EventsandCollusions:aglossaryforthemicroethnographyofvideogameplay [draftversion] PublishedinGamesandCulture,4(2)April2009 SethGiddings,UniversityoftheWestofEngland,Bristol seth.giddings@uwe.ac.ukhttp://www.badnewthings.co.

uk
TwoMicrosoftXBoxconsolesarelinkedtogetherinasmallterracedhouseinsouthBristol. Oneinthefrontroomisconnectedtoalargetelevisionscreen,theotherinthedining roomtoadataprojectorpointedatawallclearedoffurnitureandpictures.Ittakessome timetopersuadetheconsolestospeaktooneanother,torecognizethattheyshoulddivide avideogame,Halo2,betweenthem,fourplayersperconsole,butgenerateavirtualworld inwhichalleightcaninteract.Eachofthetwoscreens(thetelevisionandthewall projection)issplitintofoursubscreens,eachsubscreendisplayingthegamesvirtualworld fromthepointofviewofoneplayer.Throughtheirownwindow,eachplayerseesthegame worldfromthepositionoftheiravatar,afirstpersonviewpoint,fromwhichtheycanseethe avatarsoftheotherplayers.Theplayerssittogether,andtheirvirtualrepresentativesleap andsprintthroughthegameandacrossthescreens,triggeringafrenzyofvirtualgunfire. Itquicklybecomesapparentthatmyfellowplayers,despitetheirclaimstoincompetence, aremuchmoreaccomplishedthanmeatthisgame.Deniedtheleisurelyandtentative explorationofcontrols,conventionsandgameworldthatasingleplayerversionofthe gamewouldallow,Iamleftflailingaround.Unabletosimultaneouslymovethroughthe virtualspace,identifyusefulpowerupsandammunitionandaimmyvirtualweaponatmy onscreenenemies,myavatarisshotrepeatedly,hittingthefloorwithfrustratingregularity andfrequency.Ineachofthesedeathsmyscreenpointofviewisspunthrough90degrees asmyavatarhitsthefloor,capturingbeforemomentaryvirtualoblivionandrespawning theperpetratorofthistemporarydownfall,skippingblithelyawaytoengagewithmore worthyopponents. Itryinsteadtoexplorethegameworld,totakemyavatarforawalk.Thevirtual environmentisspectacularlyrendered,abeautifulalienlandscape.Itsoonbecomesclear, however,thatitsostensiblyopenvistasareillusoryallpathscurvegentlybackintothe mayhem.Enticingfoothillsareinreality,barrierstotheinaccessiblemountainsbeyond.This isnotaworldbutapark,agardenlandscapedforvirtualwarfare,anarena.Positioningmy avatarbehindarockasfarfromtheexplosionsandtinyleapingfiguresinthemiddle distanceaspossible,Iinsteadheadoffinactualspacethistimetothekitchen.Bothmy physicalbodyandmyavatartakeabreakfromthisintenseandfrustratingplay. DrinkingabeerandeatingcrispsIwatchmyactualopponentsnow,ratherthanthescreens. Incontrasttotheintenseonscreenactivityleapingfighters,explodingvehicles,wildvirtual cameraswingstheplayersareimmobile.Occasionalunexpecteddeathsorparticularly spectacularmomentsofactionaremetwithcursesorlaughter,andtheendofamatchis markedbythestretchingofbacksandarms,butinplaytheplayersarestill,eyeswideand rarelyblinking,motionevidentonlyinthemicromovementsofthumbsoncontrollerbuttons andanaloguesticks.AphrasefromDonnaHaraways,AManifestoforCyborgsflitsinto mymind:ourmachinesaredisturbinglylively,andweourselvesfrighteninglyinert (Haraway,1990,p.194).Myownsenseofheterogeneousagencyinthegame(paradoxically highlightedbymyineptitude),ofdrivingmyavatartowildmovement,totriggeringactions, operatingmachinery,firingweapons,navigatingspacesandbuildings,ispalpableand intense,yetprofoundlyatoddswiththissceneoftransfixedbodiesandminds.Theyseem

nottobeinitiatingtheonscreenactionormakingchoicesasconventionalcelebrationsof interactivitymightassumebutratherrespondingtothedemandsofthemachines(both thehardwareandsoftware). Thetermcyborgdoesnotseemtoohyperbolichere.Ontheonehand,theplayersare temporarily,butintensely,lockedinacircuitacyberneticfeedbackloopinwhichthey, theconsoles,controllers,andthegamesoftwarearenodes.Thelinguisticconfusionevident inmyaccountofthegameaboveistelling:Ireferringattimestomyphysicalbodyand senseofself,butattimestomyactionsinthegame.Thereisalinguisticandexperiential blurringofboundariesbetweenhumanandmachines:inthegameIisatoncemyself, myavatar,andmyselfandavatar;ahybridhumanandtechnologicalentity.

