COMD 518The Interaction Between Cinemaand Video Games On the Perspective ofthe Spectator(User)

Üzeyir Arda Ener

Introduction

Today, the increasing demand on individual entertainment and

the escalating rivalry between corporations is leading the

entertainment industry to a different direction. The viewers

can go to movie theaters and take part in the movies they are

watching or they can play a video game about a movie that just

went out and have cuts in it that hasn’t been showed in the

movie theaters. Cinema and video game industries have started

to collaborate more then we could imagine these past twenty-

thirty years. With the new technologies emerging every day, it

is mandatory for different entertainment sectors to keep up

with the new trends and to negotiate how they can collaborate

together on projects so that the spectator would prefer to buy

their products and watch their movies.

The spectator, viewer, player or we industrial designers call

them as “the user” evolves with time. Their interests,

concerns, preferences change and technology have to keep up

with it. The interaction between cinema and video games is

creating an interactive medium that the spectator transforms

into a participant in the event that is taking place. The

participation of the user to the event as an active element and

not just an ornament sitting still through the whole thing is

very important. In this paper we are going to present our

research and view on the Interaction between Cinema and Video

Games on the Spectators’ perspective. Our aim is to understand

the users’ perspective while experiencing all of these new and old

technologies that are in relation with each other through their

narrative backgrounds and from the basis of their technological

development.

Interaction of Cinema and Video Games

To understand the interaction between cinema and video games lets

first take a look at the definition of interaction. Chris Crawford

who is a computer game designer gives the definition:

“I define interactivity to be ‘a cyclical process in which two

actors alternately listen, think, and speak to each other.’ A good

conversation provides the ideal example of rich interactivity.”

[Dominic Arsenault, “Narration in the Video Game”, p.18]

“According to Eric Zimmerman there are four types of

Interactivity;

1. Cognitive Interactivity, which occurs on the level of

interpretation,

2. Functional Interactivity, which comprises all the actions that

a user can perform on the text’s material support without

altering it directly.

3. Explicit Interactivity, which is designed by the object’s

creator.

4. Meta-Interactivity, which consists in acting on the text from

its outside.” [Dominic Arsenault, Narration in the Video Game,

p.19-20]

For interaction, we need both sides to interact and communicate with

each other with any way possible and above we see the ways of

communications they can realize. So we can say that there is an

exchange between these two parts that interact.

‘In new media, users have options. They can interact with the system

through designed interfaces and get feedback. Through this feedback

the user is beginning to contribute to the system in comparison to

old media, we can talk about a much more interactive system is

present now.’ [Lev Manovich, “The Language of New Media”, p.66]

With the rise of interactivity in our world, exchange between cinema

and video games has increased a lot. “…what is commonly considered

to be the first video game (Spacewar! [1962]), the first commercial

video game (Computer Space [1971]), the first home game system (The

Magnavox Odyssey [1972]), and the first hit game (PONG [1972]),…”

[Mark J.P. Wolf-Bernard Perron, An Introduction to Video Game

Theory,p.2] ‘Since 1970s film’s influenced the video games with

their narratives and characters but in 1980s the shoe was on the

other foot (i.e. Pac-Man became an animated TV series, in 1993 Super

Mario bros. were turned into a film. After that in 1994, Street

Fighter, DoubleDragon and in 1995, Mortal Kombat turned into a

film.)’ [Mark J.P. Wolf-Bernard Perron, “An Introduction to Video

Game Theory”, p.6] The narrative of the film is the part where the

interaction with the user and the film happens. Viewers are trying

to solve the puzzle of the story during the film. The film first

greets us with an opening scene, where we learn about the story and

the characters a little, then everything starts to reveal itself. It

is very similar in video games. An opening appears when you open the

video game and that’s where you learn about the plot and your

purpose in the game. After you start playing it, as you achieve

progress in the game you start to learn more and more about the

story and get closer to your goal. The more you play the game the

more you feel attached to it because you waste time and effort for

it. These two media concepts clearly had an exchange between each

other but can we say that video games are a remediation of the film?

