Initial Observations: Little Big Planet 3 (LBP)
I chose to participate in the Little Big Forum. When I discovered the site it looked like it had much potential to be socially engaging. It had a section for members to introduce themselves, a section for screenshots, objectives and levels created, and other sections relevant to an engaging online participatory culture. However, on the very next day I went to the site and it had crashed. Fortunately, this inconvenience only lasted a day, but it made me wary of the reliability of the site.
After a few days I purchased Little Big Planet 3, for PlayStation, so I could understand the “game discourse” in which members were commenting. For instance, some members spoke on Bunkum, Moons versus Earths, and other game-related context. At this point, my only motivation to continue playing the game is to increase my understanding of their discourse and to increase relevance for myself.
The other observation I noticed is that when signing up to be a member I noticed the designers essentially require each member to have a strong familiarity with the game. They did so by asking questions that could only be answered by having access to the game such as: Your PlayStation Username and Where did you build worlds (with no options). Even at the level I am at I wasn’t sure how to answer the question of where I built my world, but fortunately after reading other members comments I was able to deduce that the answer must be either moon or earth. Apparently my answer of moon allowed me to proceed. After confirming my login I tried to comment on other members posts, however, the system blocked me until I had more “access.” In this sense, participation seems very closed and difficult. It makes me wonder why the designers of the website are so adamant about keeping this “world” very “secure” if you will. What are the benefits for the designers or other members?
Overall, I feel like I am not getting socially engaged in a participatory culture online at this point. I think I may need to find another avenue to engage other players. I’m hoping that once I set up my online connection to the PlayStation I’ll be able to locate or communicate with other players that way or perhaps through Twitter. I’m also concerned that due to the age (the last release) of the game most players are no longer fully engaged with this game, and I may need to branch into other games.
I will continue to play the game to see what the authors were speaking on concerning the player-generated context of the game. So far I find the game to be like most games in which you use the tools and navigation of the game designers. Other than being able to customize my character I don’t see how “player-as-a-designer” feature of the game, unless it’s something that comes as I evolve as a player. In terms of design, the game does allow you to control the facial expressions of your character. I’ve noticed that I do not prefer to play with my character when he has a frown on his face, and it bothers me to the point that I will change it back to a smile. I think this provides a great learning opportunity to understand how facial expressions or gestures in instructional media can influence the user’s motivation or even connection with a program. This is a concept that I want to delve deeper into, because I think the learn opportunity for designers provides more than just reminding instructional designers to use happy faces in their pictures, but greater understanding of the human-computer interaction in design as it relates to expressing emotions.