Another,verydifferent,space,butagainludicallycharged.Weareonafamilyholiday, campingintheDooneValleyontheedgeofExmoorinDorset.ThesettingforR.D. Blackmores19thcenturynovelLornaDoone,thesmall,enclosedvalleyisfullofreferences toitsliteraryincarnation.Thelocalheritageandtouristindustryhaserectedsignsindicating bothcontemporaryfootpathsandsitesthoughttocorrespondtoplacesandeventsinthe book.Thisisthenanactualplaceoverlaidordramatizedbythevirtualtimespaceof literature. Onourwalkbacktothecampsitealongtheriver,mywifePennyenergizesourflagging childrenbypointingoutmushroomsgrowingamongstthegrassandmentioningMarioKart. Thistriggersanexplosionofactivityintheboys.Theysprintacrossthefield,slowingdown thenacceleratingnoisilyastheyreachanotherpatchofmushrooms.MarioKart:Double Dash!!isavideogamefortheNintendoGameCubeandafirmfavouriteinourhouse.One conventionofthisgenreofgameanarcadestyleracinggameistheinclusionofpower upsoritemsthatbestowtemporarypowersonthecar/avatar.Mushrooms,inthis particulargame,givethecar/avatarabriefbutoftendecisiveturnofspeed.IntheDoone Valley,actualfungusbecomesanalogouswiththebrightredandwhitemushroomsinthe game,virtualpowerupsinanactualgame.

 AnxiousObjects Whataretheobjectsofstudyingameplayresearch?Whoorwhataretheagentsandwhat isthenatureofthefieldinwhichethnographicfieldworkmightbeconducted?Thesetwo shortstoriesindicatethatsomeunderstandingandanalysisoftheforms,aestheticsand conventionsofvideogamesaspopulardigitalmediaisveryuseful,asisthe acknowledgementanddescriptionofthephysicalandsocialcontextinwhichtheseforms andconventionsarerealized,vivified. Buthowtoarticulatethese,howtodescribe,andanalyzeparticularandgeneralmomentsor modesofgameplay,factoringinbothmediaformandlivedexperience?How,forinstance, toaccountforthemachinationsofaffect,asvirtualworldsareactualizedinthevery differenttimespaceofoutdoorplay?And,crucially,whatisthenatureofthegameplayer intheseintimatecircuitsoftwitchingthumbsandlivelymachines? Thisarticlesetsoutaworkingglossaryofconceptsandtermsthathavearisenfromsome recentanalyticalandethnographicresearch.Someofthesetermsareappropriatedor repurposedfromexistingtheoreticalandethnographicapproaches;afewarenewtothe field.Iwillrefertotworecentsmallscaleresearchprojectsthatmakeuseofvideotorecord andanalyzevideogameplay.Iwilladdressthemethodologicaldemandsofstudyingthe relationshipsbetweenthevirtualandtheactual,cyberspaceanddomesticspace,in everydaypopulardigitalculture.Ialsoattempttoidentifyandtheorizebothhumanand nonhumanagentsinthemomentoreventofgameplay:theobjectofstudyhereisneither humanplayersnordynamicsoftwarebutwhathappenswhentheycometogetherto generateaneventofgameplay. Amethodologicalrequirementforthesestudieswasthebreakingdownofanentrenched divisionofepistemologicallabourinnewmediaresearch:thatbetweenempiricaland ethnographicworkontheonehandandtextualoraestheticanalysisontheother. Videogamesareatoncecomputersoftwarewithproceduralagenciesandautonomous operations,computerhardware,andmediatextswithscreenimages,sounds,environments, anddramas.Iproposethenontheonehand(withapologiestoEspenAarseth),a cybertextualanalysis,andontheother,averysmallscaleethnographyofvideogames, videogameplayandvideogameplayers.Asynthesisbetweentheseanalyticaland ethnographicmethodsisneeded,givenmyunwillingnesstoestablishanaprioriasymmetry betweenvideogame(astext),videogameplay(asconsumptionorpractice)and videogameplayer(asembodiedmediasubject).Iadoptthetermmicroethnography(and adapteditasamethodology)todescribethissyntheticapproach,subsequentlysuggesting microethologyasamorepreciseterm. CybertextualAnalysis Videogamesareasignificantpopularformofscreenmedia,oftendrawingonfilmsand televisionfortheircharacters,images,andscenarios.Theyarealsocomputersoftwareand assuch,theiralgorithmicandproceduraloperationsandstructureslieoutsidethepurview ofestablishedmodesoftextualanalysisinliterary,film,andmediastudies.Newmedia studiesandgamestudieshavebeguntheprojectofcybertextualanalysis(Aarseth,1997; Bolter&Grusin,1999;Lister,Dovey,Giddings,Kelly,&Grant,2003;Manovich,2001).Espen Aarsethsbook,Cybertext:PerspectivesonErgodicLiteratureforinstance,bothengageswith thedistinctinternaloperationsofcomputerbasedmedia,andemphasizestheroleofthe