First, we need to explain what remediation is;

“Bolter & Grusin use the term “remediation” to describe a group

of related concepts. They first maintain that all media

experience shifts between two separate states of reception:

immediacy & hypermediation. They call this ongoing dynamic

balance “remediation”.” [Jim Bizzocchi, “Run, Lola, run-Film as

Narrative Database”, p.1]

From this definition we can understand that both medium had

exchanges from each one. This supports our thesis of the interaction

of both mediums are visible as you can see. We can also give an

example from a movie called “Run, Lola, Run” as a remediation of a

video game represented as a film. In “Run, Lola, Run” we can see a

resemblance of a video game like shift of real scenes to animated

scenes and repetition of parts in the movie in different mise en

scenes as if someone was playing the protagonist Lola and keeps

playing the same part to get it right this time. Also, the limited

time that Lola needs to save her boyfriend in is very much like a

video game quest that you need to complete, if you could not do it

in time you need to play again, that is the rule. You have rules

defined to you in a film, you have in most cases 90 minutes to watch

it, you have to be quite, you have to sit still and enjoy it. Even a

sequence of images passing through in front of our eyes for ninety

minutes is fun to watch it is very restricting when we compare it to

video games. In video games you have rules you have to abide by

defined in the game but you have lots of ways to reach to your goal.

Every time you play you can achieve different goals, different

scores, unlock different achievements etc. You just need the player

and the interface as different instruments to play the game and also

the graphical elements to work your way out in and out of the game.

The interface helps the player interact with the game by using the

instruments and moving inside a virtual space through graphical

elements designed to direct and give feedback to user. You cannot

interact with a film like when you are watching it in a traditional

movie theatre instead of home. When you are at home the lights are

on, you can pause the film, talk with people around you, stop the

movie and go back again etc. You have more choice and freedom just

like you have in a video game.

Another point of interaction between cinema and video games is point

of interpretation of both mediums. A spectator analyzes the movie

while in session and interprets the images to their own past

experiences and knowledge as the video game player does the same

thing. Their interpretation of the film and the video game is unique

to every individual. This is an example of cognitive interactivity

as Eric Zimmerman explained.

We can also give examples of functional interactivity that are in

common between cinema and video games. A functional interactivity

demands a user’s interaction with a subject or an object.

“Functional Interactivity that are available to film viewers

today:

The multiplex theatre-with multiple location and viewing times

Standard television release, with multiple channels and

broadcast time slots

Pay-per-view television,

Video tape and VCRs: with capabilities for immediate

replay/multiple plays/Fast Forward/Rewind/Freeze-Frame/slo-

motion/footage sounter/even limited memory functions

DVD – with most of the above, plus chapter stops and a form of

random access capability

Legal (or quasi-legal) ripped versions – the fully digital

files on TiVo and other PVR devices

Rogue ripped versions on the internet – excerpts or entire

works” [Jim Bizzocchi, “Run, Lola, run-Film as Narrative

Database”, p.7]

If you don’t give an option to the viewer to watch the film other

than movie theatres then you would limit the functional

interactivity by only choosing the time of the movie and the seat

placement they are going to choose. In video games the only

limitation of the functional interactivity is in the public internet

cafes where you pay to play video games by the hour and if there is

a line and you passed the limited time constraint you have to stop

playing.

If you watch the film on a computer the interaction changes in a

film and becomes more like a video game. You will have different

options and presets during the film when you watch it on a computer.

You can skip chapters, change the language of the film, change or

remove the subtitles of the film, watch directors comments, the

process of making the movie etc. Also in a video game you can choose

your language, choose the level you want to play, choose the

character you want to play etc. Video games and cinema have more in

common then we can imagine.

The Spectators (Users’ or the Players’) Perspective On theInteraction Between Cinema and the Video Games

From the time of the invention of Camera Obscura the position of the

viewer hasn’t been changed. The person or people whom are going to

be having their photo taken by the cameraman sit in front of the

camera and stay still until their form began to show on the plate

that is covered with chemical materials. It’s as if they are sitting

in the black camera box and watching their image pass through a tiny

whole and projects on the plate in the box. The definition of this

process looks very much like the traditional movie theatre

experience we have now isn’t it?

The design of the movie theatre isolates people from the

environmental distractions in order to provide them the perfect

experience about the film without getting distracted. Over the years

this theatre experience had gone through a lot of changes. People

are getting more interactive with their surroundings every day.

