|
Simulation
versus Representation
by Gonzalo Frasca
Page
1 - 2
- 3 - 4
Simulation
versus representation
As I previously said, simulation and representation
are two ways of dealing with reality. Until now, both
have coexisted in our culture, but representation, along
with narrative, have been dominant, mainly because complex
simulations require a level of technical sophistication
that is impossible without a computer. Nevertheless,
there are plenty of excellent examples of non-computer
based simulations, such as mechanical automatae, dolls,
war games, or even texts such as Cortazar’s Hopscotch
or the I-Ching. A doll that says “I’m
hungry” when you press her tummy is a simulation,
but a fairly simple one. A Tamagotchi that needs to
eat, sleep, play and be cured, is based on the sample
principles, but it is far more complex.
You
probably noticed that I have been using the terms "simulation"
and "videogame" almost as equivalents (a similar
thing has happened between "representation"
and "narrative", even if I stated that narrative
is a way to structure representation). Actually, there
are important differences among them that I have omited
for the sake of clarity, but will be described on my
next article on the series. Please also notice that
the definition that I previously gave of "simulation"
is provisory and actually too long: a more sophisticated
one will be provided in a next article on "simulation
and interpretation". In addition to this, I want
to stress the fact that the study of simulation as an
alternative to representation is still under construction.
This is why I encourage readers to email
me with comments and critiques.
We
are living in exciting times. For the first time in
our history, we have the tools for pushing simulation
into new frontiers. Simulation can now be used to model
systems that were before way too complex to deal with.
We now have a powerful alternative to representation
and narrative to explain and understand our world. And
simulation does not necessarily have to be a tool for
education, but also for art and entertainment (as it
happens with videogames). Unlike narrative, simulation
offers a first hand experience of a dynamic system (and
if the term "dynamic system" doesnt' sound
very excn you, you can replace it with "family",
"society", "person" or whatever
is that you would like to simulate). Simulation is a
great tool for understanding rules and relationships
among them. Certainly, representation has its own strengths
and it would be very naïve to believe that simulation
will replace it. The main problem is that representation
is such a powerful ideology and is so ubiquitous in
our culture that is hard to make the difference between
it and simulation. In this particular article, I simply
wanted to introduce some of these differences, but I
do not consider the question to be settled. In future
articles, I will go further into this thread, exploring
such issues as the rhetorical particularities of representation
and simulation; the need for an expanded semiotic model
to understand simulation interpretation; the differences
between representation and modeling; the relationship
between play, games and simulations.
It is important to notice that this article is not printed
in paper. The simulated examples that I crafted in Flash
are, in my opinion, essential to illustrate the characteristics
of simulations but would not have been possible on paper
and ink images. My main goal as a researcher is to better
understand (and explain) the potential of simulation
as a communicational tool, particularly for designing
videogames. Videogames are now a major medium, but I
do not think that they will reach their full potential
if we do not first understand the characteristics of
simulation.
Go
back to beginning of article
Return
to ludology.org
|