reader/playerinrealizingthesecyberneticoperationsineachactofreading/playing (Aarseth,1997;seealsoSalen&Zimmerman,2003;Giddings&Kennedy,2008). Part(icipant)s Aarseths(1997)diagramofatextbasedcomputeradventuregameindicatesthedynamic, cyberneticcircuitsofagencybetweensoftwareandhardwarecomponents,between databasesandsoftwareengines,userinputandalgorithmicprocessingofinformationand responses.Hisalternativetermforthesecomponents,part(icipant)s,isarichoneasit emphasizestheactiveroleoftheseparts,partsthatcometogethertoconstituteany particularinstantiationoftheadventuregameinplay.AlthoughAarsethdoesnotpursue this,thediagramsrefusaltograntanyotherstatustothehumanpart(icipant)issuggestive forrethinkingtherelationshipsbetween,andstatusof,thehumanandthetechnologicalin videogameplay.

ageneralizedconceptualizationofthefunctionalityofatypical,butadvanced,adventuregame (Aarseth1997:103).

Popularcomputermediathenmustbeconceptualizedasbothsymbolicandmaterial.On theonehand,videogamesaretoys,popularmedia,performativeevents,often characterizedbysymboliccontentderivedfromestablishedpopularscreenmedia.Onthe otherhand,theanalysisofvideogamesasacomputerbasedmediumdemandsthe descriptionofaspecialcategoryofnonhumans,softwareentities(inthelanguageof computing,agents)thatactmoreorlessautonomously,oreffectemergentbehaviour. Weshouldresistconceivingofthevideogameasadiscreteandwholeobject.The videogameisconstitutedbysoftwarecomponentsthateffecttheirownoperationsand semiautonomousagencywithinthevideogamesystem.Gameworldsandtemporalities, modesofpresentation,puzzlesandcombat,engagementwithcomputercontrolled characters,areallconstantlyconfiguringtheplayersexperienceandrespondingtothe playersresponses.

Microethnography Iusethetermmicroethnographytodescribeanonscientific,improvised,opportunistic approachtorecording,describing,andanalyzingbriefmomentsofeverydaytechnocultural activity.Ithasprovedausefulterm,referringontheonehandtothesmallscaleandshort durationnatureoftheeventsIamconcernedwith,andtheirtransitoryandmomentary nature.Ontheotherhand,thetermalludestothetechnologicalconstructionofthis ethnographicresearch.Themicroethnographyisbroughtintobeingbytheactofvideo recordinganditsvariousactors(camera,tripod,PC,etc.),allofwhichareintegral part(icipant)softheeventunderscrutinyandthescrutinyasevent.Thepresenceofthe researcherandtheresearchtechnologiesareinseparablefromthenetworksunderstudy. Theytooare(madeof)part(icipant)s.Thepart(icipant)sofcentralconcerntothisstudy however,arethecomputerhardware,software,andhumanbodies,theirparts,andtheir comingtogetherintheintenseandintimatecircuitsofgameplay. Amicroethnographicapproachsuggestsmethodologicalstrategies,bothforanalyzing gameplayandforidentifyingandconceptualizingrelationshipsbetweentechnologyagency andaestheticsineverydaytechnocultureacrossandbetweenthevirtualandtheactual.It drawsonconceptualandempiricalworkfromcyberculturalstudiesandscienceand technologystudies.Thesefieldsofstudyareconcernedwith,ontheonehand,the questioningofsecuredistinctionsbetweenpeople,culture,technologies,andthematerial world;andontheotherwiththetracingofthetransmissionortranslationofagencyamong humanandnonhumanentities.Assuch,amicroethnographyapproachhastoaddressand challengetheanthropocentrismofethnographyandanthropologytoattendtononhuman aswellashumanagenciesinplay. Event Theobjectofstudyforamicroethnographyofvideogameplaythenisnotamediacultural practice,ahumansubject,orasetoftechnologies,butrathertheeventinwhichthethree cometogether(withthehumanandnonhumanresearchers).Or,moreaccurately,itisthe eventthatisconstitutedby,andconstitutes,thesepart(icipant)s.Moreover,theevent foregroundsthetemporaldimensionofvideogameplay,emphasizesthedynamicbetween theelementsinplay:entitiescomingtogether,materialandaestheticchainsofcauseand effectorfeedback.DanFlemings(1996)considerationoftheeffectsofdiversecontextsfor (inthiscase)toysinplayisrelevanthere: Theeffectswearegoingtobeinterestedinaresimultaneouslyintheformationof anobjectandinthatobjectsconsequenceswithintheprocessesthatformedit.Ina way,therefore,itmightbebettertotalkabouteventsratherthanobjects.(pp. 1011) Thisresonateswithactornetworktheorysinsistenceon,ontheonehand,theindivisibility ofhumanandnonhumanagentsandforcesinanytechnosocialnetworkorevent,andon theother,theimportanceofthenetworkoverindividualobjectsorsubjects.Totakethe eventastheprimaryobjectofstudy,then,istolookfortherelationshipsconstitutedby,and constituting,hybridandheterogeneousagents,ratherthanmakingassumptionsaboutthe primacyofeitherhumanortechnologicalactors.AsBrunoLatour(1992)putsit, Thedistinctionsbetweenhumansandnonhumans,embodiedordisembodiedskills, impersonationormachination,arelessinterestingthanthecompletechainalong whichcompetencesandactionsaredistributed.(p.243)

