I can't believe I'm doing this.

Found this from a game blog I read.:

Your First Name of: Kemp

• Although the name Kemp creates an active mind and a restless urge to explore new ideas, we emphasize that it causes an emotional intensity that is hard to control.
  
• This name, when combined with the last name, can frustrate happiness, contentment, and success, as well as cause health weaknesses in the solar plexus, and nervous system.
• The name of Kemp gives you a very inquisitive, restless, seeking nature.
  
• You feel impelled by intense desires that you cannot comprehend or satisfy.
  
• You have had the desire to accomplish something outstanding and to do something very worthwhile for humanity, especially early in your life.
  
• This name gives you a versatile, clever, analytical mind, but unfortunately you cannot direct your interest toward an undertaking for long, as you do not have the patience and practicality for systematic hard work and attention to detail.
  
• You resent obstacles, delays, and restrictions.
  
• This name gives you ambition, high ideals, and much creative ability, but the intense dynamic nature is too often spent in feelings and in moods, rather than in constructive action.

Bootstraps vs. Blessings

I've been thinking about my career a lot lately. About what I want to do, how I'm going to get there, if I'm going to get there...

I seem to be under pressure from two equal and (seemingly) opposite philosophies, both with support.

The first is the one most commonly produced by the Christian community. The main idea is that if God wants you someplace, he will place you there. Where you are right now is where you're supposed to be. God created beings, not doings.

In my life, this looks kinda like this: Youth ministry - I like doing it, but I haven't been. Free time to build relationships and not be super stressed. Take time to live, breathe, observe, love people, etc.

With this train of thought, if God wanted me to become a game designer, he would place me in a position to be a game designer. I should still do all my class work and such (I must, after all, be faithful to all of what must be done today - not just the relational stuff.), but I shouldn't stress out so much about getting into the competitive field of game design. Perhaps some good connections through a God-provided internship will help me. Or the sister of one of my middle schoolers' parents works for Junction Point Studios and would love to have me on. Either way, I shouldn't worry about it and go go go like crazy to make it into the industry on my own.

Taking this attitude means that I don't have to worry so much about whether or not I'm creating games in my free time or not. It means that I don't have to feel guilty about not using the time I've set aside for "career time" properly. It means that I've run out of excuses for getting involved in youth ministry.

But it's not the only attitude to have.

The other attitude is the one that I hear preached most often when looking up game design career stuff. This is the typical American do-it-yourself. To get into the industry, I must be learning as much as I can about games, history, design (in every sense of the word), programming, sociology, psychology, etc... When I'm not doing that, I should be playing video games in an analytical fashion, designing games for fun (by myself and with others), and networking, networking, networking.

From the Christian angle, this means being very intentional in developing the gifts that God has given me to get to the place I believe God has called me to. It means staying focused and not letting the Enemy distract me from the goal. This is also where I get a little defensive and tell myself, "You can't let them [whoever "them" is] think that you don't work hard just because you're a Christian. You've got to work hard to His glory! That will show them that my God is too big[, too just, too holy, too whatever...] to be used as a crutch [or excuse, or scapegoat for unsuccess] by humans." Or something like that.

Practically, this "bootstraps" philosophy means that I do just that: I pull myself up by my own bootstraps. I make things happen for myself. I work hard to get where I want to go.

The problem there being (and this could be my Christian sub-culture getting through, rather than the real word of God) that there's so much "I" in those statements. There is very little "God through me."

The other problem, of course, is that I simply do not enjoy doing some of that stuff. I don't want to be so dedicated to my career that I don't have time for relationships, family, church, leading a small group, or helping with my son's Boy Scout troop someday. I never want my career to be all consuming and I feel like if I'm consumed just to get there, I'll never stop being consumed.

