Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
About Me
- Dawn Sparks
- I am currently an adjunct professor at three different colleges: Northwest Shoals Community College, Columbia State Community College, and Itawamba Community College. This means my life consists of all things English related 24 hours a day.
Subscribe To
Posts
Comments
In this essy, Hillard draws the reader's attention to the value of charater development in a book as opposed to a video game. He tells us that, in a novel, the author has to create an inspiring character, wheras in a video game, the character's personality is based on what the player does with the controller.
ReplyDeleteHillard focuses quite a bit on the fact that the story line of a video game is based on what the player decides to do with his or her controller. He also states that an author of a book has to fully create the character and decide his morals, whereas the video game is left up to the player.
An example of Hillard guiding the reader from one idea to the next is cleverly shown when he discusses video game producers wanting to sell more video games. He discusses the video game industry focusing less on the actual story and more on creating a game that is fun to play. Then he continues into the argument by saying that if the game is not fun to play then no one would buy it. Then continues into explaining that book publishers have to work harder to sell more books.
The main value of Hillard's argument is arguing how books are better for us than video games. He explains that while video games are fun to play, they don't offer inspiring stories. He also argues that they don't test human value, which books do with every word. He is basically questioning whether or not a video game can inspire someone as much as a novel or story can.
The main difference between adventure stories and video games that hilliard draws attention to is that one has to be well written and entertaining and the other just has to be fun to play.
ReplyDeleteHilliard uses opposition to show that adventure novles and video games are a lot alike in that they both have compelling conflict and conflict resolution. He says that arguments for too much violence are weak.
Hilliard uses the same criterion as Miguel Sicrat. He compares video games and adventure novels and looks for the good and bad in them.
In the second to last paragraph, Hilliard transitions to a new topic and defends his reasoning and why he thinks this way.
The value at the root is that books inspire, video games entertain.
1. Hilliard points out that adventure stories are about hero’s and the things that they go through and have to prevail over to get there and that it allows your mind to imagine how it would play out and that video games do not allow your minds to think the scenes up alone it is already there for you.
ReplyDelete2. Hilliard talks about how the storyteller may not be able to interest the one who is reading it.
3. Hilliard talks about how the inventors and writers of the video games and the stories must make the action scenes exciting for the reader or player.
4. In the fourth paragraph Hilliard talks about how adventure stories are about how the hero triumphs over the villain and in the fifth paragraph he talks about how in modern times a child is more likely to be holding a small video game than a book around. His point is that books are losing their values in the world.
5. The value of Hilliard’s argument is that losing yourself in a book or being able to imagine a scene in your head is becoming hard to do because of video games. People are losing their creative ability because the scenes are already made out for them they just have to walk through it and several video games do not have a big or real story behind them.
The author wants you to notice that in adventure books the characters and the development are key to the whole story and that there is an underlying ethical meaning behind it, and in video games about adventure, it is merely about getting to your next task rather than the travel itself.
ReplyDeleteHe uses the opposition to further bolster the argument by showing a game that actually had a moral dilemma but still failed in other aspects.
The author judges games based on whether or not they inspire and captivate, rather than entertain.
His transition into the third paragraph changes the mood from fun loving to talk of peril and the ills that overcome story characters.
He is trying to say that the story telling in video games needs to be on par with traditional books so as to lean towards a more in depth story and not just entertainment.
The difference between adventure stories and video games that Hillard draws the reader's attenetion to is the fact that in stories, there is a end. In video games, the hero continues to go on and on to higher levels. In adventure stories, the story actually has an end usually with the hero saving whoever or whatever is in danger.
ReplyDeleteHillard uses oppostion well by using certain games, movies, and stories. In each example that he uses, he gives his argument and what other people might think of it.
The criterion that Hillard uses is by him playing the video games. He could only evaluate them if he played them to see if they were the same as stories or different.
In the beginning of the argument, Hillard is for video games, but throughtout the article he changes his opinion. I think that his strategy is to make the reader see every point that he is explaining. He wants the reader to understand the big difference between stories and video games. He also wants the reader to be able to view both sides of the argument.
The value at the root of Hillard's argument is that video games do not provide the depth of things that books explain when it comes to the crisis of the problem. Then again, video games do have positive value while also having limitations.
In the essay the writer talks about adventure in vidoe games and books. He says that video games do not provide the depth that books do when it comes to crisis. Basically that you can't use as much imagiontion as to what is going on in a vidoe game as you can with a book.
ReplyDeleteHe talks about how he also plays video games but the entertainment is all wrong.
He says that the gamers just go through the motions. The player isn't rescuing the princess for any sense of honor. He is rescuing her to get to the next level.
