An old standby of the computer world is the gaming industry, going all the way back to Pong and Pac-man. One of the hottest, relatively recent, developments has been the touch screen, on smart phones and tablets such as iPad. There is a legitimate question as to how this pair of computer tendencies might co-exist.
If the proof is in the pudding, there may be some justification in dismissing these concerns. No such incompatibility has prevented the development of games specifically for touch screens: see my list of the best games for iPad posted elsewhere. This practical evidence, though, has not convinced the nay-sayers.
At the risk of caricaturing the complaint, it does often come down to a fairly crude objection. The gist of the complaint is that the player's fingers get in the way of seeing the screen.
That I suspect has more to do with bad design than touch screen gaming per se. And it seems that such a protest misses a more central insight in all of this. Complaining that a tactile interaction with the screen is problematic is really not seeing the forest for the trees. What is going on here is, I suspect, the revolutionizing of gaming. In fact, it may be a portent of the future of human-computer interfacing.
What do I mean, you ask? Well, before launching fully into explaining that, let's consider some context. There's an old joke that technology is anything invented after you were born. In fact, everything a human uses as a medium for some purpose is a technology. Paint for instance is a technology. Think for a moment about the visceral pleasures of finger painting. Of course, great, important and serious painters use artisanal paint brushes, right?
Don't get distracted from the central point, though. Probably there is not a single person reading this that hasn't at some point in life experienced the joys of sticking fingers into the paint; smearing, spreading and shaping it across a page. Part of the satisfaction of finger painting is the resemblance it has to sculpture. We all know how much children delight in finger painting. Adults, too, though if they can get beyond their inhibitions over acting child-like, can find themselves completely consumed in the tactile and sensual pleasures of finger painting.
Compare that other childhood picture producing technology, the Etch-n-Sketch. I'm not claiming there's not fun in it. It is though a very particular kind of fun: detail-driven and fixated in a vaguely obsessive compulsive way. It's a world away from the uninhibited joy of finger painting. I propose that this sheer joyousness is directly related to the immersion in, not only the finger painting experience, but also into the product of the experience; the very tactile immersion into the medium.
The finger painter is literally "in" the picture that he is painting. This is not a metaphor, but a precise description: the painting is an extension of the painter and vice versa. It is necessary to fully grasp this distinguishing quality to appreciate why touch screen gaming is not only the future of gaming, but of human-computer interface. Like the finger painting, touch screen gaming immerses players right into the game.
Those who complain about the absence of buttons and joysticks, mice and keyboards, are simply expressing the annoyance of adaptation-challenge always expressed by those left behind by change. They are resentful that their refined skills, in which they have invested so much time and energy, are suddenly obsolete.
History's full of these kinds of self-serving skill-protecting complaints masquerading as principled aesthetic objections. From photographers complaining about digital cameras, old ink-stained newspaper men complaining about the internet, motion picture moguls complaining about television, big band musicians complaining about the phonograph, and horse-and-carriage jockeys complaining about the automobile, this is an old story. And the outcome is usually the same, despite the best efforts of those with heavy investments in the past technologies. Though painful for the individuals involved, unless we are content to live in the past, this is ultimately for the good.
And of course superior function, though real enough, isn't even the real issue. The common themes here are more immediate and accessible experiences. Think about the very first person, whoever he was, that connected speakers to his television so as to produce surround sound. Surely he didn't know it, but he was blazing a way down a path which would eventually lead to that day not so far in the future when we'll all experience our favorite programs as total virtual reality scenarios.
It verges on being hackneyed to observe how much we like to "lose ourselves" in our entertainment. We seem to enjoy such recreational diversions most when we feel "wrapped up in it." A major part of the experience is our desire for however briefly to leave behind the concerns of the mundane world. Anthropology knows of no humans who haven't used some kind of intoxicants to alter consciousness. The desire for however brief a refuge in fantasy or wonder appears to be essentially human. It probably explains why we endlessly push our entertainment technology toward the experience of immersion.
The recent explosion in popularity of Wii is a case in point. It illustrates the desire to bathe ourselves in a tactically immersive gaming experience. The immersive experience of the touch screen approaches such immersion in a manner no control console or keyboard ever will. It links the child-like joy of finger painting and the intense pleasures promised by full virtual reality engagement. It links our personal past with our social future
But don't expect the appetite for technological immersion to stop there. You've no doubt seen Sci-Fi TV shows where lights are activated by voice command. Pioneering research in strong AI suggests that may be hardly scraping the surface. We may see light control systems that come on when we think about needing them. Or lights that automatically adjust to the growing fatigue of our eyes when preoccupied in a task. Immersion is the natural inclination of human-computer interface.
These touch screen games, modest as they appear today, are but a way-station into our future. The kind of games that designers create for touch screen devices like the iPad reveals much about their own capacity to contribute to the future. When you meet a game that is dependent upon "buttons" on the screen, you've encountered a designer who, sadly, is much like film makers and record producers of the past. Only able to conceive of the new technology as means to record live performances, they set up their camera and microphone in static processes which were oblivious to the rich potential that would soon be unlocked those creative souls who ventured into the world of the yet to be created disciplines of cinematography and splice-editing.
Only when game designers have fully immersed themselves in the creative possibilities of designing games organic to the touch screen, will they truly broach the potential for optimizing the best games for iPad, and other touch screen devices. The choice is whether they will be stragglers of the past or pioneers of the future.