This reflects on the media as well. Cinema and video games as a

media are facing the effects of this new interactive world. Cinema

and video games started to get more participatory. Today we can

watch movies that we can change the plot and determine the sequence

of events in the movie by giving commands much like a video game. Or

we can play video games that we play with augmented reality glasses

and get the feeling of living inside of a video game or a program.

This also became a subject to a movie called “Tron”(1982), but we

will come back to that later. What I want to talk about the

spectator’s view and experience on this subject.

Firstly, we said that we need to sides to have an interaction. The

user has an interaction with cinema and video games just like cinema

and video games have an interaction with each other. This user

activity is defined in video games as “Player Activity”.

“Player activity, is arguably the heart of the video game

experience, and perhaps the most important thing from a design

perspective. It is the element of video game that is most

written about and very theory of video games thus far seems to

agree with the idea that without the player activity there

would be no video game.

… the action has some physical aspect to it and is not strictly

an activity occurring purely on the mental plane Player

activity is input by means of the user interface, and is

limited and usually quantized by it as well. We could further

divide player activity into two separate areas, diegetic

activity(what the player’s avatar does as a result of player

activity) and extradiegetic activity (what the player is

physically doing to achieve a result).” [[Mark J.P. Wolf-

Bernard Perron, An Introduction to Video Game Theory, p.16]

What Mark and Bernard mentioned about player activity can also imply

the same thing for the cinema because without the participation of a

viewer there would be no cinema. The physical presence of the

spectator is required in a cinema experience. The experience the

spectator has in a traditional movie theatre is immobilization. In

Lev Manovich’s excerpts he says:

“Early photography continued the trend toward the imprisonment

of the subject and the object of representation.” [Lev

Manovich, “The Language of New Media”, p.107]

“Toward the end end of the nineteenth century, the petrified

world of the photographic image was shattered by the dynamic

screen of the cinema.” [Lev Manovich, “The Language of New

Media”, p.108]

“The cinema screen enabled audiences to take a journey through

different spaces without leaving their seats; in the words of

film historian Anne Friedberg, it created “a mobilized virtual

gaze.” [Anne Friedberg, Window Shopping: Cinema and the Post

Modern (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993),

2.]However, the cost of this virtual mobility was a new,

institutionalized immobility of the spectator.” [Lev Manovich,

“The Language of New Media”, p.108]

“Thus, rather than a historical accident, according to Baudry’s

psychoanalytic explanation, the immobility of the spectator is

the essential condition of cinematic pleasure.” [Lev Manovich,

“The Language of New Media”, p.108]

This question of immobilization of the spectator in front of a

screen could be true in the past. People had different things to

enjoy themselves, different tastes in life and did not get bored of

the activities they do for a period of time but now people are

living fast. They want to do everything achieve everything,

accomplish everything fast… We eat fast food, get faster cars,

invent transportation that will take us wherever we want faster, we

want faster internet connections to download and have the data we

want faster than anyone. People always have limited time now because

of their work and studies. We won’t waste our time if watching a

movie in a traditional movie theatre or playing a game on

PlayStation’s predecessor rather than the newer model worth it.

Also letting a player, play a video game by himself against the

system over and over again immobilizes the player on a different

level. That is why online video games have appeared.

“Historically, there have always been single-player and multi-player

games. Massive multi-player games have recently appeared,

thanks to the apparition of the internet. These games are based

in gigantic virtual worlds where thousands of players each play

using a character they created (their avatar). They are usually

referred to as MMOGs (Massive Multi-Player Online Games), an

expression which can be adapted to different, more specific gam

genres such as the MMORPGs for Massive Multi-player Online Role

Playing Game, MMOFPS for Massive Multi-player Online First-

Person Shooter, and so on.” [Dominic Arsenault, “Narration in

the Video Game”, p.16-17]

An example of these MMOGs is Lord of the Rings Online Game

(www.lotro.com) which is based on a book series later to be

transformed into a film series and then played by online players in

multi-player online communities and individual gamers against the

database. This Online Games that transformed from movie scripts have

their own discussion forums, educational sites about the game, fan

sites, sites that gives information for modification of the

interface of the game… It’s like the narrator J.K.Rowling whom is

the writer has created a world unique to its self that when people

turn into a video game online they want to spend most of their time

in that virtual world because they can be a hero or a leader there.