Actornetworktheorydemonstratesthattakingtherelationshipsandnetworksthat constituteobjectsandsubjectsasthefocusofenquiry,ratherthantheobjectsandsubjects themselves,isapplicabletoalltechnoculturalphenomena,largeandsmall,synchronicand diachronic.WhereasIwouldarguethatanemphasisontheeventualcouldinformthestudy ofalltechnoculturalphenomena(notonlythoseinvolvingsophisticatedtechnologies),itis particularlyusefulinthedescriptionandanalysisofvideogameplay.Gameplayisavivid exampleofthegenerationofnewrelationshipsanddistributionsofeffect,affect,and feedbackineverydaydigitalculture,oftechnicitiesnotreducibletohumanidentityand competence;aphenomenonthatcanonlybeadequatelyaddressedthrough acknowledgementofitsbringingtogetherofheterogeneouspart(icipant)s. Toexplainthismoreclearly,Iwillreferbrieflytoavideomicroethnographicstudyofthe playingof,andaround,thePCgameLegoRacers2bymytwosons(thenaged3and4years; Giddings,2003,2007).Thecomputergameoffersbotharacetrackanditssurrounding islandenvironmentforexplorationbyvirtualLegocarsandpeople.Afterenthusiastically exploringthevirtualenvironmentofthegamesfirstlevel(SandyBay),theboys transposeditstopographyintoactualLego.Thosefeaturesofthegamethataffordedthem themostpleasure,mountains,cliffs,abeachandthesea,wereeitherconstructedwithLego orMegaBlocksordrawnonpapertobelainonthefloor.Carsanddriverswereassembled fromactualLegoandthevirtualracewasnoisilyactualizedinandaroundthenewgame world.

Childrensplayisoftencharacterizedbythetranslationortranspositionofcharacters, topographies,andactionfromliteratureandmedia.Inthiseventthough,itbecameclear thatitwasnotonlythegeographicalfeaturesofSandyBaythatwereactualized(its mountainsandcoast)butalsoelementsandforcesarisingfromitsexistenceasaludic virtualworld.Thisgameworldiscodedtogenerateparticularphysicalforcesand behaviours,notablyfriction,accelerationandgravity,simulatedforcesdesignedtofacilitate gameplay,andexplorationratherthancloselyreplicateactualworldphysics.Thereare resonancesherewiththemushroomstoryrecountedearlier:IntheDooneValley,the powerupfeatureofvideogames,andits(virtual)dynamicconsequences,weretransposed fromgameworldtoactualworld.Theemblemmushroomcarrieditsaffectandeffect, fromthevirtualtotheactual. Videogameworldsareconstitutedbydifferentpart(icipant)s,differenttypesofvirtual phenomena,includingobjectsandforces.ThevirtualspaceofLegoRacers2subjectsits playerstoarangeofsimulatedphysicalforces.Mostnotably,theboysquickly(and apparentlyunselfconsciously),acclimatizedthemselvestotheeffectsandpossibilitiesof

