The cultural embeddedness of academic books on knowing, feeling, and queering video games

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

Notes

1 Add to this, the rising “gamification” of services and products has rather forcefully ensured that whether we perceive ourselves as gamers or not is largely irrelevant (see Hamari, Koivisto, and Sarsa 2014). In line with Kruis, Lehman, and Rowland (2014) observation that games and society are mutually and recursively influencing each other, we should take seriously that we are all gamers now whether we like it or not.

2 Role playing game.

3 See also, borrowing from Anable’s generous footnotes, Montfort (2003) and Harpold (2007) on the relationship between humor and the limitations of programming.

4 Specifically, Ruberg (2018, 417) states, “games can be called ‘queer’ either because they explicitly reflect the experiences of LGBTQ people, because the designers and other artists who created them themselves identify as queer, or, most often, both.”

5 Informal category in industry parlance for games that have a big-budget, high-profile, and well-known publisher – inspired by AAA category for bonds.

6 All things being equal, however, it would be fascinating to see a qualitative analysis of the themes from the full transcripts of interviews from the book published elsewhere as an article or essay.

7 Coincidentally, while we are inspired by da Silva and Vieira (2019) excellent section on paratexts, in the context of gaming studies Consalvo (2007, 2009, 2017a, 2017b) and Begy (2010) have also collectively penned a small library on the utility of the concept.