{"id":1160,"date":"2009-03-20T02:03:25","date_gmt":"2009-03-20T02:03:25","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/danielprimed.com\/?p=1160"},"modified":"2009-03-20T02:07:01","modified_gmt":"2009-03-20T02:07:01","slug":"some-fairly-obvious-game-genre-musings","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/danielprimed.com\/2009\/03\/some-fairly-obvious-game-genre-musings\/","title":{"rendered":"Some Fairly Obvious Game Genre Musings"},"content":{"rendered":"
This semester’s workload is significantly lighter than previous years, although if you combine my studies with blogging here, in my Chinese blog and a few guest articles, then I guess I have a pretty full workload. Due to the complicated workings of my free-form university program, this year I have a bunch more free choice electives, one of which I used up on a course about video games.<\/p>\n
It’s about three weeks in, and I’ve already got a good idea how most of my courses will pan out over the next few months. Perhaps I should have anticipated it, the games course is particularly lousy from my perspective. It’s not terrible, but rather it falls back on broken convention. Here’s an example of what I mean:<\/p>\n
Last week we were discussing genre in games, and what constitutes a video game genre. Besides the bleeding obvious (much of which the students already knew), I noticed that the tutor fell back many a times on incorrect genre stereotypes and conventions to frame a more complicated issue. For example statements such as: \u201cAll first person shooters involve holding a gun and shooting people from a first person perspective.\u201d<\/em> were freely tossed around the discussion*.<\/p>\n