weakenedvirtualgravity.Inbalancingtheforwardmomentumofthecarsinresponsetothe playersinputwithalunardownwardpull,thisvirtualphysicsbecamealudicelementinits ownright,asevidencedbytheseboysdelightindrivingtheiravatarcarsupsheercliffsand plungingthemintothesea.Andagain,theirtranslationofthisvirtualphenomenoninto actualmovementanddynamicsastheyshifttheirplasticcarsbetweenthebreakneck velocitiesofthelivingroomcircuitandtheslowmotionbounceandplummetoverthebrick mountainshighlightsthesevirtualoperations.Aplayfulandvertiginouskinaesthesiais codedintothegameworld,affordingnewkindsofgames.Itexistsbetweentheoperations ofalgorithmsandvariablesandtheirengineeringofembodiedsensesofcontroland resistance.Inthestudyofthisevent,itbecameapparentthatclearconceptualdistinctions betweenvirtualandactualspaceareunsustainable.Throughplay,theseboysshiftedacross thesetwospaceswithease,theirplayadaptingtothedifferentenvironments, environmentalresources,andthecapabilitiesandpossibilitiestheyafforded.Thevirtual spaceinthiseventofgameplaydoesnottranscendtheeverydayandembodied,itisareal spacetobeexploredandinwhichtheplayercanact,andbeactedon.Thevirtualandthe actualarebothreal,andinthiseventwereeachcontainedwithintheother,intertwining, eachinflectedbytheother.Neitherpreexisttheplayeventitselfthough,rathertheyare reciprocallygenerated,producedinandthroughplayevents.1 Videogamesareoftencelebratedasinteractivemedia,asfacilitatinghumanactivityand agencyinmediacultureandonthescreen.Yetitbecomesclearherethatvideogameplayers areactedonasmuchastheyact,thattheymustworkoutwhatthemachinewantsthemto do(orwhatitwillallowthemtodo)aswellasengagewithitimaginatively.Akeytermhere isagency,orperhapsthelesspoliticallyloadedbehaviour.Neitheragencynorbehaviourcan berestrictedtothehumanparticipantshere.Moreover,wearenotlookingatclear distinctionsbetweenhumansubjectsandnonhumanobjects,butthegameeventasone constitutedbytheplayfultranslationofagency,theeccentriccircuitsofeffectandaffect, betweenhumanandnonhumancomponents. Microethology Thetermethnographythewritingofpeopleitselfestablishesthehumanasthekey objectofresearch.Assuch,itisnotadequatetothestudyofeventsconstitutedbyhuman andnonhumanactors.2InitsplaceIadoptandadaptethology.Thetermethologyoriginates inthestudyofanimalbehaviour,theaffectsandcapacitiesofanimalsandtheir environment.GillesDeleuze(1992),withhisrejectionofontologicaldistinctionsbetween animalandhumanbodies(andpartsofbodies)aswellasbetweentheartificialandthe natural,extendsethologytostudies, Whichdefinebodies,animalsorhumansbytheaffectstheyarecapableof... Ethologyisfirstofallthestudyoftherelationsofspeedandslowness,ofthe capacitiesforaffectingandbeingaffectedthatcharacterizeeachthing.Foreach thingtheserelationsandcapacitieshaveanamplitude,thresholds(maximumand minimum)andvariationsortransformationsthatarepeculiartothem.Andthey select,intheworldorinNature,thatwhichcorrespondstothething;thatis,they selectwhataffectsorisaffectedbythething,whatmovesorismovedbyit...an animal,athing,isneverseparablefromitsrelationswiththeworld...Thespeedor slownessofmetabolisms,perceptions,actionsandreactionslinktogetherto constituteaparticularindividualintheworld.(pp.627628) ItshouldbenotedthatDeleuzes(1992)useofthetermaffectisnotlimitedtothe experientialandemotionalaspectsofhumanembodimentandsubjectivity,althoughthese

latterwouldbeincludedwithinit,or,rather,constitutedasparticularproductsofit. BodiesforDeleuze(followingSpinoza)arealsoanimals,microscopicparticles,organs, machines,abodyofliterature,andchemicals.Asthequoteaboveindicates,bodiesare definedinpartbytheiraffectonthebodiesaroundandwithinthemandbytheaffectthese otherbodieshaveonthem.Ethologysconcerntheniswithbehaviour. Animalsaredefinedlessbytheabstractnotionsofgenusandspeciesthanbya capacityforbeingaffected,bytheaffectionsofwhichtheyarecapablebythe excitationstowhichtheyreactwithinthelimitsoftheircapability.(Deleuze,1988,p. 27) Ifthehumanistetymologicalrootsofthetermethnographyareshedalongwithits anthropocentricpractices,thenwhatthestudyofgameplayneedsisamicroethology,a studyanddescriptionofthebehaviours,affects,andmutualbecomingsofamicroworldor themicronatureofpart(icipant)s,offingersandthumbs,mushroomsanddataprojectors, algorithmsandaptitude,playingbodiesbothhumanandnonhuman,ratherthantheapriori establishmentofhuman,machinic,ortextualbodiesastheobjectsofstudy. BeyondIdentification Conventionally,infilmandmediastudies,anyeventofscreenmediaengagementis primarilyreadintermsofpsychicidentificationbyahumansubjectwithrepresentationsof humansubjectsonthescreen(e.g.,Metz,1985).Inthesmallstudiesunderconsideration here,suchassumptionsareundermined.Invideogames,ononelevel,theshiftingofplayers identificationwithscreenimagesisdrivenmorebythedemandsofthevariousgamesin playthananysenseofideologicalinvestmentbyasubjectpositionedinrelationtoafictional protagonist.

