FANDOM


游戏研究Game studies

来自维基百科英文条目From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

与博弈论不同Not to be confused with Game theory.

'游戏研究(Game studies),或游戏学 'ludology', 是针对游戏、玩游戏的行为、玩家及玩家文化的研究。它是文化研究领域的一部分,处理历史上各种类型的游戏。这一研究领域所采用的研究方法至少包括人类学、社会学和心理学,所关注的内容涵盖了游戏设计、玩家研究以及游戏在社会及文化中扮演的角色。游戏研究的概念与电子游戏研究常有混淆,但后者只是游戏研究涉及的一个方面;现实中的游戏研究涵盖了各种形式的游戏,包括运动、桌面游戏等等。

Game studies or 'ludology', is the study of games, the act of playing them, and the players and cultures surrounding them. It is a discipline of cultural studies that deals with all types of games throughout history. This field of research utilizes the tactics of, at least, anthropologysociologyand psychology, while examining aspects of the design of the game, the players in the game, and finally, the role the game plays in its society or culture. Game studies is oftentimes confused with the study of video games, but this is only one area of focus; in reality game studies encompasses all types of gaming, including sportsboard games, etc.

在电子游戏之前,游戏研究通常只包括了人类学家关于过往社会中游戏行为的研究。[1] 然而,当电子游戏造成影响并且成为主流之后,游戏研究就升级更新了方法论,囊括了社会学与心理学的方法[2] 以观察游戏行为在个体身上带来的影响、理解玩家与社会的互动,探索游戏能够影响我们身边世界的种种方式。

Before video games, game studies often only included anthropological work, studying the games of past societies.[1] However, once video games were introduced and became mainstream, game studies were updated to perform sociological and psychological observations;[2] to observe the effects of gaming on an individual, his or her interactions with society, and the way it could impact the world around us.

目前有三种游戏研究的主要方法:社会科学方法探寻游戏如何影响人们,使用问卷和附加控制条件的实验室测试来进行;人文方法探寻游戏传达了何种意义,使用的工具包括民族志和病患观察等等。业界及工程方法则主要针对电子游戏而非一般意义上的游戏,主要考虑电脑画面、人工智能以及网络等主题。[3] 正如其他的媒介研究学--比如电视研究、电影研究--游戏研究经常包括文本分析与受众理论。

There are three main approaches to game studies: the social science approach asks itself how games affect people and uses tools such as surveys and controlled lab experiments. The humanities approach asks itself what meanings are expressed through games, and uses tools such as ethnography and patient observation. The industrial and engineering approach applies mostly to video games and less to games in general, and examines things such as computer graphics, artificial intelligence, and networking.[3] Like other media disciplines, such as television and film studies, game studies often involves textual analysis and audience theory.

领域史History

游戏研究领域始于Irving Finkel在1990年组织的研讨会,这次会议后来发展成为国际桌面游戏研究协会( International Board Game Studies Association)。从1999年开始,Gonzalo Frasca推广了ludology游戏学这一概念(来自于拉丁语的ludus“游戏”一词)[4]。随着一些学术刊物的创立,如1998年创刊的《桌面游戏研究》( Board Game Studies),2001年创刊的《游戏研究》(Game Studies)以及2003年电子游戏研究协会(DiGRA, Digital Games Research Association)的成立,学者们开始认识到关于游戏的研究可以也应当被视为一个独立的领域。作为一个年轻的领域,它吸引了一批曾经对游戏有过较为宽泛研究的学者,来自于心理学、人类学、经济学、教育学和社会学等各个领域。已知的最早使用“游戏学(ludology)”一词的文献是1982年,Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi的《成为人类是否重要 - 关于比较游戏学的一些解释性问题》一文。[5]

It wasn’t until Irving Finkel organized a colloquium in 1990 that grew into the International Board Game Studies AssociationGonzalo Frascapopularized the term ludology (from the Latin word for game, ludus) in 1999,[4] the publication of the first issues of academic journals like Board Game Studies in 1998 and Game Studies in 2001, and the creation of the Digital Games Research Association in 2003, that scholars began to get the sense that the study of games could (and should) be considered a field in its own right. As a young field, it gathers scholars from different disciplines that had been broadly studying games, such as psychology, anthropology, economy, education, and sociology. The earliest known use of the term "ludology" occurred in 1982, in Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi's “Does Being Human Matter – On Some Interpretive Problems of Comparative Ludology.”[5]