The player’s character in the game can have thousands of friends in

that virtual world but won’t have any in the real world. His life

story becomes important in that world and people are keeping track

of the accomplishments and defeats in that world.

“Digital environments are procedural, participatory, spatial

and encyclopedic. The first two properties make up most of what

we mean my the vaguely used word interactive; the remaining two

properties help to make digital creations seem as explorable

and extensive as the actual world, making up much of what much

of what we mean when we say that cyberspace is immersive.

[MURRAY, J.H. Hamlet on the holodeck: the future of narrative

in cyberspace. New York: The Free Press, 1997. p. 71.]” [Mark

J.P. Wolf-Bernard Perron, “An Introduction to Video Game

Theory”, p. 17]

In this form of gaming we can experience more than one form of

interactivity. It consist all the forms of interactivity at once

that Zimmerman talked about. This changes when you play computer

games. In Lev Manovich’s excerpt “The Language of New Media” he says

that players experience computer games as narratives. As we

mentioned before games have defined tasks like completing the task,

coming in first place, playing until the last episode or having the

highest score. Manovich says, this task is what makes the player

experience the game as a narrative. What we are seeing here is the

reflection of film as narrative to the video games.

“Once the player has started up the game, he generally watches

the opening cut-scene. This not only provides him with a

dramatic context, but also states the rules of the game,

establishing a range of desirable actions and thus drawing the

boundaries of his space of possibilities and his expectations.”

[Dominic Arsenault, “Narration in the Video Game”, p.26]

Video games need this narrated structure because the viewer needs to

be informed. This informational and educational opening in the video

game leads the player. Without a guide the player could not interact

with the game nor can it proceed. The video games become a medium

that is used to continue a story of a film with a video game. For

example the movie Matrix which had changed the film industry through

its strong narration and newly invented techniques to create new

special effects is continued with an animation and then released to

the market as a video game. The spectators who have bought the

animation and the video game after the first movie are the ones who

had the most interactive experience with the latter versions. This

presented the world with a new interaction model between the cinema

and the video game. The exchange between both medium had great

success and spectator liked to chase the story with different media

spectrum, first the movie, and then the animation, video game and

the second movie.

An opposite example happened in the “Tron” arcade video game.

“Tron is a coin-operated arcade video game manufactured and

distributed by Bally Midway in 1982. It is based on the Walt

Disney Productions motion picture Tron released in the same

year. The game consists of four sub games inspired by the

events of the science fiction film. It features some characters

and equipment seen in the film, e.g. the Light Cycles, battle

tanks, the Input/Output Tower. The game earned more than the

film's initial release.”

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron_(video_game)]

After the film, they released three other games. The first one was

an arcade video game again, second one was a computer video game and

the third one was an Xbox interactive video game. After 28 years in

2010 they released another film as a continuation of the narrative

of the first movie. The spectator experienced the technological

development and advancements from 1982 to 2010. The graphical

improvement and the 3D movie experience make it even more remarkable

for the users. The film continued in a new video game release after

the second movie. It begins with an opening cut scene from the movie

and narrates the past experiences of the User Kevin Flynn who is a

virtual world designer.

The concept of virtual reality is also connected to this interaction

between cinema and the video game. Lev Manovich explains the virtual

reailty for user as defined:

“…now the spectator has to actually move around the physical

space in order to experience the movement in virtual space. The

effect is as though the camera is mounted on user’s head. So,

in order to look up in virtual space, one has to look up in

physical space; in order to “virtually” step forward one has to

actually step forward and so on. The spectator is no longer

chained, immobilized, anesthetized by the apparatus which

serves him the ready-made images; now s/he has to work, to

speak, in order to see.” [Lev Manovich, “The Language of New

Media”, p.110]

Virtual Reality changes a lot of things for the spectator. The whole

experience of watching a movie or playing a video game is now a

whole different concept. The newly designed interactive films are

using virtual reality technologies for the spectators to interact

with the screen. There are two kinds of interactive movies.