Otheragenciesareimaginativelydisplacedontoothernonhumanpart(icipant)sintheshift fromplayinvirtualtoactualworlds.InSuperMonkeyBallforexample,althoughtheplayer choosesamonkeycharacteraccordingtopersonaltaste(allareextremelycute),to undertaketheadventureforthem,themonkeysarenotavatars.Thegamedynamicrequires theplayertocontrolthemonkeysenvironment:itisthevirtuallandscape/architectureor platformthatistippedandtilted,themonkey(initsball)thatrollsforwardthroughthe level.Thegamemechanicisbasedinconflictbetweentheplayerandtheveryelementof thegameimmediatelyengagedwithbytheplayer.Theplatform,whethernarrowbridgeor trickyjump,wouldseemtobeatoncetheavatar(thegameelementundertheplayers control)andtheenemy.Theoriesofidentificationwouldlooktotheplayerssubjective

investmentintheanthropomorphicmonkeyinhisorherbattleswithhisorher environment.Yetinthegameworld,theplayersagencyisexercisedthroughthe environment:theplayerandplatformarelockedtogetherinafeedbacklooptopropelthe monkey(motivatedonlybyvirtualgravity)toitsgoal. Anothermicroethnographicstudyillustrateshowidentificationwith(or,atleast,pleasurein playingwith)screenmediacharactersbecomes,invideogameplay,onlyoneaffectional relationshipamongmany(Giddings&Kennedy,2008).Inthisstudy,twoplayers(the researchersthemselves)cooperativelylearntoplaythevideogameLegoStarWars.The researchaimwastoidentify,describe,andtheorizethevariousagentsatplay,particularly thegameworldanditsnonplayercharacterdenizensandtheireffectsandaffectsonthe humanplayers.Onemomentinthisplayeventillustratessomethingoftheapplication,and limitation,ofthenotionofidentificationinvideogameplay.Italsoindicatessomethingof thefrustrationsandexcitementofconstitutinganewgameworld: H:ImChewie! H:YoureYoda!Yougettobe...Mr.Wise. H:ShallIseeifyoucangetkilled?[ratherthanshootingatSeth/YodaasHelen intends,Helen/Chewiejumpsupanddownonthespot] S(laughing):Deathbyleapfrog! H(laughing):Youmayhavethewisewords,butIhavethefancymoves! [untilthispointSeth/YodahadbeenwalkingslowlyaroundS.findsthatusingthe jumpbutton(X)andtheleftanaloguesticktriggersamoreenergeticmovement] S:Imjustmovingthestickalittlebit...Andhesflippingout... H:Woohoo!Hesfantastic! H:Yoda!Calmdown!(Giddings&Kennedy,2008,p.23) Herethen,theinitialpleasureoftheplayersinrecognizingtheiravatarsfromtheir knowledgeofthecinematicworldofStarWarsquicklyshiftstoanexplorationofthe materialaffordancesthattheseavatarspossesswithinthegameworldaselementsofthat softwareworld.Aestheticpleasuresfamiliarfromcinemaandtelevisiondonotdisappear; rathertheybecomeonepleasureinaset,someofwhichareuniquetodigitalmedia.Or rather,theyenterintocircuitsofeffectandaffectwiththesenewerpleasures.Hence,the playershilarityattheYodaavatarsflippingoutisdrivenbytheincongruityofthe meditative,sagelikefilmcharacterexplodingintospectacularcyberneticactionatthe slightestnudgeofananaloguestick.