社会科学方面的研究 Social science

最早讨论电子游戏的社会科学方面的理论(1971)是关于电子游戏在社会中扮演的角色的,涉及对于电子游戏中暴力行为的认识,这一理论后来以“宣泄论“之名为人所知。该理论认为玩家在电子游戏中的暴力行为可能疏导了其潜在的攻击性,会使他们在现实生活中的攻击性降低[6]。不过,一项2001年由Craig A. Anderson和Brad J. Bushman进行的关于暴力情节的电子游戏是否会增加攻击行为的元研究[7]分析了从1980年代至论文发表时的一系列数据,发现玩有暴力情节的电子游戏会导致攻击行为的增加。但是,心理学家Jonathan Freedman指出并反复强调这项研究具有极大的局限性,问题也不少。他认为Anderson和Bushman的主张过于激烈,这两位作者在写作时也带有极度的偏见。更近期的研究,如德克萨斯州A&M大学的Christopher J. Ferguson所做的研究就得出了与2001年研究截然不同的结论。在这项研究中,每个参与者要么被随机分配一个游戏,要么自主选择一个游戏。结果是,无论是随机或自选,游戏的暴力情节并未导致玩家在攻击性上有差别。稍后,由同一群研究者完成的另一项研究试图寻找攻击性特质、暴力犯罪、浸淫于真实世界暴力与电子游戏中的暴力这几个因素间的因果联系。其结论是,虽然家庭暴力与攻击性特质都与暴力犯罪高度相关,但是否浸淫于电子游戏的暴力和暴力犯罪之间的关系并没得到有效的证明,两者几乎没有任何相关性--除非这两者与前述的高相关性特征同时出现[8]。在过去的15年里,针对这一问题已经有着相当数量的元研究,每一个结论都略有区别,导致游戏学社群内就游戏的暴力问题很难形成共识。还有人认为,即使是非暴力的电子游戏也可能会导致攻击行为及暴力行为。例如,Anderson和Dill就似乎相信在电子游戏中遭遇挫折可能会导致暴力和攻击行为的发生。[9]

One of the earliest social science theories (1971) about the role of video games in society involved violence in video games, later becoming known as the catharsis theory. The theory suggests that playing video games in which you perform violent acts might actually channel latent aggression, resulting in less aggression in the players real lives.[6] However, a meta-study performed by Craig A. Anderson and Brad J. Bushman, in 2001, examined data starting from the 1980s up until the article was published, the purpose of this study was to examine whether or not playing violent video games led to an increase in aggressive behaviors.[7] They concluded that exposure to violence in video games did indeed cause an increase in aggression. However, it has been pointed out, and even stressed, by psychologist Jonathan Freedman that this research was very limited and even problematic since overly strong claims were made and the authors themselves seemed extremely biased in their writings. More recent studies, such as the one performed by Christopher J. Ferguson at Texas A&M International University have come to drastically different conclusions. In this study, individuals were either randomly assigned a game, or allowed to choose a game, in both the randomized and the choice conditions exposure to violent video games caused no difference in aggression. A later study (performed by the same people) looked for correlations between trait aggression, violent crimes, and exposure to both real life violence and violence in video games, this study suggests that while family violence and trait aggression are highly correlated with violent crime, exposure to video game violence was not a good predictor of violent crime, having little to no correlation, unless also paired with the above traits that had a much higher correlation.[8] Over the past 15 years, a large number of meta-studieshave been applied to this issue, each coming to its own conclusion, resulting in little consensus in the ludology community. It is also thought that even nonviolent video games may lead to aggressive and violent behaviour. Anderson and Dill seem to believe that it may be due to the frustration of playing video games that could in turn result in violent, aggressive behaviour.[9]

游戏设计师Amy Jo Kim和Jane McGonigal则提出,将电子游戏的强力特性应用于非游戏的场景时,能够大幅提高学习效果。[10][11]这被称作学习的游戏化(gamification of learning),意指将游戏的某些特性从游戏场景中提炼出来,将其运用于像教室这样的学习场景当中。

Game designers Amy Jo Kim and Jane McGonigal have suggested that platforms which leverage the powerful qualities of video games in non-game contexts can maximize learning.[10][11] Known as the gamification of learning, using game elements in non-game contexts extracts the properties of games from within the game context, and applies them to a learning context such as the classroom.

