This article is an excerpt from the author's book Subcultural Criticism (", 2021") with revisions and additions. This article was originally published in the Korean game network Game Generation (https://gamegeneration.or.kr/board/post/view?pageNum=1&match=id:28)
Jiang Xinkui's "Subcultural Criticism"
1. The world's earliest game magazine in Korea
The world's first gaming magazine was Computer & Video Games: CVG, published in the UNITED Kingdom in 1981, which has been published only online since 2004 and closed in 2015 to become gamesradar+ (www.gamesradar.com). To this day, gamesradar+ continues to provide players with an expected demo experience of new games, industry news, and sharp-tongued game criticism.
CVG (left) and Gamesradar+ (right)
Game magazine first appeared in South Korea about a decade later, in the early 1990s. Coincides with the period of computer popularization in the 1980s. Game Magazine introduced the modern COMBOY( ) game console that has domestically produced the Nintendo Red and White machine. Later, Samsung Electronics introduced Sega's 16-bit game console Mega Drive and released its Korean version "Super COMBOY" ( ). As attention to console games heated up dramatically, specialized game magazines emerged.
Inaugural issue of Game World
The earliest game magazine in Korea was Game World ( ) , released in August 1990 ( Cho Ki-hyun , 2012 , 58 pages). With the release of Game News (1991), Game Pass (1992), Game Champion (1992), Game Intelligence (1993), etc., the great war between game magazines began and fierce competition began. At that time, the most needed information for players was the introduction of new games, release times and game guides, but game magazines focused on highlighting the positive nature and cultural character of games, showing the importance of game cognitive transformation.
Game magazines also recruit editors who write game analysis and publish their articles (Game World in 1992, Game Intelligence in 1993, etc.); translate reports from American and Japanese game magazines (Game Channel, etc.) in 1994; serialize articles about people's attitudes toward games (Park Byung-ho's serial article in Kyung-go Shimbun in 1996, Park Sang-woo's 1999 serial article in Movie 21), etc. The multiple attempts at early forms of criticism and criticism are also particularly noteworthy.
2. A magazine that is keen on computer games with discs
Beginning in the mid-1990s, with the rapid development of computer games, most game magazines also focused on computer games. The most representative feature of the game magazine at that time was the bundle CD that accompanied the book. Early bonus discs were primarily intended to handle obsolete inventory of game discs. Unexpectedly, this move was strongly welcomed by players, further affecting the development of the entire industry, and finally the accompanying disc became a decisive factor in the sales of game magazines. As competition intensified, the discs included with the magazine gradually changed from being mainly classic games to offering new games. While gaming magazines in the 1980s retained readers primarily by providing game information and guides, gaming magazines in the 1990s attracted a large number of readers with their accompanying CDs.
The magazine's competition to introduce new games has become excessive competition, resulting in a serious overrun of the cost of purchasing game discs, which has placed a huge burden on the magazine. To make matters worse, with the prevalence of computer game piracy, as well as the development of the network environment and the emergence of online games, the computer game market began to decline, and game magazines ushered in a severe test (, 2012.1.4).
3. From paper magazines to electronic magazines
From the 1980s to the 1990s, game magazines that lasted about 10 years entered the 2000s, followed by a period of decline in the video game and computer game industries. Game magazines have lost their roots in survival, but the game industry has gained a new growth momentum, that is, the rise of online games. Game magazines have also become magazines with online games as the main content. In contrast to specialized game criticisms, most of the game criticisms of these magazines are like dragonflies dotting water. When the Internet forum appeared, the paper magazines that provided game information, guides and accompanying CDs as the main selling points were gradually forgotten and discontinued.
The development of the Internet has brought setbacks and tests to the traditional magazine media, but it has also provided a foundation for players to accelerate the sharing and transmission of information. Of course, it is not easy for players to quickly find the information they want from the vast ocean of information, and the player's demand for more specialized information is also difficult to meet. This situation led to the birth of a channel for the system to use a large amount of game information, that is, the emergence of electronic magazines ( , 2021.1.4).