So as I look to my senior year of college, I ask myself what I want to dedicate myself to. Is it to the pursuit of a career? If I don't do that - if I don't work myself silly making product - there is little chance of me getting into grad school, getting a job, or ever working in a field that I'm passionate about. Or do I pursue wholeness, simplicity, and God's increasing hold on my life? If I don't do that, who knows what will happen to me... I will probably become someone I don't want to be.

Now, before I get a bunch of comments saying this exact thing, I'm sure a middle of the road procedure would be best. But the practicality of the matter is that it's never that simple and sometimes impossible choices favoring one side or the other have to be made.

I guess the question is what is God really calling me to? And how serious do I need to be to get there?

(Possible) woops.

So I linked this blog with my Facebook notes. Now my thoughts are really open for all the world to see. Possibly even on their news feeds (until I change that).

Why?

Because I'll hopefully be updating this more as the semester starts and I start giving myself a words per day routine.

Because I want to be a better writer and the only way to do that is to write and let people read it.

Because I sometimes have thoughts I want to share with people and gain their thoughts from but my blog doesn't get much traffic.

Because I'm tired and my decision making probably isn't the best.

Goodnight, world.

TheKempest.

I've written about my name before, but I was thinking about it some more tonight (as I was laying in bed, unable to sleep. Again.).

It all started last week when I (finally) got my Xbox 360 hooked up to Xbox Live, their internet service. On the console, you can choose a Gamertag. I chose TheKemp. The idea is that you then connect to Xbox Live and you can use the same name. Of course, when I chose TheKemp, I thought, "No one else in the world is named Kemp. There's no way this one will be taken."

It was.

Microsoft would not let me be "TheKemp" because there already was a "TheKemp" out there somewhere.

So I had to one up this "TheKemp." I would not allow him (or her. Who knows?) to take my name! My new Gamertag? TheKempest. I am much more Kemp than any other Kemp in the world. (Unfortunately, it looks like I'm trying to wordplay both my name and "tempest" like some middle schooler who acts like he's really good at Halo but really is quite mediocre.)

Which got me thinking: what does that mean? What does it mean to be more Kemp than anyone else in the world? Do I associate certain qualities as being Kemp and certain qualities as being unKemp (or unkempt. ha.)?

I know that my name does mean a lot to me. I'm glad that I can't easily find any other person on Facebook with the name of Kemp. I'm glad that when I meet people, I am the only way they can define the word. They have never known a Kemp before me and chances are that they will never know a Kemp after me. My self will never be separated from the word "Kemp" by other Kemps out there as the expecations of Michaels and Johns are.

(Side notes: I just wrote my name more than I ever have in my life. What a weird name! An M and a P right next to each other? Who decided to name their child that? What the heck...)

All this slightly disassociated narcissistic talk to come down to this point: God has a name. In Exodus 3, Moses is sent on a mission by the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Moses falters several times in the conversation, but eventually asks, "Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they ask me, 'What is his name?' Then what shall I tell them?"

In the religions of the ancient near east, knowing a name gave you power over that person or force. Knowing my name gives you some power over me even still. At work, I freak out all the time when people pick my name off my name tag. I am immediately more friendly (mostly because I'm not sure if I really do know them or not). When people shout your name from across a crowded room, no matter how likely it is that there are others that share your name, you turn in that direction. Moses is sort of asking for that kind of power, only much more intense.

And the Creator of the Universe, Elohim, responds: "I am who I am. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you.'"

God's name is I Am. His very name speaks of existence. Pure, unadulterated, independent, noncontingent existence.

There is none of Descartes' famous, "I think..." before it. He just is.

Two thoughts out of this (both more or less half baked):
1. When we say "I am," are we using the Lord's name in vain? Are we willing ourselves into existence, as if that were possible? Are we, through the very nature of our own language, calling God from across the room every time we say something about ourselves? Does God turn his head attentively only to find out we were talking to the other "I Am" in the room? (P.S. There is no other I Am.)

