But anyway, I tend to go for this new trend in thinking about thinking, rather than go for the old-fashioned assumption that people are all born with the same mind, and that differences come from sources like parenting and upbringing and media.
Not to mention the mind/body split, where people assume that the mind is sort of an alien being riding along in the body (a staple of fantastic movies, TV shows, etc., where one character’s mind is transplanted into another actor, thus saving a fortune on contract negotiations).
Using current technology to spy on peoples’ brains, we’ve learned that not all brains are created equal. Some, like the people on the autistic end of the spectrum referenced in the article, are far better at computation than empathy. Others mentioned in recent studies involving religion, have a more developed brain region associated with religious ecstasy and mystical visions, while others are lacking in that department.
Then there’s the chemicals surging through our brains. High levels of testosterone and estrogen are blamed for all kinds of things, but reputable studies have shown that a lot of either one has a major influence on whether a person is aggressive and confident or hypersensitive to emotion (or in need of chocolate, or possessing a strong desire to get online and pwn stuff).
Okay, but what does this have to do with games? Well, the mind/body split is extremely appropriate when you’re talking about avatars, and in virtual reality it’s quite possible for female me to inhabit the body of a brawny wrestler type without having to deal with excess testosterone, or for me to shift my consciousness into a simlacrum of a geeky scientist without having to trade my mood swings for the ability to do advanced equations in my head.
That’s because the games deal with what Baron-Cohen is talking about – copies of reality that we are individually free to manipulate. So while consensus reality tells us we can’t just go around swapping bodies, someone long ago decided that in their particular copy of reality, this happens all the time, and enough other people shared in that fantasy to the point where it became a standard convention in fantastic stories and computer games. Like mermaids (even though Baron-Cohen seems to have a hard time telling a mermaid from a medusa).
And, although different people and different cultures have specialized names for mermaids and theories about them – and while mermaids are by no means universal, no doubt there are a few landlocked internet-less non-TV-watching people somewhere on the planet that have never heard of them – you can travel through most populated areas and find pictures of mermaids, statues of them sitting in harbors, songs about them, movies about them.
So, while mermaids have no objective basis in reality, there are a lot of these creative copies of reality include them, enough to the point where they have a consensual subjective reality, along with lots of other things such as abstract concepts, belief systems, religious figures, superstitions and TV shows premised on one actor’s mind occupying another actor’s body.
And while primary and secondary representations of reality are endlessly fascinating, Baron-Cohen takes his train of thought further when speculating on people on the Asperger’s/autism end of the spectrum, who are characterized by having a brain that is much more efficient at processing data, and much less efficient at “soft” functions like empathy, creativity and the ability to read peoples’ non verbal cues.
That’s where the article becomes relevant to gamers, because what he’s describing is the basic difference between social gamers and power gamers, or roleplayers and PVPers, or however else you want to classify it.
In real life, we tend to segregate ourselves based on where we fall in this spectrum. Those with high capacity for imagination tend to end up in different careers from those who have trouble with anything more “second representation” than a spreadsheet. They like different activities, different media and different clothes.
Computer games are the crossroads where these two organically different types of brain meet. Games wouldn’t be possible without the patient number crunchers and code wranglers who make sure all the 000s and 111s are in the right place. And without the creative types, we’d all be playing games based on sheer numbers, such as tabletop wargames and card games, rather than wandering around in green elven forests.
Cohen’s controversial, by the way. He’s written books about essential, hardwired gender differences and the Amazon reviews tend to convey that some people love him and some despise him.
There are two kinds of people in this world, those who divide people into two groups and those who don’t.
Baron-Cohen writes about two overlapping groups: the empathic and the systematic, and states that more women are empathic, more women are systematic and there are both genders on either side.
This article referring to some of his work reduces it to
Classifying individuals in general terms, he concludes that among men, about 60% have a male brain, 20% have a balanced brain, and 20% have a female brain. Women show the inverse figures, with some 60% having a female brain.What this communicates to me is that there really isn’t a “female brain” or a “male brain” – merely a 60% chance you’ll have either a systematic or an empathic brain based on what’s in your genes and/or jeans.
And, since it’s not an on/off switch, probably what is actually going on is that in 60% of women, the e-brain predominates, but they can still figure out how to calculate the tip in a restaurant, and in 60% of men the s-brain predominates, but they can still follow the plotline of an explosion-less movie.
However.
There is one kind of brain that is more concerned with ranking and number value, and it’s not the empathic brain. Not only that, but it’s more likely to come up with a ranking system that “proves” systematic brains are better, and that because more men than women have them, men are better, and that because not all men have them, that men who DO have them are better (and therefore, all the guys who are staring at the sunset with a blonde in front of it are homosexual because they’re doing something wussy and aesthetic rather than compiling a stack of numbers with the hope of discovering their own personal number is somewhere near the top).
And when this type of brain is closer to the extreme than the middle, it can get downright annoying to have conversations with that brain’s owner. I think most of us have interacted with someone who is strongly bottom line or emotional (and probably, if you’re like me, wanted to kick something that would make a loud and satisfying noise afterwards).