As of June 2021, GAMER'Z ( ) is the only game magazine that has traditionally published offline. In addition, there are many electronic magazines, such as INVEN(), GameMeca(), "THIS IS GAME"), "FOMOS"), "Game Korea"), "GAME FOCUS" (), "DAILY GAME" (), "Gameabout" (), "Game East Asia" (), "Tendency Game" (), "The Games" and so on. However, whether it is GAMER'Z, a print magazine, or other electronic magazines, the content is only focused on providing players with information such as game reviews and guides, rather than professional criticism.
4. Attempts to expand game criticism
Instead, perspectives from other fields try to examine the inside and outside of the game more closely, although its professionalism and stability are difficult to guarantee. But such attempts did not last. Although newspapers, film magazines, or other popular culture magazines, computer magazines, etc. often mention game criticism, most of them are only short stories. The Game Culture Foundation has published the monthly magazine Game Culture since March 2012, hiring industry and academic editors to publish high-quality game-related articles and criticisms, but it did not last long, and the magazine announced its suspension after the release of the last issue in December 2012.
In addition, when reviewing the trajectory of game criticism, it is necessary to mention the "Game Criticism Contest" ( ). In order to promote people's humanistic and sociological attention to games, South Korea has established the "Game Criticism Award" since 2008. With the aim of enhancing cultural and academic value, the event was organized by the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism, and co-organized by the Korea Cultural Industry Promotion Agency( Co., Ltd.), NHN Group, and TheGames.
Jeon Kyung-ran (2013) analyzed 30 award-winning articles in the Game Criticism Contest from 2008 to 2012 and concluded that the winning articles reflect people's attention to all aspects of the game, but there are considerable limitations in the field and the way to cut into it. The winning article did not criticize the content and formal characteristics of the game, the gameplay, the game structure and the game world, etc., but adopted traditional cultural analysis theories and methodologies, which have limitations for understanding various game phenomena. However, the event also has some positive significance, and it is the first attempt in South Korea to discover amateur game critics and expand the scope of game criticism. The "Game Criticism Contest" has been discontinued since the 5th edition in 2012.
Poster for the 1st Game Criticism Contest
The monographs published by critics are also of great significance. For example, Park Sang-woo's "Games, The Power to Change the World" (", ", 2000") and "When the Game Comes" (", 2005"), Lee Sang-woo's "Games, Players, Competitions: Interpreting Games with Humanities" (", , , : ", 2012"), Lee Kyung-hyuk's "Games, Another Window to Observe the World" (", ", ", 2016"), Humanities Cooperative ( ) Members of Mario '81: How Does the Game of Memory Learn From Human Sophistication? ('81: ?', 2017)' and other masterpieces. The merit of these works is that through the common humanities and social sciences, they explore the meaning of games in our daily lives and society and culture in a relatively novel and multi-angle way. However, these criticisms do not refer to each other, but all regard themselves as formal criticisms, mostly staying at the level of basic discussion of game people's literature (especially on narrative Narratology and game science Ludology), and most of the views are repetitive and similar, and they have not continued to dig deeper since then, which is somewhat regrettable.
(From left) Park Sang-woo, Lee Sang-woo, Lee Kyung-hyuk, members of the Humanities Cooperative, are critics of the game
Game criticism is now going on, and it's too early to discuss its outcome, but there are also attempts worth paying attention to. Since November 2014, Lee Kyung-hyuk has published game criticism "Play the Game" in the media criticism magazine MediaUS (MediaUS), and then published his own game criticism through major online news, game company blogs, magazines and even "National Defense Daily". From game texts to korean game culture artifact-level game halls and e-Sports, from the game industry to gameplay/players, from negative discussions about games to the social issues inherent in game texts, he explores a wide range of issues. As of June 2021, few critics can do that, and his performance is highly anticipated.
5. Problems with game criticism
The external problems of Korean game criticism are as follows.