电子游戏的另一个积极影响是能够积极地推动人们参与其他文化活动。玩游戏会提高玩家对其他文化产品的消费(如听音乐或看电视),并能够促进他们积极参与其他艺术活动(如写作或视觉艺术)。[12]不过,从文化角度来看,电子游戏作为传统文化消费形式的补充,实际上限制了它的价值。

Another positive aspect of video games is its conducive character towards the involvement of a person in other cultural activities. The probability of game playing increases with the consumption of other cultural goods (e.g., listening to music or watching television) or active involvement in artistic activities (e.g., writing or visual arts production).[12] Video games by being complementary towards more traditional forms of cultural consumption, inhibit thus value from a cultural perspective.

更多有社会学关怀的研究已经开始试图摆脱以“消极”或“积极”这样简单的观点来评价游戏,而是尝试了解游戏在日常生活的种种复杂状况之中的作用和地位。[13]

More sociologically-informed research has sought to move away from simplistic ideas of gaming as either 'negative' or 'positive', but rather seeking to understand its role and location in the complexities of everyday life.[13]

举例来说,曾经有人建议可以将魔兽世界这款非常流行的大型多人在线游戏用于传染病传播过程的研究,因为在魔兽世界的游戏世界中,曾经有一种类似鼠疫的瘟疫(亡灵天灾)得到了意外的传播。

For example, it has been suggested[by whom?] that the very popular MMO World of Warcraft could be used to study the dissemination of infectious diseases because of the accidental spread of a plague-like disease in the gameworld.

互动学[1]与叙事学之争 "Ludology" vs "Narratology"

[1]

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2013) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

游戏研究的一个主要关注点是围绕叙事学和互动学之间的争论。许多互动学家认为这两者无法共存[14],而另一些人则相信这是两个比较相似,但应当分别研究的领域。许多叙事学家认为游戏与电影和小说类似,核心要素是故事情节。而互动学派的观点则认为游戏与其他媒介不同,其最核心的特点在于玩家主动参与游戏的体验,因此应当有一套不同于传统领域的研究范式。电子游戏“与作为认知与交流结构的叙事截然不同”[15]的观点导致了针对游戏研究及其理论化范式的新的批判、理论移植及重定向、新方法研讨的领域发展。[16][17]游戏研究的一个新进展是开始试图分析交互界面的结构对于已有的键盘-鼠标范式的挑战,这一新范式被称作“可游玩界面[2]ludic interface”。

A major focus in game studies is the debate surrounding narratology and ludology. Many ludologists believe that the two are unable to exist together,[14] while others believe that the two fields are similar but should be studied separately. Many narratologists believe that games should be looked at for their stories, like movies or novels. The ludological perspective says that games are not like these other mediums due to the fact that a player is actively taking part in the experience and should therefore be understood on their own terms. The idea that a videogame is "radically different to narratives as a cognitive and communicative structure"[15] has led the development of new approaches to criticism that are focused on videogames as well as adapting, repurposing and proposing new ways of studying and theorizing about videogames.[16][17] A recent approach towards game studies[which?] starts with an analysis of interface structures and challenges the keyboard-mouse paradigm with what is called a "ludic interface".

辩论双方的学者们在论题的两方面都提出了许多学术见解。曾发表过诸多游戏研究相关文章的著名互动学家Gonzalo Frasca认为,尽管游戏与叙事故事共享了不少相似的元素,但这不能成为将游戏独立出来进行研究的阻碍。[18]他并非想要“取代叙事学方法,而是想要完善它”。[18]

Academics across both fields provide scholarly insight into the different sides of this debate. Gonzalo Frasca, a notable ludologist due to his many publications regarding game studies, argues that while games share many similar elements with narrative stories, that should not prevent games to be studied as games.[18] He seeks not "to replace the narratologic approach, but to complement it."[18]

另一位知名的互动学家Jesper Juul则主张更加严格地区分互动学和叙事学。Juul表明游戏“在所有特定环境中都不可能讲故事。”[14]这一观点认为叙事学和互动学不能同时存在,因为它们本质上就南辕北辙。Juul宣称,两者之间最大的区别是在叙事当中,事件“不得不”彼此相连,而在游戏中,玩家可以控制将会发生的事情。[14]