If the proof is in the pudding, there may be some justification in dismissing these concerns. No such incompatibility has prevented the development of games specifically for touch screens: see my list of the best games for iPad posted elsewhere. This practical evidence, though, has not convinced the nay-sayers.
At the risk of caricaturing the complaint, it does often come down to a fairly crude objection. The gist of the complaint is that the player's fingers get in the way of seeing the screen.
That I suspect has more to do with bad design than touch screen gaming per se. And it seems that such a protest misses a more central insight in all of this. Complaining that a tactile interaction with the screen is problematic is really not seeing the forest for the trees. What is going on here is, I suspect, the revolutionizing of gaming. In fact, it may be a portent of the future of human-computer interfacing.
What do I mean, you ask? Well, before launching fully into explaining that, let's consider some context. There's an old joke that technology is anything invented after you were born. In fact, everything a human uses as a medium for some purpose is a technology. Paint for instance is a technology. Think for a moment about the visceral pleasures of finger painting. Of course, great, important and serious painters use artisanal paint brushes, right?
Don't get distracted from the central point, though. Probably there is not a single person reading this that hasn't at some point in life experienced the joys of sticking fingers into the paint; smearing, spreading and shaping it across a page. Part of the satisfaction of finger painting is the resemblance it has to sculpture. We all know how much children delight in finger painting. Adults, too, though if they can get beyond their inhibitions over acting child-like, can find themselves completely consumed in the tactile and sensual pleasures of finger painting.
Compare that other childhood picture producing technology, the Etch-n-Sketch. I'm not claiming there's not fun in it. It is though a very particular kind of fun: detail-driven and fixated in a vaguely obsessive compulsive way. It's a world away from the uninhibited joy of finger painting. I propose that this sheer joyousness is directly related to the immersion in, not only the finger painting experience, but also into the product of the experience; the very tactile immersion into the medium.
The finger painter is literally "in" the picture that he is painting. This is not a metaphor, but a precise description: the painting is an extension of the painter and vice versa. It is necessary to fully grasp this distinguishing quality to appreciate why touch screen gaming is not only the future of gaming, but of human-computer interface. Like the finger painting, touch screen gaming immerses players right into the game.
Those who complain about the absence of buttons and joysticks, mice and keyboards, are simply expressing the annoyance of adaptation-challenge always expressed by those left behind by change. They are resentful that their refined skills, in which they have invested so much time and energy, are suddenly obsolete.
History's full of these kinds of self-serving skill-protecting complaints masquerading as principled aesthetic objections. From photographers complaining about digital cameras, old ink-stained newspaper men complaining about the internet, motion picture moguls complaining about television, big band musicians complaining about the phonograph, and horse-and-carriage jockeys complaining about the automobile, this is an old story. And the outcome is usually the same, despite the best efforts of those with heavy investments in the past technologies. Though painful for the individuals involved, unless we are content to live in the past, this is ultimately for the good.
And of course superior function, though real enough, isn't even the real issue. The common themes here are more immediate and accessible experiences. Think about the very first person, whoever he was, that connected speakers to his television so as to produce surround sound. Surely he didn't know it, but he was blazing a way down a path which would eventually lead to that day not so far in the future when we'll all experience our favorite programs as total virtual reality scenarios.
It verges on being hackneyed to observe how much we like to "lose ourselves" in our entertainment. We seem to enjoy such recreational diversions most when we feel "wrapped up in it." A major part of the experience is our desire for however briefly to leave behind the concerns of the mundane world. Anthropology knows of no humans who haven't used some kind of intoxicants to alter consciousness. The desire for however brief a refuge in fantasy or wonder appears to be essentially human. It probably explains why we endlessly push our entertainment technology toward the experience of immersion.
The recent explosion in popularity of Wii is a case in point. It illustrates the desire to bathe ourselves in a tactically immersive gaming experience. The immersive experience of the touch screen approaches such immersion in a manner no control console or keyboard ever will. It links the child-like joy of finger painting and the intense pleasures promised by full virtual reality engagement. It links our personal past with our social future
But don't expect the appetite for technological immersion to stop there. You've no doubt seen Sci-Fi TV shows where lights are activated by voice command. Pioneering research in strong AI suggests that may be hardly scraping the surface. We may see light control systems that come on when we think about needing them. Or lights that automatically adjust to the growing fatigue of our eyes when preoccupied in a task. Immersion is the natural inclination of human-computer interface.
These touch screen games, modest as they appear today, are but a way-station into our future. The kind of games that designers create for touch screen devices like the iPad reveals much about their own capacity to contribute to the future. When you meet a game that is dependent upon "buttons" on the screen, you've encountered a designer who, sadly, is much like film makers and record producers of the past. Only able to conceive of the new technology as means to record live performances, they set up their camera and microphone in static processes which were oblivious to the rich potential that would soon be unlocked those creative souls who ventured into the world of the yet to be created disciplines of cinematography and splice-editing.
Only when game designers have fully immersed themselves in the creative possibilities of designing games organic to the touch screen, will they truly broach the potential for optimizing the best games for iPad, and other touch screen devices. The choice is whether they will be stragglers of the past or pioneers of the future.
About the Author:
To check out the hottest news in the world of touch screen games, check out Mishu Hull's regular posts at the Best Games for iPad site. He writes on a variety of technology topics. His recent slam of the newest version of Kindle Fire, " Kindle Fire Tries it Again, But... ," is required reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment