MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4414342311 · doi:10.32920/ifmj.v5i1-2.2440

Surreal(ist) Video Games

2025· article· en· W4414342311 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jenna Ng, Quinn McMahon

Notice bibliographique

RevueInteractive Film and Media Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueDigital Games and Media
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésRelation (database)Presentation (obstetrics)Journaling file systemContemplationKey (lock)Reflection (computer programming)Process (computing)Game designVideo gameDocumentation

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Lucid Assemblage is a short exploration game created to embody Surrealism in its development and output. Its objective is to serve as a microcosmic exploration of an attempt to implement Surrealist philosophy in video games. In the process, it forms part of a wider contemplation of video game design in relation to art and philosophy movements, an area we consider underserved by current game design literature. We developed the project with a reflective practice methodology derived from Newsome-Ward & Ng (2021), in turn inspired by Donald Schön’s classic The Reflective Practitioner, to unveil “knowledge about practice through practice” (Newsome-Ward & Ng 2021, p. 559; emphasis in original). Our approach involved three stages. Firstly, we researched and collated key aspects of Surrealist philosophy, eventually identifying the 3 most dominant tenets to inform our project: dreams and the subconscious; nonconformism and counterculture; and irrationality. In the second stage, we ideated, designed and implemented a media artefact based on the crystallised tenets of Surrealist philosophies, accompanied by documentation concurrently made through journaling and detailed recording of processes, inspirations, contradictions and challenges. Finally, we reflected on the development process and the resulting product by correlating how the development of the project performed and/or reflected ‘Surreal’ qualities via the three identified tenets. We also conducted close reading of the work itself, specifically of its gameplay, presentation and narrative, to examine its reflection of Surrealist philosophies by which it had been implemented. Our key results from this study in relation to the method of Surrealist game design were two-fold. The first was the strange tension of the subconscious against the conscious in developing the game. Incorporating Surrealist philosophy into the project’s development process itself, our approach was influenced by the original Surrealists’ inclination towards automatism, a technique that prioritises spontaneous thinking to generate ideas untainted by rational oversight, thus tapping into the subconscious. By integrating automatism into game design, forethought could be minimised and the game would be positioned as a raw Surrealist expression. But this basis of the automatic game development framework that guided Lucid Assemblage’s production became a contradictory process which mirrored the paradoxes at the heart of Surrealism — the endeavour of thinking about how to not think – against the conscious, involved and functional decision-making and actions necessary to the creative act. Surrealist game development is thus a complex balancing act — one must minimise forethought to maximise spontaneity, but exercise a degree of reason to produce something comprehensible as a game. In this process, time management also becomes a major challenge. To avoid spontaneous ideas extending the project duration in perpetuity, one must define some kind of end point. The greater the span of time between idea and implementation, the more considerations the idea undergoes, and thus rationalised. Secondly (if relatedly), guarding against tangential conscious thoughts and influences for the game’s development, even when – or perhaps particularly when – not actively developing the game, also emerges as a deeply covert, if not impossible, endeavour. We continue thinking about and feeding into our minds ideas about the project even as we are not actively working on the project. In our reflections, we note how these challenges, whilst present in other forms of Surrealist art, are exacerbated by game development’s relative lack of immediacy (e.g. as opposed to automatic drawing or writing) and in its more long-drawn process of steps and stages stretched across ideation, mediation and computational processes. In this instance, the automatic game development framework was successful in producing a ‘Surreal’ game by limiting rationalisation in the design process. However, it is uncertain if the same result would have been achieved had the ideation process not been targeted toward the tenets. Further research might focus on automatic game development in the absence of such a constraint.

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,908
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,402

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,012
Tête enseignante GPT0,319
Écart entre enseignants0,307 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueInteractive Film and Media JournalMême sujetDigital Games and MediaTravaux en français237 207