On page 216 the first paragraph easily flows with the next. He talks about not getting a sense of honor with the first, then the second is talking about how a vidoe game was created where people could actually do moral things and make their own decisions.
He says that adventure is good when it comes to books, but video games are used for the wrong entertainment. They are a lot alike but video games are changing the way we as a populations look at a situation.
The difference between adventure stories and video games is that video games are more for entertainment rather that being inspired by an adventure story. Hilliard gets life lessons out of books, such as working hard to do what's right rather than walking away simply because it's too hard to deal with. Video games do not give him life lessons or ethical viewson things, but it is very amusing to play video games and get high scores. Hilliard says he loves video games and adventure stories, and video games entertain him and relieves him from stress. In the essay, Hilliard is saying how writers design video games to be enjoyable, and no one one would buy a video game that teaches ethics or maorals. Then, he says that book-publishes want to sell as many books as possible just like game designers. The true value is that video games are fun to play, but the games will never give you as much information and learning as a book.
ReplyDeleteHilliard makes a very interesting argument about the value of video games in society. The main difference between books and videogames Hilliard points out is that books shape moral and ethical ideas more than a videogame does. This is a very valid point. In a book, we can find ourselves idolizing the main character, and if that character makes good decisions we want to as well. In a video game, a player’s only objective is to beat the game. Because video games have no real consequences, a player can do whatever it takes to win. Even Bioshock, the opposition Hilliard presents, faces this dilemma. In the game the moral decisions a player must make does not really affect if the player beats the game or not. This ethical value is the criterion Hilliard uses to evaluate a videogame.
ReplyDeleteHilliard is an excellent writer. He transitions from the point about what sells videogames to what sells books by writing about how the publishers of each want to make a profit. First, he writes on how video games are made mainly for enjoyment, and having to face consequences for decisions in videogames is not very appealing to customers. He then transitions from how fun video games sell to how book publishers also want to sell. The difference, as the author sees it, is that successful books are based on good story telling not how fun they are. Good storytelling has hard decisions with consequences for characters to make.
The author obviously really enjoys both video games and books. Although he may like both, he puts moral and ethical lessons above the enjoyment. Hilliard’s whole argument all boils down to the root that someone should gain something besides enjoyment from what they do or read. He argues for gaining good moral values. And although I’m a huge fan of videogames, I do agree with him on this point.
The difference between adventure stories and video games that Hilliard draws attention to is how "stories" are about making you put yourself into the story. Look for the inspration, hope, and determination. The video games have to insure that you are entertained. They need to make sure that you would want to purchase the game rather than ensure that you are getting the "storyline".
ReplyDeleteHilliard sets up the argument by first stateing what he got out of books as a child and what video games lack. Saying that a writer, of the stories, lives the crisis and defines who the characters are. Where in creating video games you have to focus mainly on the entertainment of it.
The main crterion he uses to evaluate video games is the lack of moral and intereseting dilemmas presented. When you get lost in a story in a book you can become part of the book almost, making friends with the charaters as he refered to it. Where on the video game we simply focus on getting to the next level and often time miss what the true adventure is.
Hilliard carefully guides you from one book to another, refering to "the lord of the rings" and then takes you into "alice in wonderland" making you remember those childhood stories. The strategy was calling your attention to well know books, and movies and bring you into the stories just enough to identify with them.
The value of his argument is that movies and video games though entertaining don't allow you to see the crisis as clearly and look for the hope in the hero, whether it be a "hobit" or a "rabbit". With the inspriation needed to see these things in real life it is kind of a waste.
The difference between adventure stories and video games, according to Hillard, is that a video game does not have a well developed story line or "in-depth character..." He states, "All too often the fantasy worlds in which we attept to immerse ourselves through graphic game play prove too shallow to offer any in-depth character or story developement, which is essential for good adventure stories." video games often distract us from the story line with minigames and side adventures that can alter the story.
ReplyDeleteHillard says that he likes video games but he grew up with a mother who loved to read and imparted that love onto himself and his siblings. Sharing with us that he spent many a day in the library on "vacations".
He says that video games have no morals that you can learn from and that often times they don't present "interesting moral dilemmas or opportunities for learning."
In one paragraph he is talking about players completing a series of objectives to reach the next level and that all of the learning and inspiration and imagination shifts to amusement. Then in the next paragraph he talks about video games presenting dilemmas and opportunities for learning.
That the general public is shifting from books as the main entertainment and to television and video games because video games provide realistic visualization rather than the visualization of a book.
in this essay, Hillard is basically saying it mis easier to come up with a video game character then it is in a novel. the one in the game can be just some boring dude that does cool stufff but not in a book the character has to grab the attion of the reader.
