Gameology: Commentary and Resources for the Game Studies Community

I remember you working on this project while discussing different conference themes and I thought part of your reason for making the file was to create an othered revision of the original Space Invaders--with othering and revision as conference themes that were under consideration. The finished video does a really nice job of showing an alternate version of the Space Invaders implied narrative. The implied narrative of Space Invaders is also a nice point in the history of game studies with the discussions of ludology and narratology.

An unwinnable game, like yours, is also a nice point in game studies because many definitions of games require that the games have a winning event. Winning event is normally equated to success, but it could also be closure (even in the sense of stopping the game). Unwinnable games offer commentary on the definition of game itself. Space Invader's simplicity is also fairytale-esque, so it can be tied to many different games and rubrics, and it affords a flexible structure for comparison and analysis. The value of revisionist games like this is also an area ripe for study with fan mods and fan versions/revisions.

Thanks for the comments, Laurie. The inversion idea is definitely the core of the concept (i.e. playing "through the eyes" of the other), but I think it became something more interpretive through the animation. That is, even in the game itself, it's not a direct inversion of the Space Invaders game. I went back and forth on how close to make it like the original, though. For example, at one point I made it so you could return fire. Do you think that would make a difference in the resulting (inverted) narrative?

Very cool, makes me want to tackle something in Flash as well but I was always sort of intimidated by it.

The subversion is sort of a simple concept but very effective in my opinion. I rather like the idea of being powerless since it seems to be a bit more honest to me and that is what makes it original. Many games could be argued to have the player in the position of the Other in some way shape or form, but almost always that player has agency and a way to win with a proper set of tools at their disposal.

This game, however, does not offer that and while tempting initially with the fun of the pursuit I think all players will eventually grow tired and hopeless.

I found it interesting, in my own playing of the game, how I started to feel a bit guilty for using my fellow less agile refugees as cover and I also kept moving lower on the screen to make the game more challenging, even though that was ultimately entirely foolish.

Tanner
http://www.the-means.com

It's interesting that you started to make it harder by moving lower. Of course, since there's no way to win, and survival merely delays the later animation sequence, you could also look at it as goal-oriented toward trying to commit suicide. At least, I found that in my own testing of it, I frequently need to get past the game screen to test the transition. This meant I had to seek out the bullet, but since the turret's movements are unpredictable and not directed at all (unless you get down to less than 6 companions), I often find it harder to get shot than to avoid it, if that makes sense.