 Ananalyticalfocusonavatarsandnonplayercharacterdenizensrunstheriskofreinforcing anthropocentrismhowever.Itshouldbenotedthatmuchoftheprogresstowardthe successfulinstantiationoftheLegoStarWarsgameeventwasachievedbyonesetofactual components(eyes,brains,thumbs,controllers,buttons,etc.)respondingtothesuggestions ordemandsofvirtualcomponents.Grates,levers,vents,anddoorsglowasavatars approachthem,willingtheuseoftheForce(thecirclebuttononthePlayStation2 controller)torevealsecretsortreasure,ordirectingthumbstonudgesticksthatinturn propelavatarsinthedirectionsofactionsthatthegameasludicsoftwaresystemasa wholeprefersordemands.Thathumanpart(icipant)sarealsocomposedofpartsthatcome intoplaywiththepartsofthegamesystemisevidentinthenumerousoccasionsinwhich theplayersbrainattemptstofireasoftweapon,buthisorherthumbinsistsonmakingthe avatarjump,whereashisorhereyesmaywellbetrackingacharacteronscreenthatisnot actuallytheiravatar. Ashasalreadybeenobserved,toconductamicroethologyimpliesaconcernwiththe materialoperationsofaffectaswellas(orbefore)anyconcernwithpsychicengagement withavatarsorotherdiscretegameelements.Asthetermidentificationindicates,notions of(human)identityandsubjectivityproveveryresilient.Studiesofvideogameplayand playerstodatenearlyalwaysreproduceaprioriassumptionsoftheprimacyofhuman agencyandidentity.Theseassumptionsshouldbequestionedon(atleast)twocounts. First,theplayfulandaestheticrelationshipsbetweenthehumanandthenonhumanthat constitutethevideogameplayeventarenotonlypsychic,imaginary,significatory,ortextual. Theyarealsomaterial:mechanicalandcyberneticcircuitsofembodiedfeedbackacrossthe virtualandtheactual.Second,despitepostmodernistandpoststructuralistclaimstoits multiplicityoritsdecentring,thecoherenthumansubjectremainsafoundationalobjectof knowledgeinculturaltheory.Althoughthepart(icipant)sinandofAarseths(1997) game/systemarebyandlargenonhuman,theirrefusaltobeamalgamatedintoacoherent objectorwhole(thegameoracomputer)resonateswithrecentworkinsciencestudies andmediastudiesthateffectsanalogousoperationsonthefigureofthecoherenthuman subject.DonnaHaraways(2004)workinthisfieldiskey.Shedescribesobject/bodiesthat donotpreexistbutwhoseboundariesmaterializeinsocialinteractionamonghumansand nonhumans,materialsemioticactorsthatincludethemachinesandotherinstrumentsthat mediateexchangesatcrucialinterfacesandthatfunctionasdelegatesforotheractors functionsandpurposes(p.68).MatthewFuller(2005),inhisstudyofthetechnocultural ecologyofpirateradio,paraphrasesNietzschethus, Thesubjectismerelyaregentattheheadofacommunalityofprocessesallof whichareinacontinualstateofagitation,inandoutsideofanynamedbody,with relationsbetweenthemfluctuating.Thesubjectthusemergesfromthesustained interactionsofthesesubordinateforms...Thesubjectisacaseofperspectival positionratherthanacategoricalaprioriconditionofknowledge(p.63). IntheLegoRacersevent,theboyswouldseemtoslipbetweenanumberof identifications:beingthevirtualLegomenandbeingthevirtualLegocardriverdyadorthe caritself;beingtheconstructorsofthesemen,cars,andcarmen;beingatoncethechild playingwiththeactualLegocarmenandcoextensivewiththecarorcarmentheyare propellingaroundtheroom;beingtheplayerofavideogameandbeingametaplayer perhapsthecomputer(orgamesystem)itselfinanactualgame.Thenamingofthese hybridentitiesisnotarhetoricalormetaphoricalmovehowever:amicroethological