First, as the government tightens regulation of games and the spread of negative speech about games leads to a shrinking of the game industry, the foundation for the development of game criticism is weak. Strong regulation and negative rhetoric have made the game a "bad thing", and people believe that there is "no need to seriously discuss" the game.
Second, although there are many game magazines on the market, no one in South Korea has made a professional criticism of the game. This is very different from the situation overseas. Game magazines such as PC Gamer (www.pcgamer.com) in the United Kingdom and Computer Gaming World (computergamingworld.com) in the United States are more focused on providing readers with deep information and criticism than simple game reviews or guides. Kotaku (kotaku.com) is an online media that seriously reflects on and thinks about games, and gamasutra (www.gamasutra.com) that publishes developers and researchers' content on game production goals, game criticism, research results, etc. is a professional game criticism media.
Of course, this difference is also due to the difference in the social perception of games in South Korea and abroad, player preferences, and the soil in which game criticism grows. However, Korean game magazines have too many pages involving game reviews and guides, and it is inevitable that they will be reduced to the publicity tools of advertising money such as game promotion companies and game companies.
The problem at the intrinsic level is that it is difficult to criticize the game because of its unique textual features. The game consists of symbols and narratives, which are similar to other cultural genres. But the game contains a unique enjoyment structure that is distinctly different from other cultural genres. This enjoyment structure can also affect the text itself. Unlike other culture types, pre-made games have incomplete text until the player engages. The player is the subject involved in the creation of incomplete game text and interacts with the game. Only with the player's participation can the game become a complete text.
The line between the creative subject and the receiving subject in the game thus becomes blurred. The game text is not about acceptance, but about participation. This means that the game is not only the embodiment of the algorithm, but also the narrative environment that allows the player to experience the story and virtual situation (Jiang Xinkui, 2016). To this end, the object of criticism of the game should not only be the text itself, but also explore what kind of experience the text provides for the player, what kind of impact the player's formed experience will have on the next game, etc. (, 2012.12.12).
Not only that, but the characteristics of different platforms and types of games are also completely different. Therefore, when criticizing the game, it is difficult for people to combine multiple views and methods into one. Other cultural types are "watched" to know, while games are "played" to know. Even a game expert or a high-level player can hardly criticize a game he has never been exposed to. Playing games usually requires like-minded playmates, so depending on the type of game, platform, etc., players will form a community of enjoyment.
The process of "exchanging experiences" between players will allow them to unconsciously share and evaluate the game content, which is directly reflected in the gameplay of the game. For example, after a player who "plays" a game "comes into contact" with someone else's gameplay or related information, applies the contact gameplay to the "playing" game ( · ，2011）。 People who enjoy these directly have more information and experience than others. Critics who are not within the enjoyment community, or who do not experience the game in depth, have a hard time truly understanding the game.
6. Conditions of game criticism
The so-called "game criticism" refers to the work of analyzing and evaluating the value of the game. At this time, "criticism" is not fundamentally different from the existing concepts used in the criticism of literature, fine arts, music, dance, drama, film, etc. But just as criticism in every field has its own characteristics, game criticism is not the same as criticism in other fields. Because there are differences in the object and conditions of criticism. To this end, when examining the conditions of game criticism, it is necessary to consider both the general conditions of criticism and the conditions that reflect the characteristics of the game's differences.
In addition, the conditions of criticism are not fixed and fixed, but are composed according to the morphological characteristics of the object of criticism and the changes in the role required by criticism. Of course, different critics have different understandings of the conditions of criticism. But one can try to find common ground in the conditions of criticism to criticize.
1) General conditions for criticism
Criticism generally requires four elements: the subject of criticism (critic), the object of criticism (a work in a broad sense), the subject of creation (producer/creator/writer), and the subject of acceptance (enjoyer/receiver/reader). Criticism can play a feedback role on the creative subject, guiding the receiving subject whether to choose the object of criticism and the choice method. The subject of criticism has the opportunity to express his position on the object of criticism through criticism.