In terms of games, the e-brains are more at home in places like Second Life, while the s-brains prefer things like Lineage II.
In WoW, there are roleplay servers for the e-brains and pvp servers for the s-brains (and normal – or RP/PVP – servers for the rest of us). That’s because, while the two flavors are combined in most people and can be complimentary if the brain owners are compatible, in someone who’s strongly aligned toward one or the other, the very existence of the other challenges their internal definitions of how people are "supposed" to act and think and feel.
In the case of the s-brains, there often is outright hostility toward the e-brains, or girls, or wusses, or homosexuals, or whatever names the s-brains are currently calling them. The s-brains are the ones disrupting RP events, stirring up controversy through trash talking or controversial handles, taking over the game forums and demanding that all attention be directed toward improving PVP, and challenging anyone who disagrees with them.
The e-brains, on the other hand, are predisposed to being sympathetic and understanding regarding peoples’ differences, so they don’t initially hate the s-brains. They take a stab at understanding them, at coming up with theories for why they act that way (and devising utopian solutions to fix them).
Now I’m not going to claim that the s-brains are all sadistic villains and the poor little e-brains are all saintly victims. In fact, only an e-brain would do that – in an attempt to persuade other e-brains that they have been abused and oppressed and persecuted, as part of a strategy to get other people to punish the offensive s-brain for them.
But often it works more like this: aggressive s-brain, seeking a high score, teases and/or challenges and/or annoys a sensitive e-brain, who doesn’t like it. The e-brain is not likely to come back at them in a fighting stance – that would mean meeting the s-brain on their turf and terms, where the e-brain is more likely to be at a disadvantage (even though most s-brains who go around bullying the e-brains instead of hitting up their s-brain peers for some agro exchange are looking for a cheap and easy victory). So it stirs up drama in the hopes of attracting help from others -- possibly more e-brains to form a mob and shout down the offender, possibly another s-brain who feels like making some "heroic rescuer" points.
And sometimes it even works like this: e-brain, concerned about some social problem, such as littering, draws a lot of emotionally charged attention to it by making propaganda that suggests that litterers are cruel and inhumane fiends that want to destroy the whole planet.
The s-brains, after making fun of a few e-brains who are weeping over the tragedy of littering, decide littering is actually a heroic action that makes one manly and proves one superior to the pitiful e-brains.
Or let’s take ecology. E-brains express angst over endangered species and fuel conservation. Do the s-brains empathize with them and start conserving so everybody will have less hurt feelings? Hell no, they run right out to get SUVs and hunting licenses, behavior the e-brains have chosen to label “macho.” The prospect of scarce resources makes e-brains want to conserve, because they don’t want others to have to do without. The prospect of scarce resources makes s-brains want to flaunt their high consumption habits (and also to stockpile resources for later, or to take them away from wimps and wusses too feeble to defend them).
Or, let’s take my guild’s harsh censorship policy.
An e-brain, being corrected for saying something unwholesome like “fartknocker” in guildchat, will clean up their act, not wanting to offend others.
Some s-brains, being asked to clean up their language, will quickly determine it is strategically advantageous not to offend the easily offended and abide by policy.
Some will actually sign up to enforce that policy if it means they get a promotion. They then will frequently use their authority to make frequent demonstrations in front of others that they are empowered to come down like a ton of bricks on people who say “fartknocker.”
And some s-brains, told to tone down the language, will just assume it’s a challenge by another s-brain trying to conversationally dominate them in front of others, and will lash out.
But anyway, the whole idea of classifying these two radically different ways of seeing the world in gender terms really strikes me as something only some of the 60% of males with strong s-brain tendencies would be interested in doing, probably just to attempt to dominate the 20% of females with s-brain tendencies.
And not only that, but reducing it to gender wars turns it into a messy nebulous Vietnam-like conflict, where lots of people are sleeping and/or sympathizing with the enemy.
I’d almost suggest testing all school age children, separating out the ones who can do algebra AND play a musical instrument, and making all of us hall monitors. But that’s just my s-brain tendencies talking, because I want to win!! And dominate!! And reign supreme in my uberness, pwning everything!!
Meanwhile, my e-brain tendencies think it sounds like a whole lot of work and responsibility, and it would be more fun to take a nap, or perhaps listen to some nice music while enjoying a tasty snack.
Back to games: the really successful ones, like WoW and Sims, provide activities for both e- and s-brains, as well as those of us who can play either side according to whim. They also provide lots of opportunities for shunning those with different brain architecture, who can both be offensive, in different ways.
A game designer wanting to make a fortune attracting more people than WoW should keep in mind that, while the s-brains are the vocal players, the e-brains are the ones that "make" the community that keeps the others coming back for more.
And a game designer who wants to make the next NGE-like travesty should only listen to one side of the discussion (the vocal s-brains, naturally) and then proceed to totally ignore the other side, thus driving them away. Not only that, but at the same time, they should trash all the status and point acquisition features beloved to the s-brains.
I really hope the next game I get hooked on doesn't take that route.
I also hope it comes along soon. WoW is great, but it's starting to get just a wee bit stale.
0 comments:
Post a Comment