| Annotation |
In recent decades, the active development of the video game market, as well as the rapid growth in the number of game content consumers, have caused an urgent need for scientific research of these products. In foreign game studies, there are two approaches: narratology and ludology. The narratological approach, which is based on the analysis of the plot of the game scenario, has a long history and is closer to the humanities, while ludology includes the digital aspects of video games. Based on the first approach, which allows us to consider in detail various aspects of the psycho-emotional impact on the educational level of the game user, we can offer some recommendations for video content creators, as well as for the bodies that control the creation of such products. The article analyzes three computer games that have the name Odysseus in their titles and that use episodes and details from Homer’s heroic epic The Odyssey in their plots: the 2000 Odyssey quest from the French company Cryo Interactive (The Odyssey: The Search for Ulysses), the 2011 game by the Russian company Nevosoft Odysseus. The Long Way Home, and the adventure action game with numerous quests from Ubisoft Assassin’s Creed, which released the first part of the game Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey in 2018. Using comparative methods, the narratives of the listed games are compared with the narrative in the original version of Homer’s epic poem The Odyssey, and elements of the Gothic tradition and associated popular culture in the gameplay scenario are noted. As a result of the study, it became obvious that the postmodernist general cultural context of modern civilization and game designers, who turned to ancient archetypal models for advertising purposes, chose the most destructive, barbaric type of using ancient names and narratives. In classical plots, there are no moral guidelines left, laid down there by classical authors. An important issue, which the conducted analysis leads to, is the problem of responsibility of video game developers for the educational, upbringing and informational content of the content they offer.
|
| References |
1. Savchuk, V. V. Media philosophy. Attack of reality, SPb: RXGA, 2013. (In Rus.)
2. Shkaev, D. G. Philosophy of computer games. Social and Humanitarian Sciences. Domestic and Foreign Literature. Series 3, Philosophy. 2018. Web. 08.08.2024. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/filosofiya-kompyuternyh-igr. (In Rus.)
3. Shevczov, K. P. Boundaries of the game. International Journal of Cultural Studies, no. 1, pp. 6–19, 2019. DOI: 10.24411/2079-1100-2019-00001. EDN PKNJGD. (In Rus.)
4. Galkin, D. V. Computer games as a phenomenon of modern culture: experience of interdisciplinary research. Humanitarian Informatics, no. 3, pp. 54–72, 2007. EDN PBHHHH. (In Rus.)
5. Arjoranta, J. How are games interpreted? Hermeneutics for game studies. Game Studies: the international journal of computer game research, no. 3, 2022. Web. 08.08.2024. http://gamestudies.org/2203/articles/arjoranta_how_are_games_interpreted. (In Eng.)
6. Shevtsov, K. P. Computer games as a subject of philosophical analysis. Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. Philosophy and conflictology, no. 1, pp. 98–103, 2016. (In Rus.)
7. Novikova, O. N. Human gaming activity in the space of virtual reality. Society and power, no. 6, pp. 16–25, 2018. (In Rus.)
8. Burlakov, I. V. Homo gamer. Psychology of computer games. M: Klass, 2000. (In Rus.)
9. Vetushinsky, A. S., Salin, A. S. Game Studies in Russia: the eighth year. Sociology of Power, no. 3, pp. 8–13, 2020. (In Rus.)
10. Ståhl, M., Rusk, F. Player customization, competence and team discourse: exploring player identity (co)construction in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive. Game Studies, 2020. Web. 08.08.2024. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348097808_Player_customization_competence_and_team_discourse_exploring_player_identity_coconstruction_in_Counter-Strike_Global_Offensive. (In Eng.)
11. Husemann J. Die Problematisierung von Gewalt in Computerspielen. Bielefeld, 2022. (In Germ.)
12. Kurchatova, N. Yu. Gamification in education. Innovations and risk competence of the teacher. Proceedings of the 16th International Scientific and Practical Conference. Saratov: Saratovskij istochnik, 2020: 22–27. EDN ZKVCSP. (In Rus.)
13. Karimova, M. R. “Gamify”, or why modern education needs games (on the example of students studying in the fields of “Sociology” and “Political Science”). Humanities. Bulletin of the Financial University, no. 1, pp. 46–50, 2020. (In Rus.)
14. Gol`czova, T. A., Procenko, E. A. The use of gamification tools in the process of teaching foreign languages. Yaroslavl Pedagogical Bulletin, no. 1, pp. 81–89, 2021. DOI: 10.20323/1813-145X-2021-1-118-81-89. (In Rus.)
15. Igolkina, M. I., Yazynina, V. S. The use of gamification elements in teaching a foreign language at a technical university. Humanitarian Bulletin, no. 1, pp. 1–6, 2021. DOI: 10.18698/2306-8477-2021-1-702. (In Rus.)
16. Sartakova, E. E. Problems of development of the theory of gamification in Russia. Bulletin of Tomsk State Pedagogical University, no. 2, pp. 168–187, 2022. (In Rus.)
17. Tixanovich, T. I. Gamification in the competency-based approach system. KANT, no. 2, pp. 428–432, 2021. (In Rus.)
18. Khokhriakova, Yu. M. Possibilities of gamification of educational activities of university students. Humanitarian studies. Pedagogy and psychology, no. 5, pp. 27–37, 2021. DOI: 10.24412/2712-827X-2021-5-27-37. (In Rus.)
19. Hartung M. Spielend die Schulen verändern. Die Zeit, no. 18, 2018. Web. 08.08.2024. https://www.zeit.de/2018/18/gamification-schulenbildung-spielen. (In Germ.)
20. Linderoth, J. Why games don’t learn more: An ecological approach to games as learning environment. The Journal of Garming and Virtual Words, no. 17, pp. 279–298, 2023. (In Eng.)
21. Lapin, D. A., Kalimulin, B. B., Xomich, D. A. Mediatization of gaming experience using the example of Russian video blogging. Medi@l`manakh, no. 5, pp. 43−51, 2023. DOI: 10.30547/mediaalmanah.5.2023.4351. (In Rus.)
22. Bolotnov, A. V. Stream as a new hypermedia genre. Bulletin of Volgograd State University, no. 2, pp. 111–120, 2021. DOI: 10.15688/jvolsu2.2021.2.10. (In Rus.)
23. Doronina, Yu. G. Video blogs as new media. Almanac of World Science, no. 6, pp. 97–99, 2018. EDN YVQEPZ. (In Rus.)
24. Aarseth, E. J. Cybertext. Perspectives on Ergodic Literature. London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997. (In Eng.)
25.Furmanov, I. A. Social psychology of aggression and violence. Minsk, 2016. (In Rus.)
26. Vostryakova, P. S., Mixal`kova, O. A., Graf, Ya. I. Gaming addiction, causes and possible consequences. Globus, no. 2, pp. 51–55, 2020. (In Rus.)
27. Severin, A. P. Neurophysiological patterns of Internet addiction. Globus, no. 2, pp. 55–58, 2020. (In Rus.)
28. Krasilnikov, G. T. The Internet in the world of the modern teenager: the Hamelin piper or the Milky Way. Bulletin of the Council of Young Scientists and Specialists of the Chelyabinsk region, no. 4, pp. 66–72, 2016. (In Rus.)
29. Afanasyev, O. N., Shalamova, E. A. Computer addiction. Nurse, no. 2, pp. 40–43, 2015. (In Rus.)
|
