1) Face<\/p>\n
I found this idea really interesting:<\/p>\n
“As with expression, patterns of gaze can vary depending upon culture or subculture. For example, lack of sustained mutual gaze might be interpreted as indifference or rudeness by an American person and as politeness by a Japanese person.”<\/p>\n
This suggests that interpretations of facial expressions are not necessary universal and will to a certain extent be influenced by the culture that you grow up in. \u00a0This is similar to the theory in linguistics of Universal Grammar which explains that all humans are born with the ability to pronounce the sounds of every world language, but those not used in one’s native language will quickly be forgotten as they will not be needed. \u00a0However, I was always under the impression that body movements, including facial expressions, were a way to\u00a0transcend a\u00a0language barrier because it is a “language” that is universally understood. \u00a0Given that this may not be the case, target audience should have influence over the design of character mannerisms. \u00a0This then begs the question, what is unique to those characters that are part of games that transcend cultural boundaries (if there are any that really do so)?<\/p>\n
2) Eliza Effect<\/p>\n
This article discusses the precursor to the now very dominant component of computer science: artificial intelligence. \u00a0Reading about the Eliza Effect and the “yes-no therapy” experiment, I immediately thought to myself, “why are we so ready to except AI as human interaction?” \u00a0Yes it is true, as the author mentioned, that eventually the facade breaks down and reveals its limitations but up until that point, most humans are willing to temporarily accept these simulations as reality. \u00a0This is especially apparent in video games across the board, and in particular, “The Sims” series comes to mind. \u00a0I will admit I have played they games to death and have found all of their limitations but I still play on. \u00a0And it seems that the more and more realistic they get, the more popular they become. \u00a0Why are we so\u00a0desperate\u00a0to make the virtual world a mirror of our own?<\/p>\n
3) Hills Like White Elephants<\/p>\n
It is amazing how much\u00a0Hemingway\u00a0is able to convey about the characters (and their relationship) through very simple descriptions and lots of dialogue. \u00a0I was especially intrigued with the\u00a0dichotomy\u00a0of describing the two characters as “man” and “girl”, and the adult situation they are in. \u00a0That brief description in the context of the dialogue was enough to discern that the relationship they share is an inappropriate one – he may be a good deal older than she is, they are constantly moving from place to place to be together, he clearly has a power over her that makes her feel like she would do anything to make him happy. \u00a0However, it is also clear that the man feels remorse about having this dominance in their relationship and clearly doesn’t want to lose her by forcing her to do something she would regret. \u00a0Hemingway does a really good job of revealing information discretely without explaining the circumstance explicitly but describing enough for the reader to understand what is going on.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
1) Face I found this idea really interesting: “As with expression, patterns of gaze can vary depending upon culture or subculture. For example, lack of sustained mutual gaze might be interpreted as indifference or rudeness by an American person and as politeness by a Japanese person.” This suggests that interpretations of facial expressions are not<\/p>\n