Network Aesthetics Notes Part 2. Distributed Forms
Digital media offers new forms of sensory and social habits. Games are a cultural form of digital media within a current network era offering worlds and microcosms of dynamic systems, allowing players to interact with them in new sensory and social ways. Jagoda takes a look at three different games; Introversion’s Uplink (2001), Jason Rohrer’s Between (2008) thatgamecompany’s Journey (2013) and his own augmented reality game The Project (2013) to examine the participatory and improvisational qualities of network aesthetics. Each of these games address interconnection of networks not as a novel feature but as an aesthetic form that can be represented and participated in through gameplay.
Uplink is a computer network simulation which puts the player in the position of a hacker. The game does not run on a network, but rather creates a diegetic world of hacking through audiovisual and interactive instruments. Visually, Uplink relies on a cartographical aesthetic to create an illusion of network. The two most important operations of Uplink are communication and control, which evidently serve as an allegorical aesthetic of networks. Jagoda emphasizes how society functions on the illusion of continuous control and instant communication through networks.
The next game, Rohrer’s Between is analyzed through Jagoda’s personal account of the gameplay. Between uses network aesthetics through an online game which reflects action and extimacy (the breakdown of intimacy) by linking the player with a secondary player. The game thinks through networks, not about them by complicating our control within networks. In the game, communication and connection is broken, the secondary player which the game is dependant on does not appear on screen. This a ludic aestheticizing of distance and the dependance on someone or something that is similar to the relationship we have with networks. In the same way that our reliance on networks gives us the illusion of being close and in control, there is a distant intimacy that occurs in the game. Between highlights experiences of dysfunction that are not often acknowledged but still remain a large part of network cultures.
Jagoda analyzes Journey through the accounts of experience shared on the online tumblr blog Journey Stories. Journey provides a unique co-op experience where players can voluntarily traverse through the environment of Journey with other players linked through online networks. The other players do not effect the gameplay but rather created an affective experience together. Through this co-operational function, Journey illustrates network aesthetics as an experience of intense affective sensations. While looking through the accounts written on Journey Stories, Jagoda notices the trend of stories regarding experiences rather than overt narrative stories. He attributes this to Journey’s lack of language which creates a greater emotional connection between players. This can be likened to modern ‘stranger sociability’ which is a symptom of networks. Journey aestheticizes this stranger sociability by allowing players to experience feelings of disconnectedness and intimacy with others through a network connection.
Lastly Jagoda discusses his work The Project which was an Alternate Reality game inviting players to engage with three conspiracy groups through social media, live performance, transmedia storytelling and more. ARGs explore qualities of connection through game form, utilizing game based interactions and collective interplay to access ordinary affects. He describes networks not merely as novel objects of study but constantly altering forms which unfold and initiate new ways creating experiences. Jagoda felt ARGs existed within networks but also mirrored them. There are five main elements of ARGs which The Project employs: 1. The flow of transmedia which employs the experience of moving among media and integrating multiple medias to create new relationships. 2. Integration of play with everyday life to blur the boundaries of ludic gameplay and real life, mirroring the sociotechnical conditions of the internet. 3. The production of an alternative reality which is situated in everyday life but creates a distinction from empirical reality. 4. A breakdown of distinctions between designers and players where games transform through a collaboration between designers and players. 5. The organization around collective gameplay in which realization and completion of games rely on the collective intelligence of both game makers and players. These elements are recognizable not only within ARGs like The Project, but exist as aestheticizations of the networks they inhabit and utilize.
Jagoda addresses the process, collaboration and failures of The Project in order to highlight the range of connections that ARGs generate and how they reflect networks. He describes his game as a constant process and not a static ludic experience. Players were invited not to fill a role as an actor with an established script and environment, but rather move in and out of different roles in response to particular events or puzzles. This leads to the next element of collaboration. Collaboration is a necessary aspect of ARGs and networks because of the ongoing reciprocation of information needed for both to function. If this does not continue than connectivity is broken and failure is imminent. But in games failure is central to game form because it is often considered a productive consequence and a learning tool. It is a stepping stone to eventual success. The Project experienced failures in a few ways, firstly with the refusal of public play and the lack of user interaction in online networks. Jagoda acknowledges these failures allowed the creators to rethink conceptually about networks, how they change and what sensations they grant us. The Project was not about representing a network necessarily but bringing a new one into existence in order to rethink the role of public life within the era of networks. Jagoda concludes by addressing the view we have of modern networks as being universal and necessary forms of connectivity that promise to explain everything and last forever. He emphasizes that although networks seem to be our everything we shouldn’t view networks as a simple object that connects us all. We should utilize networks themselves while we can to recontextualize the ethics of being and coming together in the network era.