An old standby of the computer world is the gaming industry, going all the way back to Pong and Pac-man. One of the hottest, relatively recent, developments has been the touch screen, on smart phones and tablets such as iPad. There is a legitimate question as to how this pair of computer tendencies might co-exist.
The easy response would be to point out, since such games exist, where's the evidence for a problem? I've compiled my list of the best games for iPad elsewhere. And yet, this alone doesn't resolve the matter for the games designed for touch screen are often cited as evidence of the problem.
At the risk of caricaturing the complaint, it does often come down to a fairly crude objection. The gist of the complaint is that the player's fingers get in the way of seeing the screen.
That I suspect has more to do with bad design than touch screen gaming per se. And it seems that such a protest misses a more central insight in all of this. Complaining that a tactile interaction with the screen is problematic is really not seeing the forest for the trees. What is going on here is, I suspect, the revolutionizing of gaming. In fact, it may be a portent of the future of human-computer interfacing.
What do I mean, you ask? Well, before launching fully into explaining that, let's consider some context. There's an old joke that technology is anything invented after you were born. In fact, everything a human uses as a medium for some purpose is a technology. Paint for instance is a technology. Think for a moment about the visceral pleasures of finger painting. Of course, great, important and serious painters use artisanal paint brushes, right?
Such a truism though blinds one to the valuable insight available. Who reading these lines has never experienced the joys of poking their fingers into the paint? Can you remember the sensual pleasure of smearing, spreading and indeed even shaping the paint with your finger tips? Really, if you examine it closely, finger painting is less like brush painting than it is akin to sculpture. Children famously revel in it. It provides great satisfaction for adults too though if they can overcome inhibitions against the indulging of child-like pleasures.
Compare that other childhood picture producing technology, the Etch-n-Sketch. I'm not claiming there's not fun in it. It is though a very particular kind of fun: detail-driven and fixated in a vaguely obsessive compulsive way. It's a world away from the uninhibited joy of finger painting. I propose that this sheer joyousness is directly related to the immersion in, not only the finger painting experience, but also into the product of the experience; the very tactile immersion into the medium.
For, if you think about it, the finger painter is not merely painting the picture, but doing so from within the picture. The painter is literally, physically in the picture he is producing. The painting is an extension of the painter. And no less is the painter an extension of the painting. The kind of sublime joy generated by this profoundly immersive experience goes a long way in helping us understand why touch screen gaming is the future of gaming. And not only that, but is a harbinger of the future of human-computer interfacing. With the touch screen game we discover a simulation of the immersive, joyous experience of finger painting.
Those who complain about the absence of buttons and joysticks, mice and keyboards, are simply expressing the annoyance of adaptation-challenge always expressed by those left behind by change. They are resentful that their refined skills, in which they have invested so much time and energy, are suddenly obsolete.
Our technological history is littered with those who tried to mask their efforts to protect their skills investment with pretensions of principle. Photographers complaining about digital cameras, ink-stained newspaper men complaining about the internet, motion picture moguls complaining about television, big band musicians complaining about the phonograph, and horse-and-carriage operators complaining about the automobile, are just a few of so many examples. The march of progress certainly does leave its causalities. Unless though we are happy to resolve ourselves to life in a permanent past, such change is finally for the good.
It's not just though about improved functionality, but also about a more immediate experience and a more accessible one. The first person who had the idea to hook up speakers to their TV to create a surround sound effect were leading the way along the path to the day when we all will experience our favorite shows as virtual reality experiences. And that day isn't as far off as you might think.
It verges on cliche to observe how we humans so enjoy "losing ourselves" in our entertainment. When we're enjoying it the most we're "wrapped up in it." These turns of phrase capture a deep seated desire for momentary transcendence. For a little while we seek to escape our worries and even our very bodily presence in the mundane world. This urge for brief refuge in fantasy explains much about our continuous urge for deeper and deeper immersion in our entertainment media.
The hugely popularity of Wii illustrates the point: this sudden and mass embrace of a tactically immersive gaming experience. The immersive gaming experience of the touch screen situates the player into the game in a way reminiscent of the childhood pleasures of finger painting. Indeed, we might say that it is an essential link between those childhood pleasures of the past and the promises of our virtual reality future.
Even that though is just a shadow of the technological immersion we can expect. Science fiction TV programs such as Star Trek or Babylon 5 depict technology that allows lights to be switched on through voice command. That though only scratches the surface of what is coming. The pioneering of cutting edge of strong AI opens the possibility of an environment in which the lights come on when we think about needing them, or they increases intensity when registering eye fatigue. This is the direction in which the future is moving and it is the logic of our endless thirst for the fully immersive human-computer interface.
Touch screen gaming is a stepping stone into that future. Game designers who try to build button or stick driven games for the iPad are like the early film makers and record producers who could only conceive film or tape recording as instruments for recording live performances. Until the benefits of splicing were discovered the potential of such media went unexplored.
Likewise, until they can wrap their heads around the possibilities of organic designs, realizing the optimum potential for the best games for iPad, and other touch screen devices, such designers will be the last of the past, rather than pioneers of the future.