Jesper Juul, another notable ludologist, argues for a stricter separation of ludology and narratology. Juul argues that games "for all practicality can not tell stories."[14] This argument holds that narratology and ludology cannot exist together because they are inherently different. Juul claims that the most significant difference between the two is that in a narrative, events "have to" follow each other, whereas in a game the player has control over what happens.[14]

Garry Crawford和Victoria K. Gosling的主张则偏向于将叙事视为游戏的基本组成部分,因为“不可能将游戏情节从日常的生活的社会影响中分离出来。反过来说,游玩的行为也会在个人及社会层面展现出有意和无意的影响”。[19]发布于2013年的电子游戏《美国末日/最后生还者》(The Last of Us)被认为是一部“叙事杰作”。[20]游戏研究领域叙事学的支持者认为《最后生还者》及其前后发行的类似游戏可以被视作游戏事实上可以讲故事的例子。

Garry Crawford and Victoria K. Gosling argue in favor of narratives being an essential part of games as "it is impossible to isolate play from the social influences of everyday life, and in turn, play will have both intended and unintended consequences for the individual and society."[19] The Last of Us is a video game released in 2013 that has been referred to as a narrative "masterpiece."[20] Proponents of the narratology side of game studies argue that The Last of Us and similar games that have followed it and preceded it, serve as examples that games can in fact tell stories.

其他研究领域Other areas of research

正如大多数学术研究的学科一样,游戏研究也有一些更专业化领域或子领域。

As is common with most academic disciplines, there are a number of more specialized areas or sub-domains of study.

电子游戏的前领域研究Video game pre-history[[2]]

电子游戏产生前的游戏研究是一个新兴的研究领域,该领域的研究提出现代电子游戏起源于:游乐场马戏团串演中的一些设施,如射击游戏;拥有诸如大型过山车鬼屋等要素的早期康尼岛-风格的娱乐公园;19世纪的景观模拟如立体透视模型全景模型星象仪立体照片等;以及拥有机械游戏机和西洋镜等设备的娱乐场[21]

An emerging field of study looks at the "pre-history" of video games, suggesting that the origins of modern digital games lie in: fairgroundattractions and sideshows such as shooting games; early "Coney Island"-style pleasure parks with elements such as large roller-coasters and "haunted house" simulations; nineteenth century landscape simulations such as dioramaspanoramasplanetariums, and stereographs; and amusement arcades that had mechanical game machines and also peep-show film machines.[21]

游戏与老龄化Games and aging[[3]]

由于人口老龄化的缘故,人们一直对使用游戏改善老年玩家的整体健康状况和社会关系感兴趣。例如 Adam Gazzaley及其团队设计了NeuroRacer(一款试图改善60岁以上老年参与者在游戏之外的认知任务的游戏),而美国退休者协会则组织了一场游戏比赛来改善老年人的社会关系。像Sarah Mosberg Iversen这样的研究人员认为,大多数针对游戏和老龄化的学术工作都包含了经济生产力的主张,[24]而Bob De Schutter和Vero Vanden Abeele则提出了一种不再关注年龄带来的衰退,而是根植于高龄带来的积极因素的游戏设计方法。[25]

In light of population ageing, there has been an interest into the use of games to improve the overall health and social connectedness of ageing players. For example, Adam Gazzaley and his team have designed NeuroRacer (a game that improves cognitive tasks outside of the game among its 60+ year old participants[22]), while the AARP has organized a game jam to improve older people's social connections.[23] Researchers such as Sarah Mosberg Iversen have argued that most of the academic work on games and ageing has been informed by notions of economical productivity,[24] while Bob De Schutter and Vero Vanden Abeele have suggested a game design approach that is not focused on age-related decline but instead is rooted in the positive aspects of older age.[25]

游戏中的虚拟经济Virtual economies in gaming[[4]]

多人在线网络游戏能够为经济学家提供关于真实世界的经济学线索。基于数字信息的市场完全可以追溯到玩家,所以也就体现了真实的经济学问题,比如通货膨胀、通货紧缩甚至经济衰退。因此就能在信息完全充足的情况下研究游戏制作者想出来的解决方式,而因为可以整体地研究其中的经济,也就可以进行经济学实验。这些游戏让经济学家变成全知者,他们能找到他们研究所需的任意一条信息,而在现实世界他们则只能依靠假定去研究。

Massive multiplayer online games can give economists clues about the real world. Markets based on digital information can be fully tracked as they are used by players, and thus real problems in the economy, such as inflation, deflation and even recession. The solutions the game designers come up with can therefore be studied with full information, and experiments can be performed where the economy can be studied as a whole. These games allow the economists to be omniscient, they can find every piece of information they need to study the economy, while in the real world they have to work with presumptions.

