#scottkromko

Reading about Bogost's "How to do Things With Video Games" made me consider what I actually think about when playing games. There's one game in particular that made me think about how much I actually became invested in the characters in it, much like a book--Final Fantasy X. The game forces you to interact with the characters in a way where you control the fate of the world. It makes you confront issues that are similar to some political/religion issues we face in our world today.

After trying desperately until 12am to get as many achievement points as possible with a few classmates, I realized again how much of a time-sink WoW really can be. I wasn't really paying attention to how much time I spent in front of my computer last night since I was doing it for extra credit points, but before I knew it, 3-4 hours passed. I ended up accomplishing a lot on my character for my class, and my guild over on Stormrage ended up taking down a new heroic raid boss. It didn't feel like that long nor did I feel bored at any point...and I've been playing this game for way too long.

Sitting in class, I don't think many people found the Leeroy Jenkins video very interesting..maybe except for Adri, Long and myself. It's a "classic" WoW video, and like Adri said in class, it's even a part of the game now as a title you can receive. Whether or not it was staged to just be funny is left unknown (although, it's like 99.9% certain it was), it's still something that can happen in raids from day-to-day. What Leeroy is doing is called 'face-pulling'...basically, people do what he did in the video. Run into something head on without a strategy or pulling something by mistake. I've taunted the boss a few times on accident in my raids and face pulled a few others (and died instantly, of course), and you become the laughing stock of the raid for a few minutes. But in Leeroy's case, he deviated so far from the norm in a WoW raid, he was made famous.

The chapter about deviance in the book we read directly relates to what Leeroy did in his raid. While it was funny, some people get super pissed off that stuff like this happens. It's not how the situation in the game should be played out, and deviance like this from in-game norms sometimes causes issues between players. Reading the chapter almost made me feel uneasy because some of the stuff that's mentioned, I would never do...and I probably wouldn't want to play with someone who did those things. I think it relates back to who I am as a person (I like things to be planned out and done with precision) and not just being an "elitist." On the other end, however, people can play the game whichever way they like. And in Leeroy's case, he thought he would run in and try to take on enemies on his own.

A lot of people posted this week about getting sucked in, learning the game, becoming interested, etc. So I thought about why I play the game and why I have played so much in the past. A few of my guild mates on Stormrage server were talking about their time played on their characters. Thinking mine was going to be embarrassingly high compared to others, it actually wasn't (If you type /played in game, it'll tell you how long you've played your character for). But then in light of what we've been talking about in class and thinking why I play the game, I actually really thought about it.

I thought the chapter on feminism was the most interesting one so far. I think the way female characters are described in the book is pretty accurate in context of the game...at the time the book was written. However, since then, female characters have taken a more prominent role in the game's story. When Wrath of the Lich King finally ended when you kill the Lich King, one of the main protagonists in the story is Jaina Proudmoore. She plays a huuuge role all throughout the Wrath dungeons and storylines and is a big part of the reason you actually succeed in killing the Lich King. While a male character is still the forefront of the expansion, Blizzard has improved on their storytelling and fit it toward the female audience. Even in the latest expansion, Cataclysm, two of the dragon aspects that help you kill Deathwing are of the female gender.

The final eight chapters I chose to read were: 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 35 and 36. I didn't really have any certain methodology for picking them other than skimming the remainder of the book and picking out any titles, authors or topics that might seem interesting to me. And I'd definitely say some of the later chapters made the book more interesting overall than the previous 22 we read between the last couple of weeks.

While I still wasn't a fan of the book, I think the chapters constructed with song "lyrics" or poetically were the most interesting to read. The break in the long-winded discussions some of the authors were having, to this, was very nice. My favorite section was Chapter 32 by Daniel Bernard Roumain: "What One Must Do: Comments and Asides on Musical Philosophy." Some of the questions/discussion posed in the chapter were about the meaning of music. What does it do for us? It makes you think about certain memories, feelings, etc. that the song lyrics might invoke. And the magical idea behind it all, none of those feelings or memories between people will ever be completely the same. The end of the chapter talks about the 'human experience.' And that's what I think music and sound is all about. You experience it through yourself, your own memories and thoughts. Nobody can take that away from you, and I think that's what makes sound a beautiful thing.

The other chapter I thought was mildly entertaining was the one written by Lanier. I chose this one just because of the familiar name...and it was everything I would've expected from Lanier. Ever since reading You are Not a Gadget and then this piece, I expect if I ever listened to Lanier speak, I would automatically think of him as a whiny person. Not that his writing is bad or anything, but I think he just complains too much. He gives solid proof for his beliefs and provides thought-provoking material, I just think he's whiny about it. Even still, his chapter was one of the more interesting ones in the book.

Ok, so, ever since we read the first Klosterman article about Weezer, I've been on an insane "Weezer kick." I can't stop listening to their songs-mostly because Klosterman is a god damn genius, and I hate him for it. He's absolutely right in every aspect in which he talks about Weezer and Rivers Cuomo (mostly about him being literal). I've always liked Weezer, but over the last few years, I kinda stopped listening to them...now I've kinda gotten musically revived to this genre of music through that article, as sad as that sounds.

It's fun listening to any of Weezer's songs, mostly off of Make Believe, and trying to just not make too much of it. And that's exactly what you have to do. While I still really don't like the album 'Make Believe,' I can understand an argument for why it's good. I think the best one is 'The Green Album,' but that's just 'cause I think its got the most catchy songs (and their best one, Hash Pipe). Go listen to Don't Let Go or Photograph and tell me they aren't catchy! I dare you!

I just thought I'd share my musical revelation this week instead of Sound Unbound.

I've read a lot of Klosterman's stuff before, mostly from www.grantland.com where he's a regular contributor to sports and pop culture things on there. He's really easy to read, witty and just an all-around pretty awesome dude. Both of his articles we read about Weezer and Ted Kaczynski give us all something to think about. For the first one, I really like Weezer and I guess I fell into the same boat all other Weezer fans did and assumed Rivers Cuomo hated all of us and made songs like "Beverly Hills" just in case we all like to wallow in a pit of despair listening to bad songs. But Klosterman does have a point with Weezer's music. They are really literal. I never really stepped back and looked at it like he wrote about. Even after, I still say Weezer's best albums are their earliest ones, but I suppose I can learn to appreciate their other stuff too.

As for Kaczynski...he's insane but did have a few good points in his so-called manifesto of craziness. What he did was incredibly wrong obviously, but you can't say he didn't have some sort of point. Klosterman pointed out it's not completely crazy to think some of what Kaczynski had to say was actually true. I don't think I could give up the internet for a long period of time though. I like to play too many games and use it a lot for the work I do with the sports magazine I'm employed with. It's easy to say you could give it up but when you think about how much you use the internet on a daily basis, it's hard to imagine life without it.