Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The video- and computer-game industry generated a profit of US$6.35 billion in 2001, earnings greater than those of either Holly- wood films or pornography and, in the entertainment field, second only to those of the music industry. It is estimated that 60 per cent of all Americans regularly play computer or video games;142 per cent of them are women; the median age of gamers is twenty-eight.2 The pro- duction budgets for computer games now regularly run into the tens of millions of dollars, and the creation of a single game may involve a team of designers, actors, programmers, and musicians that rivals in size some film production crews. Despite the scale of this phenome- non, surprisingly little scholarship has been devoted to it. What scholarship there is can be divided into four basic categories: 1. History of Computer Gaming. Electronic games actually date back to 1958. In that year Willy Higginbottom, a technician who had designed circuits for the Manhattan Project, connected an ana- log computer to an oscilloscope and some buttons to create an electronic game of tennis. He did not patent the game. The first successful computer game was created three years later by a group of MIT technicians. Called Spacewar, it crudely simulated a spaceship shooting at enemies. It would eventually find its way into coin-operated arcade consoles. Computer games, then, are over forty years old, but it is only in the past twenty or so years that they have had any cultural profile. There has been lit- tle scholarly attempt to document their history, so most of the work in this category is being done by amateur enthusiasts.3 2. Taxonomy. Computer game enthusiasts and developers have been recognizing, defining, and naming computer game genres for the past ten years or so. "Gamers" (a term I will take to include not only enthusiasts but creators of computer games) ~~ Canadian Review of American Studies/Revue canadienne d'~~tudes am~~ricaines 34, no. 1, 2004now recognize such genres as real-time strategy games, role- playing games, simulation games, and first-person shooter games. Many of these genres have recognized sub-genres. For example, some real-time strategy games are called "god games" because they place the player in a position of detached omnipo- tence. Video games tend to be categorized not by narrative con- tent but by style of game play. A real-time strategy game, then, may be set in outer space, in contemporary Europe, or in medi- eval China; because, in each of these settings, the player controls squadrons of fighters and their military hardware from a detached, third-person perspective, they are all real-time strat- egy games. 3. Socio-psychological Studies. This is the largest category of com- puter-game studies. Sociologists, psychologists, women's stud- ies scholars, media scholars, and innumerable journalists have tried to discern the impact that video-game playing is having upon society. Most often, these studies are analyses of the effects of video-game violence or video-game gender representation on children.4 As early as 1982, the United States surgeon general, Dr. C. Everett Koop, publicly declared that "videogames were evil entities that produced 'aberrations in childhood behaviour'" (Poole 218), though he offered no evidence to support his posi- tion. These studies were given a special urgency after the Col- umbine massacre when it was revealed that the two young men who committed that crime were fans of the first-person shooter game DOOM. There was a Senate inquiry on the subject in the wake of that massacre. 4. Formalist Studies. These look at computer games as a new type of media experience and/or a new form of narrative. Much of this scholarship draws upon theories generated in film and televi- sion studies.5 The most prominent theorists working in it are, perhaps, Steven Poole, author of Trigger Happy, and Mark J.P. Wolf, editor of The Medium of the Video Game.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,030 | 0,012 |
| Communication savante | 0,009 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,012 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,021 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».