“One type is designed for a large theatre screen and is usually

intended to be a group experience. The other type is for a

small screen and is viewed at home.” [R. Verdugo, M. Nussbaum,

P. Corro, P. Nuñez and P. Navarrete, “Interactive Films and Co-

Construction”, ‘Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile,

Chile’, p.2]

In contrast to first one, the second one is designed to be a more

intimate experience for a single individual. For a film to be

interactive, which really means can be directed by the spectator you

need to split the movie in parts. These parts can be separated into

two definitions. One must be defined as the pieces that should

continue without any interference from the spectator, as the other

should be the pieces that determine choices the protagonist makes

during the movie. In the Interactive Films and Co-Construction

excerpts they are saying that none of the past structural elements

of a traditional film helped them to define a basis for the

interactive movie. So they called their new unit as Micro-Core (MC).

They split this Micro-Core into two as Back Bone Micro-Core and

Detour Micro-Core.

“The distinction between them is that a BBMC links to multiple

DTMC and the user must navigate to one of them while DTMC link

exclusively to the next BBMC. In terms of interactivity, BBMC

are interactive while DTMC are not.” [R. Verdugo, M. Nussbaum,

P. Corro, P. Nuñez and P. Navarrete, “Interactive Films and Co-

Construction”, ‘Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile,

Chile’, p.10]

When the user has to decide on what happens next in the film, s/he

has to give a command to BBMC to direct the narrative to his choice

of DTMC. This system lets the spectator to change the sequence of

events in the film and lets the spectator to make a choice just like

in a video game. Each individual that makes a choice during the film

is creating a film of his own. Distinct to other films, if it shown

in a group, that group of people sees the film from the decision of

the spectator who makes the choices in the movie. In this regard the

spectator acts as the director of the film but again the spectator

has a limited power on the film, s/he cannot decide on the

narrative. Different narratives are planned by the producers of that

interactive film and the spectator can only act on those parts. The

idea behind this movie is by using the screen as the action space

you can drag in and out elements to and from the screen. By dragging

in and out objects, the spectator is able to change the films

progression.

Their aims here is to use the past experiences of the user and

interpret them to a new technology to design a more user friendly

and more interactive film experience for the user.

Virtual reality contributes in interactive movies as well. They

design virtual bubbles sliding down the screen of the movie theatre

and the viewers who can pop a bubbles wins a price by seeing his/her

seat number on the screen. The viewer’s pop virtual bubbles they can

nor see or smell but acts very naturally while doing this activity.

What we witness here is the virtual real.

“In summary, VR continues the screen’s tradition of viewer

immobility by fastening the body to a machine, while at the

same time is creates an unprecedented new condition, requiring

the viewer to move.” [Lev Manovich, “The Language of New

Media”, p. 111]

Today, it is not necessary to use a machine to experience the

virtual reality, technological advancements have been made for that.

They are now trying to blend the physical and the virtual spaces ant

create environments that can only be seen with the help of a

machine. For example Google Corporation has invented a new

technology named Google glass. With the help of an eye accessory you

are able to send messages via voice recognition, find out where you

are and see virtual graphical elements from the screen of the glass,

have a face to face chat with your friends, log on to internet and

make a search, find out directions by asking the device and so many

other possibilities can be applied. This technology is giving the

spectator the chance to move around the physical space. Now the user

is carrying the screen with him/her and interacts with it

constantly. This constant interaction causes a reliance on this

object. We can question whether it brings to us more than it takes

but the user adapts to this vast technological change very rapidly.

The ones that cannot adapt are going to experience difficulties in

time.

The experiences we gather from cinema and game will help us use

these devices to our own benefit. In Lev Manovich’s excerpts he goes

on to say that:

“We are witnessing the emergence of a new cultural meta-

language, something which will be at least as significant as

the printed word and cinema before it.” [Lev Manovich, “The

Language of New Media”, p. 98]

We are indeed in an era of incredible cultural changes and

developments. Our daily devices are getting smaller and more

personalized every day, our game consoles are disappearing and our

movements are taking their place instead. You can play a race video

game on your TV just by holding your hand like you are holding a

steering wheel and steer the wheel to the direction you want to move

(Xbox 360 motion control feature.) We can control our TV’s at home

with hand motions and voice control without using a remote. So comes

the question to mind what will happen after this… Lev Manovich

explained very briefly;

“Eventually VR apparatus may be reduced to a chip implanted in

a retina and connected by wireless transmission to the Net.

