<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Achapman on Journal of Digital Humanities</title><link>https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/author/achapman/</link><description>Recent content in Achapman on Journal of Digital Humanities</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-US</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/author/achapman/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Privileging Form Over Content: Analysing Historical Videogames</title><link>https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/1-2/privileging-form-over-content-by-adam-chapman/</link><pubDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://journalofdigitalhumanities.org/1-2/privileging-form-over-content-by-adam-chapman/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;It is my hope that by now few deny that contemporary game series like &lt;em&gt;Civilization_or_Assassin’s Creed&lt;/em&gt; constitute history.&lt;sup id="fnref:1"&gt;&lt;a href="#fn:1" class="footnote-ref" role="doc-noteref"&gt;1&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/sup&gt; However, such a broad term does not convey the approach that analysis of these new historical texts requires. At this early stage in the serious study of historical videogames, we must be sure to adopt an approach that privileges understanding the videogame &lt;em&gt;form&lt;/em&gt; (and the varying structures this entails) and its integral rolein the production and reception of historical meaning, rather than solely, or even primarily, on the &lt;em&gt;content&lt;/em&gt; of specific products as historical narratives. Simply focusing on the accuracy of the game often re-informs us about popular history rather than recognizing the opportunities for engaging with discourse about the past (and the nature of this discourse) that this new historical form can offer.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>