A Decade in Games Studies. Critical and reflexive interrogations on digital play and games research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the present issue, GAME celebrates ten years of activity as an independent academic journal, one that is neither tied to a commercial publisher nor to a single institution. As a way of celebration, the journal will now be accepting submissions for rolling issues along with our traditional theme-based, monographic issues. This is also a chance to glance back at the history of the field of game studies, and of our journal’s place in the broader research communities, over the course of the past decade. Table of Contents: M. Benoit Carbone, F. Giordano, I. Girina, I. Mariani, M. Teti – Ten years of GAME – Games as Art, Media, Entertainment B. Soderman, J. Keever – The Playful Turn and Critical Play S. Caselli, K. Bonello Rutter Giappone, T. Z. Majkowski – Ten years of Historical Game Studies. Towards the intersection with memory studies Z. Rizvi, S. Mukherjee – “Your Subaltern is not my Subaltern”. Intersectionality and the Dangers of a Single Game-story M. O’Brien – The many facets of culture in digital games policy: the EU dimension L. P. Bruno – Game Studies Meets Japanese Studies Ten Years of Research D. Guay-Bélanger, M. Deslongchamps-Gagnon, F. Lavigne, B. Perron – Game(play) Archives: Quebec Video Gamesas Case Study D. Cavallotti – Games and Cathode Rays. Discourses on a New Medium in the Italian Specialized Magazines (1981-1988) G. Fantacci – Sovversioni Videoludiche. Dalle avanguardie alle pratiche performative in-game The rich array of topics and diverse approaches that populate this issue represents an example of the intercultural, transdisciplinary research into games, play, and gaming that GAME has been welcoming and for which it will continue to represent a generous platform. In this issue, our authors grapple with a wide range of perspectives and conceptual frameworks that represent the interdisciplinary development of games studies as a field over the course of the past two decades. Overall, these contributions explore disciplines like media and games archaeologies, offer reflections on dimensions like agency and ownership, explore industrial and legislative frameworks, and interrogate the relations between art and avantgarde in and through gaming. While focusing on a variety of national and transnational contexts, this issue’s contributions offer theoretical and conceptual frameworks that address foundational questions for games studies, such as the notion of play and its ideological production in the late twentieth century, the sociocultural construction of games as object of investigation, and the nature and dynamics of national and global industrial formations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.045 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".