Assessing Interactivity in Video Game Design

how analyses of video games diff er (or should diff er) from analyses of other media forms. Lacking an organized tradition of game analysis, critics are likely to draw on other disciplines in media studies to make their assessments. Although such methods may be productive to some degree, mediaspecifi c biases will likely also be present. Just as early fi lm theory drew on psychology and literary theory, resulting in analyses centered on character and narrative, video game analyses are in danger of becoming dominated by fi lm theory and other theories currently in use (and in vogue) in media studies. It is useful, then, to consider what areas of overlap do exist between analyses of video games and other media as well as what areas of video game analysis are new and unique. At present, two excellent essays suggest methodologies for analyzing video games. Lars Konzack (2002) divides game analysis into seven diff erent areas: hardware, program code, functionality, gameplay, meaning, referentiality, and socioculture. Espen Aarseth (2003) looks at diff erent game research perspectives and other typologies that broadly address game analysis. In this chapter, I focus much more narrowly on a single area of video game design: Assessing Interactivity in Video Game Design