If it is said that criticizing the subject/object and creating/accepting the subject are the basic elements of criticism, then the conditions for criticism have the following three points. First, criticism must go beyond the level of post-reading feelings, so a corresponding system must be established. Second, becoming a critic requires a recognized procedure. Third, it is necessary to publish critical academic magazines, daily newspapers, magazines, online magazines and other media. The media should ensure the stability and trustworthiness of criticism ( · · · ，2015.5.8）。 These three conditions relate to the professionalism, stability and continuity of criticism, respectively. In short, criticism can be said to be "the professional work of the main body of criticism that systematically analyzes the relevant matters of the object of criticism and evaluates it in a position of publication by a trustworthy media."
The most important point of criticism is that it goes beyond the existing possibilities of the object of criticism, and through continuous questioning and searching for answers, it conveys what the object of criticism means to our lives and its social connotations. The same goes for game criticism. We should not limit ourselves to the joys that games bring, but focus on the social functions of games and the possibilities of the future of games, and interpret the daily changes and the changes of the trend of the times through these interpretations.
In short, criticism is the achievement of the object of interpretation and the publicity of the understanding of the interpretation. The following prerequisites are required for this. First, create a critical ethos of sincere discussion and study of games. Second, support the systematization of games and game criticism. Finally, in order to be able to understand the personal or social gaming experience, critical tools, annotations, and criticisms are provided.
2) The laws of change and game criticism
However, the general conditions of criticism are very different from the situation faced by game criticism. Especially in South Korea, the conditions for game criticism are relaxed, and they cannot reach the same fixed form as the existing art and cultural types. Of course, no matter what the object of criticism is, it must be flexible and constantly changing in essence. If the basis of game criticism survival is game and society, then it is bound to fluctuate with the changes in games and society. The definition of a game is also constantly being restructured. Games in the metaverse era are necessarily different from games before the embryonic days of online games.
Compared with existing art or cultural genres, game culture is highly convenient and closed, and it is difficult to form a professional system of criticism. The enjoyment of the game is highly correlated with the player's personal experience, which is also a major constraint on the difficulty of forming a game criticism system. However, in this sense, game criticism is not non-existent, but everywhere. Institutionalized criticism is insignificant because the enthusiasm for criticism outside the system is beyond people's imagination. If institutionalized criticism from the traditional point of view is not taken into account, game criticism can simply be described as "overheated". In cyberspace such as blogs, forums, and social media, game criticism is everywhere. Players accumulate game experience through various platforms and devices, set up an online community to discuss the game, and have expert-level information and knowledge. This lays the foundation for players to become quasi-critics, but it also makes it difficult for traditional criticism systems to form, satisfying every player.
By actively enjoying = criticizing, the basis of criticism can be broadened or democratized. But on the other hand, this situation lowers the level of game criticism and obscures the criticism itself. If the existing criticism circles of artistic and cultural themes have become an active space for contradictions and close interweaving between the institutionalized professional criticism field and the emerging amateur criticism field centered on the Internet, then the true face of game criticism, which is vaguely positioned due to the imperfect institutionalized criticism field, will become more blurred.
This phenomenon is closely related to fundamental issues such as the conditions and role of game criticism. Existing concepts of criticism cannot be applied to this phenomenon. So can the establishment of a special criticism system become the initiator of game discussions and exert positive initiative to influence the development of games? If there is no institutionalization, is criticism possible? Can the unfamiliar imagination that cannot be found in institutionalization be further excavated through the democratization of criticism?
In order to answer these questions, first of all, for those "periphery without center" criticism that appears in the absence of institutionalization, its rule conditions should be redefined. That is to say, in the changes that affect the criticism field, instead of distinguishing between criticism and non-criticism, it is better to expand the extension of criticism by creating new conditions.
Gamers should get rid of the role of passive consumption criticism and actively write, publish, and share criticism through the Network, becoming the new subject of criticism. The cyberspace where they publish criticism is a new and dynamic space for readers to read criticism and express their thoughts. The question, however, is how to define from their article which part is criticism.
