Skip to main content

Minecraft as a Modern fantasy - great fun and deeply problematic?

A specter is haunting the internets - the specter of Minecraft. If you have not yet encountered it, chances are it will be near you soon. Minecraft is a so-called indie game that has made it big, with 4 million purchases so far (and counting), even though the game is still in beta. On YouTube, fan-made Minecraft videos such as this one easily attract hundreds of thousands of viewers.

How come this success? Minecraft certainly does not impress with spectacular graphics nor sophisticated narratives. Basically, Minecraft is about mining. After a tiny Java-program is installed on your desktop, it generates a vast 3D world, complete with oceans, continents, weather above and caves below. As a player you are then free to explore and exploit this world after your liking - typically through mining of various ores and crafting of items (hence the name of the game). The only stress factor is that during nighttime, monsters spawn out of dark spots on the map, which in effect is anywhere that you as a player has not yet lit up with torches. Thus, there is a clear incentive to put a cosy little house together rather quickly, or arm yourself for battle until dawn breaks.

The way I'm currently thinking about explaining the succes of Minecraft - which is also a personal issue, since I'm under its spell - is that the game stages a meeting between the dangerous but resourceful Nature and the vulnerable but rational Man that appeals to the Robinson Crusoe that many of us have somewhere inside. In a sense, Minecraft epitomizes the deeply Modern fantasy of the powerfully rational Human Individual, dropped from the sky (literally, in the game) to manipulate Nature by cutting it up into cubes for easy handling (mining), combining them to achieve higher complexity (crafting) and an increase of power (tools) for further manipulation. No wonder Minecraft is intriguing for anyone enrolled in this Modern narrative of the state of things.

However, in this Modern fantasy lie problems that are rapidly becoming more and more obvious. As humans collectively struggle with grasping the consequences of climate change, we try to locate a particular human actor to blame for the misery, but find only historical contingency and delicate ecosystems. Nature is not simply our endless resource, it turns out, and there is serious backlash to our 'rational' exploitation of it. Furthermore, we might have to design a new politics to divide resources between us, since they are finite. These limitations are absent in Minecraft, which is why it comes across as highly Modern, great fun to play (for people like me, who grew up Modern), and potentially deeply problematic if taken in without a dose of reflexivity.

How might Minecraft approach the Nature-Culture divide differently? One place to start might be to generate maps that have finite resources and a fully destructible world. This would add a whole new tension to the game, as players in multiplayer worlds might have to negotiate how to use the sparse land that has been generated for them. As it is now, multiplayer worlds end with a layer of indestructible 'bedrock' - a game feature that might also be seen as a metaphor for the Modern belief in a bedrock of facts that Man can reach if he is rational enough to cut through chaotic Nature.

Another idea could be to make worlds in which players cannot survive when dropped from the sky, but have to grow as part of a larger ecosystem, dependent on other beings. Obviously none of this would overcome the Nature-Culture divide, as should be the ultimate ambition, but then again - that might diminish the fun of the game for Moderns like us.


  1. I feel like I deserve some credit here:

    "to manipulate Nature by cutting it up into cubes for easy handling (mining), combining them to achieve higher complexity (crafting) and an increase of power (tools) for further manipulation. No wonder Minecraft is intriguing for anyone enrolled in this Modern narrative of the state of things."

    I totally inspired that when saying the game was about creating order from chaos. Right? Right.

    Anyway, I don't think I agree the game is problematic, much less 'deeply' so. Or if it is, there are a whole load of other things that should also be characterized as problematic.

    I don't feel an indie video game should bear the major responsibility for educating people about environmental/political/whatever problems, unless it's a 'serious' game made with that explicit purpose. If you want to do this, I feel like there are other cultural products ahead of Minecraft in the line waiting for value judgements.

    I generally find it a bit weird to use a lot of energy judging fiction/entertainment like games on ethics. Lots of protagonists in movies or novels do some heinous shit without that meaning those are bad novels/movies.

  2. The short answer is that I only take time to criticize things that I like. That's why Minecraft is first in line. And yes, you are an inspiration for many things that I do :-)

  3. Do Fate of the World next! A game actually intended to be about the environment, limited resources etc. It just got an update to implement migration in its depressing simulation of just how fucked we are.

  4. I guess this guy had some of the same thoughts you did:


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Official statistics: 51% of 16-74 year old Danes use Facebook

In making a case for why my MSc dissertation here at the Oxford Internet Institute should be concerned with something as hyped and mundane as Facebook, I've been looking for numbers on the Danish social media landscape.

On the English-language web, the commercial SocialBakers Facebook statistics suggest that 49% of the Danish population are on Facebook.

This rather non-transparent number can now be compared with a recent report by Statistics Denmark, suggesting that 51% of 16-74 year old Danes have a Facebook account. The second-largest online social network service in Denmark, LinkedIn, is trailing far behind at 8%. Most surprisingly perhaps, a mere 3% of the surveyed age cohort use Twitter.

As such, there are compelling quantitative reasons for choosing Facebook over e.g. Twitter for a case study of how social media reflect life in Denmark. Another recent survey produced for a Danish daily confirms this: A tiny elite of the 319 most active Twitter users in Denmark write half of …

Two (used) comments on Gillespie's new chapter "The Relevance of Algorithms"

I'm in Paris this semester, as a visiting doctoral student at the Center for the Sociology of Innovation (CSI) at Ecole des Mines and at the médialab at Sciences Po. 
Apart from finding myself in the middle of two very lively research communities, I've also been so lucky that a series of cross-institutional seminars on Digital Methods are taking place in Paris this spring.
The last seminar was on "Transformative interaction: web effects on social dynamics", for which I volunteered to prepare a brief comment on one of the selected readings, namely Tarleton Gillespie's chapter "The Relevance of Algorithms", forthcoming in an edited volume on "Media Technologies" to be published by MIT Press. (The full chapter has been uploaded by Gillespie here).
Since I prepared the comments in writing, and since they did in fact spark some discussion, I've decided that it might be appropriate to recycle them as a blog post. Here goes:

Introducing: The Twitter-thing!

Context: The Twitter-thing is the (awkward?) translation into English of 'Twittertinget' - a project I worked on last year with two Danish colleagues, Irina Papazu (CBS) and Tobias Bornakke (Uni. of Copenhagen) in collaboration with the Danish newspaper Politiken. The Twitter-thing is a tool that draws on TCAT in order to build a network visualisation of how Danish MPs use hashtags on Twitter. Here follows my abstract for the upcoming Data Publics conference in Lancaster, where I'll be exhibiting the Twitter-thing.

Parliaments could seem to be highly issue-agnostic places. All sorts of problems move in and out of these large and expensive devices (Dányi 2015), while the membership stays more or less the same in-between elections. But as issues are taken up and left behind by parliaments, they also make cuts in the parliament in the sense that specific sets of parliamentarians become attached to specific issues. The aim of the Twitter-thing tool is to trace these cuts and v…