Gameplay Journal #5
When I think of glitches, I associate it with ideas like an interruption, noise, or disturbance. When I’m playing a game and I encounter a glitch, it can be noticeable and shake me out of my interaction with the game. Engaging with something like a game, I have expectations for what I’m able to interact with, what I’m able to manipulate, and what I’m able to achieve. So when a glitch occurs and I get interrupted, a couple things happen. One, I recognize that it’s abnormal and perhaps unintentional and two, this is a product of something that I may have done and can potentially manipulate. Glitches happen, they’re a part of code, no matter how well something is designed, glitches can and will happen during the process creating it.
While glitches can make navigating a piece of software difficult, “The perfect glitch shows how destruction can change into the creation of something original” (Menkman, 341). With most standard business practices, you want there to be as few glitches as possible, as that’s ideal for users and their experience. But when you stop thinking about the practical experience and instead think about the theoretical potential, glitches become more than an inconvenience. Instead, they have the potential for different perspectives and highlight the two sides of dealing with glitches; the unfamiliar disturbance that’s usually associated with it, and embracing the oddities of glitches. “They challenge its inherent politics and the established template of creative practice, while producing a theory of reflection.” (Menkman, 344)
Works Cited:
Menkman, Rosa. “Glitch Studies Manifesto”. Video Vortex Reader II: Moving Images beyond Youtube, 2011, pp. 336–347.