The role of the subject in the hermeneutic analysis of video games
The article reveals the main hermeneutic categories related to the research of the subject of interpretation and demonstrates their transformations in the field of game studies. The study of meaning-making of videogames requires the analysis of the subject interpreting videogames. Hermeneutics as theory, philosophy and methodology of interpretation allows such study. Different approaches to hermeneutic analysis of videogames are disclosed. It is stated that the main subject of videogames is the player as an interpreter that differs from the spectator / reader. The practical nature of the analytic activity of a videogame player with the purpose of achieving certain goal is examined. The player is considered an actor who can not only play along the game rules, but also try to break them. It is delineated that the player can act both as player and as spectator simultaneously during the process of playing. Videogames propose different information sources inside the game world that can be interpreted by the player with the aim of better understanding the game world. Another important subject of videogame is the developer, who also appears different from the author of other works of art and continues to reinterpret his own product even after its release. The difference between the communication of player and developer and communication of simple author and spectator is described. The spectator of Let’s Plays and streams is also considered as the subject interpreting videogames. This subject may be both passive and active in different situations. It is stated that spectator interprets not only videogame itself, but also player and his actions. The article demonstrates the differences between named subjects and shows how they influence on each other. Together they produce the meaning and interpretation of videogames. Further exploration of categories of developer and spectator in philosophical discourse is considered an important direction for comprehensive understanding of videogame polysubjectivity and deepening hermeneutical analysis of videogames.
Bohachov, 2000 – Bohachov A. Peredistoriia filosofskoi hermenevtyky. Naukovi zapysky NaUKMA. Kyiv : Stylos, 2000. T. 18. S. 17–21.
Demeterio, 2001 – Demeterio F.P.A. III. Introduction to Hermeneutics. Diwatao, 2001. 1(1). P. 1-9.
Kasian, 2008 – Kasian V. Filosofiia : [navchalnyi posibnyk]. Kyiv : Znannia, 2008. 347 s.
Hadamer, 2000 – Hadamer H.-H. Istyna i metod; [per. z nim.] Kyiv : Yunivers, 2000. T. I : Hermenevtyka I : Osnovy filos. hermenevtyky. 464 s.
Hoy, 1982 – Hoy D. C. The critical circle: literature, history, and philosophical hermeneutics. C. Berkeley : University of California Press, 1978. 182 p.
Jeanrond, 1991 – Jeanrond W. G. Theological Hermeneutics Development and Significance. Basingstoke; London : Macmillan, 1991. 220 p.
Horban, Maletska, 2018 – Horban O., Maletska M. Basic approaches to the definition of the concept of «videogame» as an element of modern scientific discourse // Skhid. 2018. № 3(155). P. 29-33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21847/1728-9343.2018.3(155).139675
Textuality in video games, 2003 – Buckingham D., Burn A., Carr D., Schott G. Textuality in video game // DiGRA ’03 – Proceedings of the 2003 DiGRA International Conference: Level Up, 2014. Volume: 2. P. 144-155
Arjoranta, 2015 – Arjoranta J. Real-Time Hermeneutics Meaning-Making in Ludonarrative Digital Games : PhD thesis. The Department of art and Culture Studies, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland. 2015.
Aarseth, 2003 – Aarseth E. Playing Research: Methodological approaches to game analysis // In Proceedings of Digital Arts and Culture Conference (Melbourne, May 2003). 2003. DOI:10.7238/a.v0i7.763
Arjoranta, 2011 – Arjoranta J. Do We Need Real-Time Hermeneutics? Structures of Meaning in Games // Think Design Play: The Fifth International Conference of the Digital Games Research Association, Netherlands : DiGRA/Utrecht School of the Arts. 2011
Bogost, 2008 – Bogost I. The Rhetoric of Video Games // The Ecology of Games: Connecting Youth, Games, and Learning [Edited by Katie Salen. The John D. and Catherine T.] MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning. Cambridge, MA : The MIT Press. 2008. P. 117–140. DOI: 10.1162/dmal.9780262693646.117
Sicart, 2009 – Sicart M. Against Procedurality // Game Studies. 2011. Vol. 11, no. 3 (2011). Режим доступу: http://gamestudies.org/1103/articles/sicart_ap
Sicart, 2011 – Sicart M. The Ethics of Computer Games. Cambridge, MA : MIT Press. 2009. 264 p.
Salin, 2018 – Salin A. Principles of Procedural Hermeneutics // The Philosophy of Computer Games Conference, 2018. Copenhagen. 8 p.
Pietschmann, Liebold, Valtin, 2017 – Liebold B., Pietschmann D., Valtin G. The MMORPG Designer’s Journey // Casualization and its Consequences for Social Interactions, New Perspectives on the Social Aspects of Digital Gaming. Multiplayer 2, [ed. by Rachel Kowert, Thorsten Quandt]. 2017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315629308
Digital culture, Play, and Identity, 2008 – Digital culture, Play, and Identity: A World of Warcraft Reader / [ed. by Hilde G. Corneliussen and Jill Walker Rettberg]. Cambridge, Mass. : The MIT Press. 2008
Fjællingsdal, 2014 – Fjællingsdal K. Let’s Graduate – A thematic analysis of the Let’s Play phenomenon : Master thesis. Norwegian University of Science and Technology. Trondheim, Norway. 2014. 74 p.