From the beginning, there was no "high/good" criticism and "low/bad" criticism. As traditional criticism pursues, criticism is not directed at more than just advanced readers. Given the nature of the game and the player, it is inevitable that the concept of traditional criticism will be modified or expanded. Proposing clear criteria and scope is no longer the prerogative of experts. Game criticism has an ever-changing nature and appears in the contradictory unity between the subject of criticism and the reader. Of course, in this process, we must adhere to the original purpose and role of criticism. Otherwise criticism would have no raison d'être. （ ，2016）。
7. The direction of game criticism
So how do you set the course of game criticism?
First, explore creative theories and methodologies. While it is not easy to find theories and methodologies that are only directed at game criticism, we must continue to explore the reality in which games are located, as well as critical theories and methodologies that can touch the social context. The object of criticism is different, and the language of criticism must also be changed. Only by constructing the identity and role of criticism through the inherent attributes of the game can the discernment of game criticism be guaranteed.
For existing critical theories and methodologies such as psychoanalytic criticism, Marxist criticism, feminist criticism, new criticism, reader reaction criticism, structuralist criticism, deconstructive criticism, new historicism and literary criticism, queer criticism, etc., which can both enrich the text and deeply observe the text, one needs to explore and think about how to integrate them more effectively into the aesthetics of the game. In addition, how to refine and professionalize criticism according to the game platform and genre, and consolidate the overall framework of criticism, is also something worth considering. In the increasingly diverse situation of media transformation and media mix, it is becoming increasingly important to explore new forms and forms of criticism.
Second, redefine the role of criticism. Criticism is often accused of lack of self-awareness, or bias toward explanations and greetings. The reason is that the role of criticism is not played. Criticism is not about absorbing or transmitting the object of criticism, but is reflected or reflected to the outside world along with the critical gaze. In other words, the main role of criticism is not to "absorb", but to "feedback". The effect of criticism is to achieve coevolution with the subject of criticism through repeated feedback on the subject of criticism and the object of criticism.
However, the role of game criticism needs to go further on this basis. A careful interpretation of a particular text should take a closer look at the problems, challenges, and directionality of the actors in the process of criticism. This means that while exploring the cultural changes formed by the creative subject and the receiving subject, game criticism should formulate specific countermeasures to cope with the establishment of flexible and changing texts, the social application of texts, and the changes faced by the game industry, and cultivate the ability to read and understand these issues.
As long as criticism is content to be inferior to writing, there will never be anything that leads criticism to the object of criticism. Game criticism should go beyond text, influencing the reality of not textualization (in relation to the game, of course). Ultimately, the role of game criticism is to point out the problems that should be solved, to reflect on game society and life, and to explore how we can coexist with games.
Third, what is needed in the discussion of criticism, both traditional and non-traditional, is an awareness of the impossibility or necessity of "full" integration. Criticism and non-criticism, critical space and non-critical space, the line between critics and non-critics has blurred. Expert-level players, players with experience that experts do not have, space for criticism that provokes fierce controversy, criticism that transcends existing critical definitions everywhere. These demarcated lines are meaningless. The way forward for game criticism should be based on the recognition of this point, and thus begin to move forward (, 2021).
The problem, however, is that there are good criticisms and bad criticisms in game criticism. And there will be no game criticism, or rather, no good criticism. Everyone wants to write good criticism, but it's not easy to do it in the first place. Trying to write a good critique in the first place can cause a lot of problems. Criticism is a kind of creative work, if you do not focus on the joy of creation, only covet the result, you will not be tempted to imitate others, or simply list the knowledge learned, or even deceive. Having a lot of gaming experience doesn't guarantee that you'll write good criticism. If you want to write a good criticism, whether it is traditional criticism or new criticism, you must first have its own system and professionalism.
It is necessary to abandon the needless cynicism of other criticisms. Since the total integration of criticism is not possible or necessary, one should focus on accepting other criticisms (whenever, whoever they criticize), reflect on the appropriateness of one's own views through the criticisms of others, and strive to add new meaning to the criticisms of others and oneself.