2. (This one's even less baked...) Does our existence cry the name of God? If he is existence and being, then we, through our contingent being constantly call attention back to the one without whom we would not exist. Through this (obnoxiously deep, convoluted, and) philosophical lens, it makes sense that the purpose of human life is to glorify God. We are, after all, merely borrowing from his existence...

3. (I know I said two, but then I reread the top and this point has to be made at least a little...) What attributes are distinctly God's? As I was reflecting on what made me the "Kempest" of all the Kemps, what makes I AM the most I AMest of all the I ams?

This question is, of course, answereable (at least a little) through a good theology book, but it does merit more thought.

Later.

P.S. Fun idea to try with your friends! Take the ideas from my reflection on my name earlier in this entry and think about how God feels in the same situation. Good times.

Why I'm not all about player agency.

I have a problem.

I want to be a video game designer, but I don't always agree with how the industry and culture is moving, behaving, and expecting, especially when it comes to story and narrative design.

You see, 0ne of the fancy shmancy terms tossed around by game designers from time to time is "player agency." It is the idea that the player is in control of the story. Games like Oblivion or Grand Theft Auto put quite a lot of agency into the hands of the player - their stories are mostly optional, discovered through what missions the player chooses and how they complete them. These games take pride in the agency of the player - the ability for the player to determine the course of the story. These games stand in stark contrast to many role playing games like the Final Fantasy series, where the story unfolds in a linear fashion and the player makes limited decisions that don't really affect the outcome of the characters' actions.

Popular opinion in the video game industry is to put more and more power in the hands of the players - let them make their own stories. In this camp, the role of the designer is to create an interesting world and starting conditions for the player's own creative expression. The player is free to participate in the telling of the story by telling it how they want it told. They determine protagonist, antagonist, conflict, desire, obstacle - everything. Through this, players can compare notes (stories) revolving around the question, "What did you do?" or "How did you get past that boss?"

But are players ever going to really interact with the game in a meaningful way? Will they be changed by the stories they tell in the same way that an audience is changed in other media?

I don't think so. I tend to think that players, when left to their own devices, are highly unlikely to tell a story of nuance, meaning, and thematic significance, no matter the tools they are given.

So why the obsession with player agency? Why do we buck so much the hand of a good designer/storyteller?

More personally, why am I so comfortable with it? My favorite games are ones in which I am a participant in a larger story - games where I assume the role of a character, rather than creating one myself. These games, through their gameplay (to a small extent) and their story, create meaning, thought, and, ultimately, change in how I view the world. (Drop everything you're doing and play Final Fantasy Tactics all the way through - you'll understand what I mean.)

Perhaps it all comes down to theology.

I think a large part of my struggle is that I have little problem trusting someone else to tell my story. I submit myself daily to the story that God is telling, to following his son with my life, and to the wonderful power of his themes and signficance. I have no problem believing that someone behind the scenes knows more than I do and has something to teach me.

Maybe running to player agency is really just a small part of the rebellion coming out in a new way - people trying to control their own lives and tell their own stories, and meaning nothing in the process.

Now before anyone reads this and gets all upitty about some judgmental Christian banter and blah-blah-blah, I'm not writing this to condemn the idea of player agency or to suggest that those who hold to that narrative theory are rebels, sinners, and godless fools. Rather, I write it to defend my own instinct toward authorial control.

If video games can be (and are) a powerful and somewhat accurate metaphor for life, then just as I believe there is a Designer of the world who arranges things for meaning and purpose for our good, so too I believe a human designer can inject some of that meaning and purpose for the good of his characters and players. Just as we as humans find life most fulfilling while following Jesus, I think it can be apt that players will find a well designed game most fulfilling when they follow the plan (or story or whatever) of the designer.

As with so many of my ideas, I'm not sure if everything came through effectively, so I'll summarize as simply as I can: If life has a designer who has a plan that we should follow, why shouldn't video games?

(Inspiration for this post brought to you by The Brainy Gamer. Read the comments and follow links. There's good times in there.)