The easy response would be to point out, since such games exist, where's the evidence for a problem? I've compiled my list of the best games for iPad elsewhere. And yet, this alone doesn't resolve the matter for the games designed for touch screen are often cited as evidence of the problem.
At the risk of caricaturing the complaint, it does often come down to a fairly crude objection. The gist of the complaint is that the player's fingers get in the way of seeing the screen.
That I suspect has more to do with bad design than touch screen gaming per se. And it seems that such a protest misses a more central insight in all of this. Complaining that a tactile interaction with the screen is problematic is really not seeing the forest for the trees. What is going on here is, I suspect, the revolutionizing of gaming. In fact, it may be a portent of the future of human-computer interfacing.
What do I mean, you ask? Well, before launching fully into explaining that, let's consider some context. There's an old joke that technology is anything invented after you were born. In fact, everything a human uses as a medium for some purpose is a technology. Paint for instance is a technology. Think for a moment about the visceral pleasures of finger painting. Of course, great, important and serious painters use artisanal paint brushes, right?
Such a truism though blinds one to the valuable insight available. Who reading these lines has never experienced the joys of poking their fingers into the paint? Can you remember the sensual pleasure of smearing, spreading and indeed even shaping the paint with your finger tips? Really, if you examine it closely, finger painting is less like brush painting than it is akin to sculpture. Children famously revel in it. It provides great satisfaction for adults too though if they can overcome inhibitions against the indulging of child-like pleasures.
Compare that other childhood picture producing technology, the Etch-n-Sketch. I'm not claiming there's not fun in it. It is though a very particular kind of fun: detail-driven and fixated in a vaguely obsessive compulsive way. It's a world away from the uninhibited joy of finger painting. I propose that this sheer joyousness is directly related to the immersion in, not only the finger painting experience, but also into the product of the experience; the very tactile immersion into the medium.
For, if you think about it, the finger painter is not merely painting the picture, but doing so from within the picture. The painter is literally, physically in the picture he is producing. The painting is an extension of the painter. And no less is the painter an extension of the painting. The kind of sublime joy generated by this profoundly immersive experience goes a long way in helping us understand why touch screen gaming is the future of gaming. And not only that, but is a harbinger of the future of human-computer interfacing. With the touch screen game we discover a simulation of the immersive, joyous experience of finger painting.
Those who complain about the absence of buttons and joysticks, mice and keyboards, are simply expressing the annoyance of adaptation-challenge always expressed by those left behind by change. They are resentful that their refined skills, in which they have invested so much time and energy, are suddenly obsolete.
Our technological history is littered with those who tried to mask their efforts to protect their skills investment with pretensions of principle. Photographers complaining about digital cameras, ink-stained newspaper men complaining about the internet, motion picture moguls complaining about television, big band musicians complaining about the phonograph, and horse-and-carriage operators complaining about the automobile, are just a few of so many examples. The march of progress certainly does leave its causalities. Unless though we are happy to resolve ourselves to life in a permanent past, such change is finally for the good.
It's not just though about improved functionality, but also about a more immediate experience and a more accessible one. The first person who had the idea to hook up speakers to their TV to create a surround sound effect were leading the way along the path to the day when we all will experience our favorite shows as virtual reality experiences. And that day isn't as far off as you might think.
It verges on cliche to observe how we humans so enjoy "losing ourselves" in our entertainment. When we're enjoying it the most we're "wrapped up in it." These turns of phrase capture a deep seated desire for momentary transcendence. For a little while we seek to escape our worries and even our very bodily presence in the mundane world. This urge for brief refuge in fantasy explains much about our continuous urge for deeper and deeper immersion in our entertainment media.
The hugely popularity of Wii illustrates the point: this sudden and mass embrace of a tactically immersive gaming experience. The immersive gaming experience of the touch screen situates the player into the game in a way reminiscent of the childhood pleasures of finger painting. Indeed, we might say that it is an essential link between those childhood pleasures of the past and the promises of our virtual reality future.
Even that though is just a shadow of the technological immersion we can expect. Science fiction TV programs such as Star Trek or Babylon 5 depict technology that allows lights to be switched on through voice command. That though only scratches the surface of what is coming. The pioneering of cutting edge of strong AI opens the possibility of an environment in which the lights come on when we think about needing them, or they increases intensity when registering eye fatigue. This is the direction in which the future is moving and it is the logic of our endless thirst for the fully immersive human-computer interface.
Touch screen gaming is a stepping stone into that future. Game designers who try to build button or stick driven games for the iPad are like the early film makers and record producers who could only conceive film or tape recording as instruments for recording live performances. Until the benefits of splicing were discovered the potential of such media went unexplored.
Likewise, until they can wrap their heads around the possibilities of organic designs, realizing the optimum potential for the best games for iPad, and other touch screen devices, such designers will be the last of the past, rather than pioneers of the future.
About the Author:
To follow the hottest goings-on in the world of touch screen games, follow Mishu Hull's regular posts at the Best Games for iPad site. He writes on a variety of technology topics. His critical review of the newest version of Kindle Fire, " Kindle Fire Tries it Again, But... ," is required reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment