here’s the real question: What is the true identity of the tangible interface within a project, and what makes it into a mechanism of the game?” I think David Arenou had this pretty well under control. He understood that to make an interesting game, he had to pay particular attention to the player’s movements in response to everyday surroundings not as objects, but as toys.
He invested much thought on the role that immersion plays in a game, and as such, I warned him that if his plan targeted only a technological demo level, it was likely to fall short. Indeed, a tangible interface must be viewed as essential to the whole system.
On another note, I was pleased to see that theory could blend in with practice and design issues. After all, the article I had written on tangible interfaces was fundamental research whose aim was to trace a retrospective opinion on the history of video games based on the success and failure of certain interfaces. But I had never imagined it within the scope of design. I want my research to encompass more than just design requirements because this enables me to address social and cultural issues, and raise long-term questions while more accurately measuring my research’s potential impact. I am happy to see my research efforts echo throughout David’s project, and all the more so given the recognition that his project has received.
Thierry Lehmann: This project is not centered on technological performance, but rather on usage.
Sébastien Genvo: Exactly. The relevance of a game should not be based on technological performance, as currently exhibited by Sony and Microsoft as they boast applications equipped with more sensors than the Wii and the use of three-dimensional motion in their games, but rather in terms of playability. The arguments are convincing, but so are the chances of ultimately obsolete programs.
Thierry Lehmann: Beyond mere esthetics, how can design contribute to the gaming community?
Sébastien Genvo: When video games first came to life, the term, game design (design applied to video games), was inexistent. Most of the time, programmers designed games, but were not allowed to take credit for them. They were not viewed as creative professionals.
The value add of design on a purely esthetic level was quickly identified, but it took a while before design became recognized as a usage-oriented discipline. This sparked much controversy. In one of the first books published in the 1980s on game design, Chris Crawford stated, “We don’t need programmers who know all about exemplification nor technologists, but rather creative professionals who truly ask themselves what a game should be like. What does it take to make a good one? What makes it successful?” Chris Crawford also said that “…to answer these questions, we must set up a framework for thinking and theorizing, a framework for critical thought that goes well beyond development issues.” To me, this is design’s contribution to gaming. That said, I am not downplaying the technological aspect. The two elements – design and technology – go hand-in-hand when it comes to game conception. Design leads one to reflect about the medium and the role of usage within video games. At the end of the day, we must keep in mind that the user lies at the heart of it all.
Translation by Morgane SAYSANA & Krista SCHMIDTKE
Who is Sébastien GENVO?
Page 6 of 7 | Previous page | Next page
