Are Video Games Culturally Dominant

In Patrick Jagoda’s (2017) essay “Videogame Criticism and Games in the 21st Century,” the author makes a number of claims about the nature of videogames and the meaning that can be inferred from them. Jagoda’s main arguments are that 1) videogames today have varied functions (exhibited by the various genres proliferated in the platform) and cannot be seen as representing the same elements that characterized them in their infancy many decades ago; and that 2) they represent a complex and highly nuanced form of life that is beyond the means of any simple critique or analysis. As Jagoda (2017) states, videogames “manifest a form of sociopolitical intervention, an element of everyday life, a form of personal expression, and a medium for artistic production” (p. 9). In other words, videogames are a dynamic form that cannot easily be boxed or labeled as representing a specific set of values, ideals, tools, outcomes, or meaning. This paper will explore Jagoda’s arguments and also address another of the major issues, which he analyzes—the question videogames’ cultural dominance.
Videogames have varied functions, as Jagoda points out when he discusses the many different genres that have emerged over the years. For instance, there “serious games,” “art games,” action games, and so on: there is virtually a type of game for just about every taste, which means that the people who engage with these games are typically diverse as well. Some will play only a certain type of game while others might play a variety of games. For some the function will be entertainment, others to hone a skill, others to socialize with friends, and for others it may even serve as a means of employment (gaming has in fact become an industry, as is evident on popular social media platform YouTube where gamers earn celebrity by posting routine videos of their playing accompanied by commentary: PewDiePie is one example of a gamer who has millions of followers—but there are many others as well). Thus, videogames are not the same things they were when Atari hit the stands in the 1980s. Those 8-bit videogames were very basic and consisted of elementary, arcade-style applications. They did not command they same level of skill, attention, engagement, study, practice, scrutiny, or social interaction that many of today’s games command. The evolution of gaming has altered drastically as a result of advancements in computer technology, maturation of themes, and the development of the overall genres. They are as varied as genres in literature or genres in music or genres in film. They exist across a range of platforms, from PC-based games to online games to console games (Playstation or Xbox or Nintendo, for example). They are no long part of a niche market, as Jagoda (2017) observes: they have grown from their humble origins to reach a broader market and to appeal to a wider demographic of all ages and genders. One might find a grandfather playing Minesweeper on a PC and a teenage girl playing Halo on Xbox in the same house. The utility and proliferation of computers have assisted in this expansion of gaming to include such a wider demographic.
As Jagoda (2017) argues, videogames also represent a complex and highly nuanced form of life that includes sociopolitical manifestations, everyday life experiences, personal expression and artistic expression. Games can combine art with technology and narrative just as they can still offer up basic, time-passing utility for audiences who prefer a simple form of recreation like computer-based solitaire. Thus, games have embraced popular and counter-cultural themes; they have embraced design and art to attract players; they have embraced music and other forms of media. This has allowed the make-up of players to be diverse as well. Jadoga (2017) notes that “approximately 44% of videogame players were women in 2015” (p. 11). That is an impressive statistic that shows how broadly games appeal to the populace and how important gaming has become to culture in general. It is not a “male” thing to do but something that men and women engage in. In fact, even organizations and movements have gotten involved in videogames in order to advocate for important causes in society: “In the twenty-first century, there has been an increase in serious videogames, in particular. Notably, the Games for Change foundation was established in 2004 and, since that time, has sought to create and distribute games that contribute to participatory advocacy” (Jagoda, 2017, pp. 7-8). Such games have focused on violence in Darfur, the corporate greed of Big Oil, and climate change.
Jagoda’s third major argument addresses the question of videogames’ cultural dominance. He argued that in today’s media ecology, there is no real dominant medium. Rather, Jagoda notes that “the contemporary transmedia ecology privileges the merging and copresence of cultural forms (facilitated by the metamedium of the digital computer) over an obsolescence or replacement model” (p. 12). However, videogames are a “central form of aesthetic production” (p. 12) which means that even though they do not dominate culture, they do play a significant and pivotal role in culture. They act as a hinge upon which various cultural expressions find a foothold and a place to swing for audiences: games give a platform for numerous artists, producers, story-tellers, designers, activists, advocates, organizations, and so on, to achieve their specific goals. But videogames themselves are not anymore crucial to the survival of culture or to the direction of today’s culture than any other important media in the 21st century. They are all, in a way, interconnected and polymorphous. Jagoda attests that whether videogames are culturally dominant “remains to be seen” (p. 12)—implying that games could take over all other forms of media to be the one source of information, entertainment, and communication that most impacts society in terms of cultural inputs.
If videogames are culturally dominant, this has the following two implications for how we think about human culture today. It would mean that old media (books, newspapers, magazines) would be dead. Indeed, their usefulness may have already reached their peak. Today’s culture industry is well aware of the demand for interactive engagement, in which players can engage with their media instead of sitting their passively enjoying it. Passive forms of entertainment may follow in the footsteps of old media. This is already being seen, for instance, in the way that people in the 21st century have embraced social media; nothing could be more interactive than this form of media in which users communicate directly to other users, cultivate a brand, offer entertainment, or comment on one another’s posts. It is the ultimate in interactive media. Videogames serve as a medium for social media users, as YouTube shows, where videos on playing games pull in millions of views every day. The second implication is that how we think about human culture today is dependent on digital technology and its ability to reflect our own personal interests. We are entering into a kind of virtual world or virtual reality where we can escape from this world and find seclusion in the virtual world. It is really not much different from seeking escape through drugs, because in both cases there is a disconnect from the real world—and, in both cases, the habit can become addictive and even dangerous to one’s health. Thus, should videogames become culturally dominant, the health of human society could be in danger.
References
Jagoda, P. (2017). Videogame Criticism and Games in the 21st Century. American
Literary History, 00(0), pp. 1–14.