ReplyDeletehe is saying in a video game the character's chocies are easier to make and if you choose to play it one way you can go back and play the other way to but not in a story once the auther makes the person choose something you have to stick with it.
the example he is making is that video games may be cooler and more excitting you will get tierd of it preety soon where as a book you could read over and over.
the main value is that books are better then vidoe games for the mind.
1. Hillard states that with literature, action sequences are used as tools to progress the story - to delve deeper into the internal conflicts, victories, and defeats of its characters, but with videogames, however, story is merely used as a basic element to progress the participant to the next flashy action sequence.
ReplyDelete2. By stating that any form of communication can fall victim to bad writing, Hiller acknowledges that videogames do have the ability to inspire greatness in the masses, but he goes on to say that they routinely fail to do so.
3. The criterion is that videogames are society's main, most widely embraced, form of communicating character ideals.
4. At the close of the ninth paragraph, Hiller states that a videogames developer's primary concern is not story, but the development of an enjoyable games that will make lots and lots of money. Transitioning to the next paragraph, he says that that is basically the same primary goal for book publishers, but the trick to do it, to sell lots and lots of books, is different - it requires great storytelling, not bloody action and blight, flashing lights. It reminds me of an apologist attitude towards the argument. Finding similarities in both mediums can open someone up to the idea of reaching for higher ground in both.
5. That videogames have the opportunity to inspire greatness, possibly affect someone's life for the better, if there were a greater emphasis on storytelling.
Hilliard says the difference between adventure and videogames is the focus it puts on parts of the story. Adventure books focus on the story as the main value,using action as tools for storytelling. Videogames are mainly about action with small bits of story thrown in to piece the action together.
ReplyDeleteHilliard agrees that most videogames have poor stories and choices that do not morally effect the player. He uses the opposition's arguement to make the point that videogames have to potential to tell a story like a book but fail to take advantage of it.
Hilliard uses the Game Bioshock to illustrate that videogames can be used to tell a meaningful story. He also cites that because videogames are mainly for entertainment, the story is usually pushed aside so the gameplay is entertaining.
Hilliard transitions by using the common idea of "zero to hero" to start talking about how videogame stories are presented.
His root value is that videogames should not be discounted as a valuable storytelling method.
Michael Hilliard describes adventure stories as connecting readers to growth and development by being able to identify with inspiration. In describing video games, Hilliard claims the focus really doesn’t stay with inspiration and learning but rather centralizes on skill and progression levels of tasks given to the individual. Opposition is used by describing the downside, or complaints of video games. These include the violence the games can portray, the replacement of using gaming consoles to reading a book, and how real word violence may be associated with video games. The author cites statistics such as the popularity of video games among females and also the average age of a “gamer” being 35. To evaluate video games, the author references Miguel Sicart to show that video games can have some value but many times cease to inspire the individual. He further accounts his own experiences to reflect on how games can created an escape from reality. He also clearly defines the limitations games do have by consistently comparing the value of reading an adventure to playing one only for amusement.
ReplyDeleteHillard's essay points brings up a few differences between video games and books read by individuals. His belief is that books have an inspiring sort of vibe to them. They promote and encourage a person to visualize the story in their heads and play the scenes out in ones minds. Video games on the other hand seems to be full of cut scenes and videos meant to explain the story line.
ReplyDeleteThen hillard seems to use a opposition form of writing to help his argument. This form of argumentative writing helps his point because he can get the reader to look at both sides of of the equation. To look at both Video games and the book reading perspective.
Being that video games do not activate or inspire a mind to imagination could be his main criterion. Hillard states that video games are just mearly a boss that you need to overcome in order to make it to the next level.
One of hillards strategies is that he likes to throw his opinion around slightly from one arguing point to the other. an example of one of these places would be in the last paragraph. The author points out that he likes video games but changes over and begins arguing that video games often amuse someones mind rather that inspire it like a book can.
Hillards root point seem to say that he would believe that books should really be encouraged to read for young minds. this would be able to boost their imagination rather than just promoting their skill and tactics in gaming.
The article Adventure is Calling contrasts the differences between adventure stories and video games. The difference between the stories and video games that Hilliard draws the reader’s attention to is that of video games being entertaining and fun, but adventure stories being inspiring and contributing to the “growth and development of society.” Hilliard clearly shows the reader the difference between the games and stories, as well as provides evidence for both sides.
ReplyDeleteHilliard develops his argument by presenting both sides of it. He uses opposition by contrasting both sides. The one side is that of the adventure stories; they provide a meaning and depth that does not come through video games. On the other hand, he presents the positive value of video games; that they are fun, entertaining, and “relaxing.” His argument is made all the more effective by addressing both sides and opposing them.
