A Pause to Re-View: Videogame Sandboxing

Abstract

The purposes of this research article are to review written works on videogames and their criticisms, and to formulate (or synthesize) general approaches to videogame studies from those documents. The subject matters are divided into four groups: art, narrative, play, and form. The research results are as follows: 1) A criticism of artistic aspects of videogames is often based on unclear understanding of art, both on the side of those who deny that videogames can be considered as an art form and those that support the idea of videogames as art. However, whether videogames are art or not does not affect the playability of video games themselves or their playfulness. 2) Videogames since the late 20th century have been incorporating more narrative aspects to their game mechanics. This opens the opportunity for critics to analyze the functions of the narratives of these videogames. And yet, the critics cannot focus solely on the narratives; their relations to gameplay must be addressed as well. Videogames are not objects of representation, but procedural objects where their contents are formed at the time of play. 3) Play is an aesthetic experience of video games that critics can focus on in terms of interactivity and the design of playfulness. Furthermore, the critics have to acknowledge how they play videogames as different types of play will affect the generated contents of videogames, and the study of the results respectively. The critics must play and analyze their own coauthoring of the content – as a form of meta-criticism. 4) Lastly, the subject matter of form is the general approach to videogame criticism. Unlike literature and film, the study of videogame form is still lacking in terms of what forms are specific to videogames. As a result, the more formalized approach to videogame criticism is a tool that will concretize videogames as objects that can be touched and studied while not negating their procedural nature.