Stephanie

The point that kept standing out to me throughout the article was McLuhan's view that games are models or reenactments of real life. I had never thought of it that way before. I also thought it was interesting how he points out that they release particular tensions. In that way, one could say that in video games one is acting out things they could never do in reality, such as kill others, go on elaborate adventures, etc. However, I think that video games do not really reflect real life (although I haven't ever played military games, which would be based in reality, I guess). What I also found interesting is that McLuhan writes continually about how a defining characteristic of games is interplay. If that's true, then where do video games come in? I think that most video games don't encourage interplay at all, but rather make the player isolated. They create a fantasy environment that the player experiences alone. Even with these online games ( I don't really get how they work, so I may change my mind later) in which a player is communicating or playing somehow with people on the internet, there is no real connection. I think that online gaming is a poor substitute for actually having personal contact with others in even a board game or a sport. The author writes that "games are extensions, not of our private but of our social selves, and that they are media of communication should now be plain." I think that video games are pretty much the opposite, and are an extension of our private selves and not at all about socializing. They are about immersing oneself into a private entertainment.