希腊的前财政部长,Valve公司的内部经济学家Yanis Varoufakis研究了EVE Online这款游戏并认为电子游戏社区给经济学家一个舞台来实验和模拟未来的经济。[26][27]Edward Castronova已经研究了包括《无尽的任务》(Everquest)和《魔兽世界》在内的多款游戏中的虚拟经济。[28][29]

Former Finance Minister of Greece and Valve's in-house economist Yanis Varoufakis studied EVE Online and argued that video game communities give economists a venue for experimenting and simulating the economies of the future.[26][27] Edward Castronova has studied virtual economies within a variety of games including Everquest and World of Warcraft.[28][29]

对认知的益处Cognitive Benefits[[5]]

对游戏进行的心理学研究提出了一些关于玩游戏是如何为儿童以及成年人带来益处的理论。有些理论声称电子游戏能够帮助提升认知能力,而不是阻碍其发展。这些关于提升的理论包括了对视觉对比敏感度的提升。[30]其他可以提升的能力包括在充满各种障碍的环境中寻找物体的能力,这种能力的发展主要是通过第一人称射击游戏完成的,游戏中的主角必须以第一人称视角观察所有事物,并且需要提高他们的空间注意力,因为他们必须要在一个特定的游戏区域内定位一些物体。[30]游戏通过一些动作要素来达成这种能力的提升,这意味着在虚拟世界中时刻都要设置各种障碍,玩家必须持续观察周边的环境才能取得成功。[30]

The psychological research into games has yielded theories on how playing video games may be advantageous, for both children and for adults. Some theories claim that video games in fact help improve cognitive abilities, rather than impede their development. These improvement theories include the improvement of visual contrast sensitivity.[30] Other developments include the ability to locate something specific among various impediments, this primarily done first-person shooter games where the protagonist must look at everything in a first person view while playing, by doing this they increase their spatial attention due having to locate something among an area of diversions.[30] Games accomplish this by having action in them and such a player must remain observant of the surroundings of the video game in order to achieve success should an impediment come to obstruct their playing in the virtual world.[30]

大脑运作速度的提高可能是电子游戏带来的另外一项认知提升,在持续的游戏过程中,玩家需要思考才能在游戏中表现良好。这种持续性的思考会让大脑持续运作并大幅提高思维速度,因为在游戏中的成功依赖于快速思考的能力。[30]除了思维模式的提升,游戏也能提高玩家的注意力。这是因为动作游戏中持续的战斗需要玩家持续地投入注意力,在这一过程里集中注意力这一技能也被提高了,因为用户必须专注于屏幕上显示的游戏内容。

Another cognitive enhancement that is given by playing video games would be brain functioning speed, due to the constant playing and need to think while playing in order to do well in the game. This constant thinking allows the brain to constantly run and the speed of thought is sharpened greatly, because the need to think quickly is required to succeed.[30] In addition to the pattern being increased, another increase would be the attention of the video game player. This is due to the video games of the action genre having continuous fighting that requires the user’s constant attention and in the process the skill of concentration is also sharpened due to the concentration the user must have on the screen the game is displayed on.

在电子游戏中持续使用游戏控制器也被认为对克服阅读障碍有所帮助。这一持续的过程可以训练用户克服他们在解释能力上的障碍。[30]由于在操作控制器的同时需要观看屏幕上显示的内容,因此游戏也可以提升眼手协调能力。[30]游戏中玩家的协调性也得到提升,在游戏中玩家需要持续观察并从游戏中接受到强烈的精神刺激,而协调性在游戏中又非常重要,因此协调性能在游戏时持续的视觉和身体运动中得到提高。[30]

The overcoming of the condition known as dyslexia is also considered an improvement due to the continuous utilization of controllers for the video games. This continuous process helps to train the users to overcome their condition which impedes in their abilities of interpretation.[30] The ability of hand-eye coordination is also improved thanks in part to video games, due to the need to operate the controller and view the screen displaying the content all at the same time.[30] The coordination of the player is enhanced due the playing and continuous observation of a video game since the game gives high mental stimulation and coordination is important and therefore enhanced due to the constant visual and physical movement that is produced from the playing of the video game.[30]

