While popular discussions about queerness in video games often focus on big-name, mainstream games that feature LGBTQ characters, like Mass Effect or Dragon Age, Bonnie Ruberg pushes the concept of queerness in games beyond a matter of representation, exploring how video games can be played, interpreted, and designed queerly, whether or not they include overtly LGBTQ content. Video Games Have Always Been Queer argues that the medium of video games itself can--and should--be read queerly.
In the first book dedicated to bridging game studies and queer theory, Ruberg resists the common, reductive narrative that games are only now becoming more diverse. Revealing what reading D. A. Miller can bring to the popular 2007 video game Portal, or what Eve Sedgwick offers Pong, Ruberg models the ways game worlds offer players the opportunity to explore queer experience, affect, and desire. As players attempt to 'pass' in Octodad or explore the pleasure of failure in Burnout: Revenge, Ruberg asserts that, even within a dominant gaming culture that has proved to be openly hostile to those perceived as different, queer people have always belonged in video games--because video games have, in fact, always been queer.
A look at video games through queer theory. The argument here isn’t that video games have always had queer characters and narratives (albeit true), but that queerness is fundamental in gaming’s system, structures, and play. The field is, by nature, queer.
Jump in with an open mind. This one is radical, especially if you’re unfamiliar with theories around “queering” art. But it’s so good and it will change the way you think about queerness in games.
J'ai un peu des émotions contradictoires face à cet essai pour une approche en particulier, mais c'est aussi un peu la base et l'argument de l'essai donc c'est un peu dure de le juger à ce niveau... Video games have always been queer propose des lectures queer de jeux vidéos (jusqu'à pong) qui n'ont clairement rien de queer, mais dont on peut en faire une lecture différente de la vision hétéro-centré et hétéro-chronologique.
Ces lectures peuvent prendre la forme de jouer différemment à ces jeux ("danser" autour d'un ennemi plutôt que de le tuer, se tuer plutôt qu'obtenir la victoire, bref, souvent jouer contre les attentes de la victoire), mais Bonnie Ruberg propose aussi des lectures sur-interprétative de ces jeux, lectures queer en soi de l'objet, le lire pour se l'approprier. Ces malheureusement ces lectures qui me perdent, le chapitre un commence très abruptement avec une analyse du jeu vidéo Pong en appliquant littéralement une théorie d'Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick où Pong serait en fait une métaphore de deux hommes s'échangeant en permanence une femme (et plein de truc sur les triangles). Ces lectures plaquées, aussi queer soient-elles, ne sont pas ce que j'ai apprécié du livre, je vois suffisamment d'analyses boboches où on plaque un concept sur un objet culturel pour l' "analyser" et plutôt que de trouver ça "queer" comme lecture, je trouve ce partage d'analyse (pas les lectures, le lectorat peut bien avoir la lecture qu'il veut des livres et jeux vidéos, je trouve toujours fascinant les lectures anti-raciste et queer de Lovecraft), mais son partage me renseigne plus sur l'expérience du joueur que sur le jeu en soi (ce qui n'est pas une mauvaise chose, mais ce n'est pas mon truc). Ses analyses peuvent cependant être aussi très complexes et fascinantes, toujours avec Pong, lorsque Bonnie discute de la proximité des hommes lorsqu'ils jouent à une version arcade de Pong où les actions des joueurs (encore des hommes) n'ont pas le choix de résulter en toucher de l'autre homme, une forme de caresse, pendant le jeu. Bref, les lectures plaquées ou sur-interprétée à escient sont souvent balancées par des analyses plus "académiques" tout aussi queer, mais peut-être moins aussi.
L'auteur·e, à travers ces analyses, aborde aussi de nombreux sujets, de Gamergate aux enjeux de "diversité" dans les jeux AAA, à la mainmise capitaliste sur le queer qui résulte plus en des jeux presqu'épurés (où juste des protagonistes qui ont tel ou tel identité) que de réels jeux queer. Il y a plusieurs suggestions de jeux vidéos queer qui sont proposés, surtout vers la fin de l'essai avec une conclusion qui ce concentre sur trois créateurs et créatrices de jeux vidéo (une femme, un homme, une personne non-binaire) et leur approche queer à la conception de jeux vidéo qui était aussi très intéressant.
Si vous aimez le queer-reading ou vous désirez en voir des exemples, cet essai est définitivement pour vous, pour un ouvrage plus académique, nous ne sommes pas déçu non plus même si certains passages sont sur-interprétés à escient, on nous apporte aussi un bon bagage de théorie queer ce qui n'est pas négligeable. Dans l'ensemble, c'est très intéressant, ça me touche juste un petit peu moins.
Ruberg gives us an important intervention in the field of game studies, opening up new modes of understanding and inquiry. Each of the book's seven chapters offers new frameworks for reading games in depth and offers fully drawn-out, specific examples of the kind of inquiry being proposed. The writing is particularly clear and direct, even when presenting subtle and intricate points of analysis. https://apkslover.com/shadow-fight-4-... It means for video games to be queer and compelling demonstrates that they've always been so! A great book for both research and teaching.
In this great in-depth study of video games and queer modes of playing, Ruberg brings together game/queer studies in unique ways, through concepts such as affect. The studies in this book go beyond queer representation to show that video games have always been queer and can be played queerly. The "too-close-readings" of games such as Portal are very insightful. Highly recommend reading this title, it'll make you understand and interpret games in a new way!
I usually don't read many academic books so I was worried that this would be a challenge, but luckily the writing and tone made the topics easier to come by for me and I was interested in what it had to say about gaming culture, queer theory, and how to 'pick apart' mediums till your hearts content!
Such books help me better understand why I'm so sceptical of linguistic interpretations when it comes to terms and definitions. For many reasons, I rarely feel like I've learnt anything about a word when I learn what it used to mean centuries ago and why it sounds the way it does. This particular book (otherwise quite curious in its observations regarding the view on gaming as a mostly masculine activity and speedrunning as making friends with glitches) was served very poorly by the notion that, since you have a word for both "LGBT+" and "different", you can safely assume that playing Pong together "should be understood as deeply queer" -- mainly because it has two identical paddles, and also because the ball ricochets from them and therefore doesn't move in a straight way, and also because its (usually male) players had had to stay way too close to each other while playing the original arcade cabinet (now, I'm a big fan of how in The Night Watch, Captain Cocq's hand casts its shadow right over his lieutenant's crotch, but at some point even I get tired of giggling at every man who wants a bigger score than other men). Or that speedrunners can understand LGBT+ better because queers fail all the time and weren't historically eager to marry.
Now, is gaming culture known for toxic masculinity and the cult of a True Gamer, the conqueror of pixels who hides from his quarrelsome wife in his man cave? Yes, and Sonia Fizek needed one chapter to judo everyone involved, from the founders of game studies to totalitarian governments, without blurring the meaning of the word "queer" until it means nothing in particular. (I actually think that she covered the same subject more accurately by addressing the stereotype "only real men play video games" in terms of "In which ways can you play a game anyway?", without trying to explain why any strange gameplay practice is in fact connected to LGBT+.) I can perfectly understand sympathy for the excluded and the different, but I just doubt that in practice, many can relate to this convoluted path between a desire to leap out of bounds and freeze Father Gascoigne's AI and a desire to bang Father Gascoigne.