Hilliard uses the value of adventure stories to evaluate video games. He does so by addressing the positive of video games compared to reading stories. The positives are that they can be more captivating, they are relaxing and provide a way of escape with little effort, and they are fun and enjoyable to a large age group. Hilliard also talks about the negatives of the video games compared to adventure stories. These are that video games can distract the player from main idea of adventure and plot, they also give less depth in their meaning, and they can be more amusing than inspiring.
In the 5th paragraph, Hilliard talks about how books used to be the primary form for delivering adventure stories, but now it is video games. He guides us from one idea to the next by briefing us on the history of both and how and why it has changed over time. Hilliard’s strategy could be that of showing the positives for video games that not many people see because of the stereotypes against them. Hilliard is slowly trying to get people to think more about the positives and negatives of both sides, instead of just looking for the typical stereotypes.
Hilliard’s argument shows the value, both positive and negative, of video games. He examines both equally and appears to keep an open opinion about both sides. I believe that the root value is that of showing the reader that all though things may look all one way, either positively or negatively, that there can be more than one side that has not been examined.
Hilliard states: "The traditional roles are reversed. In place of action and adventure as catalysts for character development, character development becomes a compulsory base for the - much more important - action sequences." He is attempting to draw attention to the fact that in books, the reason the character get into action sequences at all is for the sake of establishing what he or she is fighting for and what sort of things and morals are important to him or her, whereas in video games, only cut scenes are offering any development and the action sequences are the main focus, for the purpose of keeping the player entertained.
ReplyDeleteHe uses opposition by admitting that there are games in existence that do a good job of creating serious moral dilemmas and further enhancing the story's character depth as a book would normally do, but then returning to say that these moral dilemmas in games normally lack consequence later in the game, whereas in a book any decision could critically alter the path of the character.
The main criterion he uses to evaluate video games are the fact that for games to be successful and enjoyable, they have to be stylized differently from stories in a book. For a game to be these, it only has to be fun to play, whereas with a story book, the story must be captivating and the action scenes that are normally the selling point of a video game, are only present in stories to aid the development of the story. He is attempting to highlight the higher level of complexity and capability to offer a learning experience that you get with books rather than video games.
He guides us from one idea: the idea that books were the mainstream method for storytelling, until recently when he introduces the new idea that video games are slowly but surely becoming the new method of getting stories told to the masses. He attempts to brief us on the background of both and explain the benefits and deficiencies of both.
His argument shows the values of both video games and books and explains traits both have that only they can offer when telling an adventure story.
Hilliard draws the attention to the differences between books and video games. He states that video games are beginning to take over books. That you do not see children holding books anymore, but they are holding a video game system in the palm of there hands. Shooting games and adventures children and adults do not have to read anymore, but they can actually play the game and almost like they were actually in the game.
ReplyDeleteHilliard also talks about how the games have great story lines and have dilemmas. Also, stating that books basically do a better job at creating a real world scenerio than the games. Games do not have enough consequences later in the game ,and books go more into depth and creat a twist in the story line.
I believe his main criterion for this essay could be imagination. In video games the children or gamers do not have to use there imagination, everything is already there for them to see. On the other hand, in a book a gamer would have to visualize the scenes and imagine what they are reading. They actually have to depict an adventure.
Hilliard carefully guides us from one idea to another. He does this by talking about the history and background of books, but also talking about his personal experiences as a younger boy reading adventure stories and himself enjoying swordfighting scenes and potions. Then, he moves onto talking about how video games are the new books without reading. How kids are walking around with video games in their hands rather than clutching books.
In Hilliards argument he shows the value of both video games and books. He does this by stating all the pros and cons of video games.
Hilliard talks about the differnces between children playing video games over reading a book. Also the adults not reading anymores, and playing games like they are really in them.
ReplyDeleteHe also talks about how the games have good stories lines. He believes that book are better because book can be in depth with twist, but games can not do that.
I believe that he has good points. However, I would prefer a video game over a book any day of the week. If I read a book I have to visualize what I am reading. In a game I do not have to.
He does a good job with explain the history of books and games and also talks about his peronal life as a boy. He just do a great jobs listing the diffences betweem.
He states the pro and cons of both the video games and books.
Hilliard says that in adventure stories you learn more about the characters and their morals. In video games you just have to defeat an enemy or get somewhere. You do not really understand the journey being made.
ReplyDeleteHe says that games are now starting to tell you more about the character and give you more details to the story but not as much as the books.
Games can only be made so much like a book because they still need to be enjoyable and playable for the video game buyers.
In the last paragraph he talks about how much he enjoys video games, but at the end of the paragraph he states that video games too often amuse rather than inspire.
The value of his argument is that people like video games because its a challenge and a journey at the same time, but an adventure story can give you a journey with all the details and characters that you you enjoy.