玩电子游戏还可以提升玩家的社交技巧。这主要得益于多人在线游戏,因为这些游戏需要持续的沟通,玩家之间必须通过社交来完成游戏中的目标。此外用户也可以通过在线游戏认识新朋友,同时与已经熟识的朋友保持沟通,在在线游戏中的持续合作会加强他们之前已经建立起来的联系。有一些游戏是专为辅助学习而设计的,因此玩游戏的另一个好处是游戏可以成为一种寓教于乐的手段。一些电子游戏中包含了解谜类的问题,玩家必须通过思考才能得到正确的解答,而动作要素主导的电子游戏则需要一定的策略才能完成。这一过程可以迫使用户进行批判性的思考因而能提升玩家的思维能力。[30][31]

The playing of video games can also help increase a player's social skills. This is done by playing online multiplayer games which can require constant communication, this leads to socialization between players in order to achieve the goal within the game they may be playing. In addition it can help the users to meet new friends over their online games and at the same time communicate with friends they have already made in the past; those playing together online would only strengthen their already established bond through constant cooperation. Some video games are specifically designed to aid in learning, because of this another benefit of playing video games could be the educational value provided with the entertainment. Some video games present problem solving questions that the player must think on in order to properly solve, while action orientated video games require strategy in order to successfully complete. This process of being forced to think critically helps to sharpen the mind of the player.[30][31]

游戏文化Game Culture

研究游戏文化,也是游戏研究的一个分支领域。喜爱电子游戏的玩家本身就属于亚文化的一部分。他们通常会自发形成一个社区,并使用一套圈内人才能理解的语言。此外,在各大游戏展会上,不少玩家还会穿着喜爱角色的服装进行角色扮演。同时,活动方也会组织玩家进行线下对抗赛。据官方统计,在2017年的德国科隆游戏展上,就有35万名玩家到场。[32]

One aspect of game studies is the study of gaming culture. People who play video games are a subculture of their own. Gamers will often form communities with their own languages, attend conventions where they will dress up as their favorite characters, and have gaming competitions. One of these conventions, Gamescon 2017, had a record attendance with over 350,000 attendees.[32]

玩家的人口学调查Demographics of Gamers

  • 65% 的家庭有至少一个玩家
  • 67% 的家庭有游戏主机或游戏设备
  • 男性玩家的平均年龄在33岁
  • 女性玩家的平均年龄在37岁
  • 男性玩家占总数的59%,女性玩家占41%[33]

  • 65% of households have a gamer.
  • 67% own a console or gaming device.
  • 33 is the average age of male gamers.
  • 37 is the average age of female gamers.
  • 59% of gamers are men. 41% are women.[33]

另见See also

References[[6]]

