MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W95853058 · doi:10.25071/1718-4657.36719

Crisis' as Tool in the Digital Games Industry: Resistance or Command and Conquer?

2009· article· en· W95853058 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueIntersections conference journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Games and Media
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Theme (computing)IdeologyResistance (ecology)HegemonyPublic relationsState (computer science)Political scienceWork (physics)Political economyMedia studiesSociologyEngineeringComputer sciencePoliticsHistoryLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From media-driven moral panics to colossal business failures, digital games have historically been rife with crisis, defining the games industry and its practices to a significant degree. More recently, media discourse regarding the very aggressive global economic crisis is host to an ideological game where the form and context of crisis is shaped into a number of disparate and sometimes contradictory conclusions about the current state of digital game development. I will provide an overview pinpointing some of the recent claims made about the digital games industry and relate this discursive context to the ongoing challenges of the peoplewho work within it. Additionally, in an effort to address the title and theme of the Intersections2009 Conference, I wish to highlight the ways in which crisis can be “disruptive”, but also manipulable and productive in ways that reveal both hegemonic industry mandates and opportunities for bottom-up mobilization.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.724
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it