Owen

An ascpect of abstraction--as the author points out--is that it forces the player's mind to complete or imagine game details... much like how a good book demostrates how delightful one's imagination is. Because imagination seems to be primarily visual, visual mediums like movies and video games give your mind little space. How can a visual medium attractively give space for the imagination? Also, how can perceptual abstraction be a stimulate the way words or concepts are to the imagination? Once I see an image I hold it in my mind... when a read a description of an image my corresponding visuals are completely fluid.

http://www.ugo.com/channels/games/insidegames/game/media/index/77/Spore.aspx

That Spore game that keeps getting mentioned.

McLuhan's basic postulate is that Western man's games are "a collective rather than private dramatizations of inner life." To explain how he arrives at this conclusion he first compares modern western man (characterized as fearlessly individualistic) with ancient or non-literate cultures (characterized as tribal social structures). This comparison demonstrates how the cultural world-view is reflected in art/games/ritual. This is example is potent because ancient tribal culture had a cosmic orientation that sharply contrasts the individualism of modern man. Therefor, by describing the shift from tribe to individual and the corresponding shift in the nature of games the link becomes obvious.
McLuhan also sees games as a necessary piece of a heathy society; as in the example of today, games are an outlet not available in social and working life. Additionally, "Games are a popular art, collective, social reactions to the main drive or action of any culture."
The most intersting observation is how games serve as a tool for cultural adjustment: "For individualist Western man, much of his "adjustment" to society has the character of a personal surrender to the collective demands. Our games help both to teach us this kind of adjustment and also to provide a release from it." When one considers social life to be a game--looking at usually invisible rules as what they are--it's rules are revealed to be as arbitrary as football. The author discuss war (much like poker) in terms of game but comes short of labeling it a true game, because like the stock market and business, the rules are not fully known by all participants. "Art and games need rules, conventions, and spectators." Where is the spectator in most online or single player video/computer games?

If this game is indeed as good as its said to be I can't believe I haven't played it. Personally, I would play America's army simply to get a good competitive rush off of it, easily ignoring the proganada. If it's paramount goal is indeed recruitment it wouldn't phase me nor the mass majority of gamers either, I imagine. Halter describes the transformation of military theory for the 21st century in Sun Tzu to Xbox, to then illustrate: "Quick-thinking individuals who effortlessly operated inside high-tech communications systems? Sounds like your average video game player might be a match." Reaction time, spacial awarness, the use of intutation to guess enemy movements, and most importantly fluid team work are what makes the best Counter-strike player. Sounds like a good soldier, also. But would anyone want to do it for real?
The only area that threatens me is the sublimial. The subject switch from completely fantastical, historical, or fabricated subject matter to the intensily real and contemporary is unnerving. Like Halter's mention of "Bad guy" termonology. He see's an easy transposition of the term bad guy from aliens to Iraqis as "natural, even subliminally comforting, in its simplicity, and puts a new spin on the concept of "demonizing" the enemy." Later in the article, when he discusses the seriousness of a war game durning a time of war, he writes: "creating or even playing a game that promises a realistic experience of war verges on an inconsiderate lack of respect at best, or a manipulative attempt at propaganda at worst." The army is giving you its best shot at a peachy and heroic simulation of being a soldier(i.e. the hero biographys on the website). A video game can't possibily be an acurate representation of such an experience and if one is subconciouslly mislead to think so I suppose that would be bad.

http://www.ugo.com/channels/games/insidegames/Content/ViewCategoryProducts.aspx?SectionID=989

Found this when I was checking out Will Wrights Spore. An entire catagory of bubbly and relatively nonviolent games!

Video Games: Sexist Tendencies by Professor James Woudhuysen.. if you really want to dive into it, read this (55 pages):
http://www.woudhuysen.com/documents/ComputerGamesSexDifference.pdf#search=%22Video%20games%3A%20sexist%20tendencies%22

The intro is accessible reading however...