  1. Jump up^ Huizinga, Johan (1938). Homo Ludens. Haarlem: Tjeenk Willink & zoon. OCLC 962401170.
  2. Jump up^ Mayer, Richard (29 May 2016). "Three Genres of Game Research"Design ToolBox. Retrieved 17 June 2016.
  3. Jump up^ Konzack, Lars (2007). Williams, J. Patrick; Smith, Jonas Heide, eds. "Rhetorics of Computer and Video Game Research". The Players' Realm: Studies on the Culture of Video Games and gamingISBN 9780786428328.
  4. Jump up^ Frasca, Gonzalo (1999). "Ludology Meets Narratology: Similitude and Differences between (video)games and Narrative"Parnasso3.
  5. Jump up^ Juul, Jesper (2004-02-22). "The definitive history of games and stories, ludology and narratology"The Ludologist. Retrieved 2018-03-30.
  6. Jump up^ Feshbach, Seymour; Singer, Robert D. (1971). Television and Aggression; an Experimental Field Study. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. OCLC 941871879.
  7. Jump up^ Anderson, C. A.; Bushman, B. J. (2001). "Effects of Violent Video Games on Aggressive Behavior, Aggressive Cognition, Aggressive Affect, Physiological Arousal, and Prosocial Behavior: A Meta-Analytic Review of the Scientific Literature"Psychological Science12 (5): 353–59. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00366.
  8. Jump up^ Ferguson, Christopher J.; et al. (2008). "Violent Video Games and Aggression: Causal Relationship or Byproduct of Family Violence and Intrinsic Violence Motivation?"Criminal Justice and Behavior35 (3): 311–32. doi:10.1177/0093854807311719.
  9. Jump up^ Anderson, C.A.; Dill, K.E. (2000). "Video games and aggressive thoughts, feelings, and behaviour in the laboratory and in life". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology4: 772–790. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.78.4.772.
  10. Jump up^ Kim, Amy Jo (1 August 2011). "Smart Gamification"SlideShare. Retrieved 8 March 2014.
  11. Jump up^ McGonigal, Jane (2011). Reality is broken: Why games make us better and how they can change the world. New York: Penguin. ISBN 9780099540281.
  12. Jump up^ Borowiecki, Karol J.; Prieto-Rodriguez, Juan (2015). "Video Games Playing: A Substitute for Cultural Consumptions?" (PDF). Journal of Cultural Economics39 (3): 239–58.
  13. Jump up^ Crawford, Garry (2012). Video Gamers. London: Routledge. ISBN 9780415563680.
  14. Jump up to:a b c "A clash between game and narrative"www.jesperjuul.net. Retrieved 2018-03-30.
  15. Jump up^ Aarseth, Espen (2001). "Computer Game Studies, Year One"Game Studies1 (1).
  16. Jump up^ Konzack, Lars (2002). "Computer Game Criticism: A Method for Computer Game Analysis" (PDF). CGDC Conference Proceedings: 89–100 – via DiGRA.
  17. Jump up^ Costikyan, Greg (2002). "I Have No Words & I Must Design: Toward a Critical Vocabulary for Games" (PDF). CGDC Conference Proceedings: 9–34 – via DiGRA.
  18. Jump up to:a b "Ludology"www.ludology.org. Retrieved 2018-03-30.
  19. Jump up^ Crawford, Garry; Gosling, Victoria K. (2009). "More than a game: sports-themed video games and player narratives". Sociology of Sport Journal26: 50–66.
  20. Jump up^ "Why The Last of Us is the first truly mature action game (and our Game of the Year)"gamesradar. Retrieved 2018-03-30.
  21. Jump up^ Grau, Oliver (2004). Virtual ArtMIT PressISBN 978-0-262-57223-1.
  22. Jump up^ Gazzaley, Adam (4 September 2013). "NeuroRacer Study"University of California, San Francisco: Gazzaley Lab. Archived from the original on 8 September 2013. Retrieved 6 September 2013.
  23. Jump up^ Kissell, Margo (17 March 2016). "AARP teams up with students designing games for 50 plus"Miami University. Retrieved 1 March 2018.
  24. Jump up^ Iversen 2014.
  25. Jump up^ De Schutter & Vanden Abeele 2015.
  26. Jump up^ Plumer, Brad (28 September 2012). "The Economics of Video Games"The Washington Post. Retrieved 1 March 2018.
  27. Jump up^ Suderman, Peter (June 2014). "'A Multiplayer Game Environment Is Actually a Dream Come True for an Economist'"Reason. Retrieved 1 March 2018.
  28. Jump up^ Castronova, Edward (July 2002). "On Virtual Economies"CESifo Working Paper Series752 – via SSRN.
  29. Jump up^ Edward., Castronova, (2005). Synthetic worlds: the business and culture of online games. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN 9780226096278OCLC 58648183.
  30. Jump up to:a b c d e f g h Gray, Peter (20 February 2015). "Cognitive Benefits of Playing Video Games"Psychology Today. Retrieved 1 March 2018.
  31. Jump up^ Granic, Isabela; Lobel, Adam; Engels, Rutger C. M. E. (2014). "The Benefits of Playing Video Games" (PDF). American Psychologist69 (1): 66–78. doi:10.1037/a0034857.
  32. Jump up^ Stewart, Sam (28 August 2017). "Gamescom 2017: World's Biggest Video Game Convention Has Biggest Year Ever"IGN. Retrieved 28 February2018.
  33. Jump up^ "2017 Essential Facts About the Computer and Video Game Industry"(PDF). Entertainment Software Association. April 2017. Retrieved 1 March2018.

Further reading[[7]]

External links[[10]]


引用错误:<ref>标签存在,但没有找到<references/>标签