approachwouldlookfortheaffectedandaffectingbodies(orpart(icipant)s)inthisevent. Thustheplayersherearegeneratedbythegameevent,compiledfrompartsthatare humanandnonhuman,virtualandactual. Conclusion:Collusion Microethnography/microethologybringtocybertextualanalysisanattentiontothe operationsofvirtualcircuitsandcomponentswith,andas,theirrelationshipstohuman players,hardware,andactualenvironments.Akeychallengeforamicroethologyof gameplayistodescribeandanalyzethesematerialeventsasgeneratedandconstitutedby variousbodiesandagentspart(icipant)sbothhumanandnonhuman,hardandsoft withoutreinscribinghumanistaprioridistinctionsbetweensubjectandobject.Assumptions orassertionsofsubject/objectdistinctionsingameplay,atbestallowattentiontoonly someofthegameplayeventscomponents:thescreenimagesbutnotthehumanplayers behaviours;physicalmovementsbutnotrulesets,andsoon.Butatworse,suchdistinctions denythecoconstitutionalnatureofgameplayasintense,intimate,andcyberneticas relationsandtransformationsofspeed,slowness,andaffectbetweenallpart(icipant)s:they breakthecircuit. Whatmightthestartingpoint,thefocus,beofamicroethologyofgameplay?Inplaceof identificationastheprivilegedtermfortherelationshipofhumanandnonhumanin videogameplay,Isuggestcollusion.Thewordhasaludicetymology(colusion),soto colludeisnotonlytoworkwithanotheroractinconcertwith,butalsotoactinplay, tocometogetherin,andas,play.Theworddoesnotinitselfassumeanythingaboutthe natureofthecolludingentities,butindicatesthevideogamesmaterialdistributionof agenciesandthepositioningofagents,bodies,orpart(icipant)s.Theeventisconstitutedby thecomingtogetherinplay,thecollusionofmaterialandimaginaryelements:the operationsofgames(theirconventions,rules,andprescriptions),embodiedknowledgeand technicities(andpleasures,anxieties,frustrations,imagination),playpractices(roleplay, toyplay),screenmediaimagesandcharacters,virtualgameworlds(andtheirphysics, automata,andaffordances),andallsortsofbodies. Questioningtheconceptualcentralityofthehumansubjectdoesnotmeanthathuman desires,anxieties,identifications,andinvestmentsarenotinplayinmediatechnoculture.In theeventsbrieflydescribedabove,thedifferentgamesarespunintobeing,throughthe tastes,personalities,andabilitiesthetechnicitiesofthehumanpart(icipant)saswellas thematerialaffordancesofcomputerhardwareandsoftwaresimulacra,andbeyondinto whateverresourcesareathandforplay,includingactualtoadstoolsandfields.Ifcodeand informationmustbeunderstoodasreal,material,oftheworld,thensotoocanthe intangibleyetreal,embodiedyetdistributed,monstrous,operationsofhumanparts perception,imagination,creativity,anxiety,playwithoutalwaysalreadyreducingtheseto thereassuringsynechdochesofidentityandsubjectivity.

Notes 1.SeeGiddings(2007)forafulleraccountofthisstudy 2.Indeed,followingLatour(1992),thereisnoinstanceofcultureorsociallifeconstituted onlybyhumanactors:Theculturalisalwaystechnocultural. References Aarseth,E.(1997).Cybertext:Perspectivesonergodicliterature.Baltimore:JohnsHopkins UniversityPress. Bolter,J.D.,&Grusin,R.(1999).Remediation:Understandingnewmedia.Cambridge:MIT Press. Deleuze,G.(1988).Spinoza:practicalphilosophy.SanFrancisco:CityLightsBooks. Deleuze,G.(1992).Ethology:Spinozaandus.InJ.Crary&S.Kwinter(Eds.),Zone6: Incorporations(pp.625633).NewYork:ZoneBooks. Fleming,D.(1996).Powerplay:toysaspopularculture.Manchester,UK:Manchester UniversityPress. Fuller,M.(2005).Mediaecologies:materialistenergiesinartandtechnoculture.Cambridge: MITPress. Giddings,S.(2003).Circuits:Avideoessayonvirtualandactualplay.InM.Copier&J. Raessens(Eds.),Levelup:Digitalgamesresearchconference[CDROM].Utrecht,The Netherlands:FacultyofArts,UtrechtUniversityPress. Giddings,S.(2007).ImtheonewhomakestheLegoRacersgo!Studyingvirtualandactual play.InS.Dixon&S.Weber(Eds.),Growinguponline:Youngpeopleanddigitaltechnologies (pp.3549).NewYork:PalgraveMacmillan. Giddings,S.,&Kennedy.(2008).LittleJesusesandfuckoffrobots:onaesthetics,cybernetics andnotbeingverygoodatLegoStarWars.InM.Swalwell&J.Wilson(Eds.),Thepleasures ofcomputergaming:Essaysonculturalhistory,theory,andaesthetics(pp.1333).Jefferson, NC:McFarland. Haraway,D.(1990).Amanifestoforcyborgs:Science,technology,andsocialistfeminismin the1980s.InL.J.Nicholson(Ed.),Feminism/postmodernism(pp.190234).NewYork: Routledge. Haraway,D.(2004).TheHarawayreader.London:Routledge. Latour,B.(1992).Wherearethemissingmasses?Thesociologyofafewmundaneartefacts. InW.Bijker&J.Law(Eds.),Shapingtechnology/buildingsociety:Studiesinsociotechnical change(pp.225258).Cambridge:MITPress. Lister,M.,Dovey,J.,Giddings,S.,Kelly,K.,&Grant,I.(2003).Newmedia:Acritical introduction.London:Routledge. Manovich,L.(2001).Thelanguageofnewmedia.Cambridge:MITPress. Metz,C.(1985).Psychoanalysisandcinema:Theimaginarysignifier.London:Macmillan. Salen,K.,&Zimmerman,E.(2003).Therulesofplay:Gamedesignfundamentals.ambridge: MITPress.