From that moment on, we will carry our prisons with us – not in

order to blissfully confuse representation and perceptions (as

in cinema), but to always “be in touch,” always connected,

always “plugged-in.” The retina and the screen will merge.”

[Lev Manovich, “The Language of New Media”, p.113]

But this may not be the case for everyone. People may deny to be

plugged in to a 24 hour system where the information of the

spectator can be accessible by everyone. If this occurs, is the new

screen becomes the spectators own perspective or the spectator’s new

screen will become the physical space? We can agree with Manovich

that this idea of carrying your screen with you the whole time and

even someday implanting it in your retina will definitely become a

prison for the spectator. This connection is very much like in the

Matrix. People are connected 24/7 trying to find their way to the

real world but the actual reality for this people is the virtual

reality. When the protagonist in the movie Neo wakes up and sees

what happened to the actual world, he faints. Then he tries to adapt

to the rules of the virtual and the real world that he did not knew

and experienced before. Just like a video game the Morpheus

character is telling him all the rules that exist in the real world

doesn’t exist in the virtual world. Also the movie “Gamer” can be

reference to this implant to the spectator’s eye. The narrative of

“the Gamer” is taking place in the future where the actual prisoners

are implanted a chip into their brain that lets’ the players control

them. If a prisoner reaches to the final level and passes it, he

will be free of his charges. The protagonist can still feel and use

his senses but the players don’t know that. Eventually a group of

people reveals the truth and hacks the chip of the prisoner so that

he will have control over his actions. The mastermind behind this

whole technology has an evil plan of controlling everyone in the

world but he fails to succees hi plan. The issue of “who is behind

the screen” is the main subject here as well .Hegel’s representation

of self-consciousness can help us understand this situation from the

perspective of the spectator. If the spectator is the one looking

from the screen (the retina), then who is behind the screen. For

Hegel it is himself watching himself from the same perspective but

if the technology lets us to place implants on the retina of the

spectator that is connected to the Net 24/7, you may not know whom

is watching. There is always a feeling of delight and discomfort

about these ‘too good to be true’ technological advancements.

“Dynamic, real time and interactive, a screen is still a

screen. Interactivity simulation and telepresence: like

centuries ago, we are still looking at a flat rectangular

surface, existing in the space or our body and acting as a

window into another space. Whatever new era we may be entering

today, we still have not left the era of the screen.” [Lev

Manovich, “The Language of New Media”, p.114]

In summary, the spectator’s perspective changes between situations,

interactions, technological advancements and environments. The

interaction between cinema and video games are increasing every day

and shaping its way to a much more interesting and user friendly

future. The spectator (viewer, player or he user) is adapting to the

change and is setting his/her eye to a better, more interactive and

brighter future.

References

1. Lev Manovich, “The Language of New Media”, 2005

2. Dominic Arsenault, “Narration in the Video Game”, 2006-2007

3. Mark J.P. Wolf-Bernard Perron, “An Introduction to Video Game

Theory”, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, 2003

4. R. Verdugo, M. Nussbaum, P. Corro, P. Nuñez and P. Navarrete,

“Interactive Films and Co-Construction”, Pontificia Universidad

Católica de Chile, Chile

5. Jim Bizzocchi, "Run, Lola, Run - Film as Narrative Database", Simon

Fraser University, 2005

6. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Crawford_(game_designer)

7. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interaction

8. http://tureng.com/

9. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1104001/

10. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tron_(video_game)

11. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Mirror_(TV_series)

12. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_film

13. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbQCVENvwrM (3D Video

Glasses Oculus)

14. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHx8tK5igSU (Brazil 360º

Cinema Interaction – Berlin)

15. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qe9CiKnrS1w (13th Street-

The first interactive horro movie)

16. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2g94xQmtHw (Gamer movie)

17. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=by4hyBxRo8E (Enter the

Matrix Game Trailer)

18. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruHLfQjWDa8 (Xbox 360

Kinect vs. Playstation Move)

19. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruHLfQjWDa8 (Tron Evolution

Walkthrough)

20. http://www.academia.edu/275067/Hegels_Conception_of_Self-

Consciousness