1. Introduction
[1.1] In 2018, the movie adaptation of Ready Player One (2018) premiered in theaters, and it presented an...interestingly flawed perception of gaming culture. Because many a review, editorial, and blog post (and even multiple scholarly papers) have already broken down the film—its shortcoming and high points—we focus on a single scene, relevant to this special issue's theme of creativity as critique, that misunderstands gaming as an experience: the race. To find the first Plot MacGuffin, players of OASIS (the in-world virtual reality game) must complete a seemingly impossible vehicle race; this is presented as a major challenge, a complex mystery that has stumped hardcore veteran and newbie gamers alike. Eventually, the answer to how to successfully cross the finish line is revealed: One must simply drive backward.
[1.2] It is difficult to express how frustrating, exasperating, this reveal was to many gamers in the movie-going audience through text alone and without the proper facial expressions to convey the deep disappointment (one of the guest editors of this special issue actually got asked to leave the theater because they shouted "Are you serious?" and couldn't stop laughing at such an absurd plot point, resulting in not being able to watch all of Ready Player One until it was available to stream). The frustration/exasperation (and unhinged laughter) likely did not come from the basic idea of the reveal but from the framing of action as unconventional—beyond the realms of expected gaming behavior and insight—when in reality, driving backward in racing games is almost unremarkable in its commonality. The plot point presented a disconnect between the underlying logic of the movie in its understanding of gamers and innovation of actual gamers.
[1.3] In communication and media studies, it's generally accepted that the consumption of media is not passive; it is active. As such, it is unsurprising that gaming history overflows with examples of experimentation and innovation—examples of speedrunning as rereadings of procedural rhetoric and dissections of frame data to shave milliseconds from world records, examples of emergent playstyles that transform competitive shooters into dance floors or social hubs, examples of glitch hunters cataloguing exploits with archival precision, examples of modders rewriting physics engines and character models, examples of players collaboratively reverse engineering code to understand (and sometimes undo) developer constraints, examples of machinima creators who repurpose game engines as animation platforms, examples of communities built around challenge runs that impose artificial constraints to reveal new design logics, and of course, examples of players driving backward in racing games. Players frequently treat games not as authored texts beyond their control but more as systems to interrogate...and to break to see what remains once rules collapse.
[1.4] Obviously, pushing beyond the boundaries of authorial intent is not unique to gaming fandom (nor strictly unique to those active in fandom—see discussions of Barthes's "Death of the Author" [1977]). Neither is the idea of creativity of critique unique to gaming as the psychology behind fan creation transcends individual fandoms and mediums; the bulk of fannish productions is, arguably, rooted in the dual experience of passion and frustration for source texts (Jenkins 1992, 2006), inciting a determination to reimagine media to better satisfy one's desires.
[1.5] However, the medium of games (video games and otherwise) appears to occupy a distinct space within fan-creative pursuits because of the intentional integrations of interactivity—of systematized, structured play. Like fan creators whose inspirations come from media like films, novels, comics, and so on, gaming fan creators can recontextualize the plots, characters, and themes of games (check out the fascinating video essay by YouTuber Super Eyepatch Wolf titled "What the Internet Did to Undertale" [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFIs6LsV0a4] for an overview of the immense number of alternative universe, or AUs, of the indie title...and all the AUs of the Undertale AUs), but the opportunities for creativity, critique, and creative critique extend beyond the narrative and into the structural. Gamers test the boundaries of mechanics, systems, platforms, and sometimes the very ideas of play, interactivity, and games (Super Eyepatch Wolf also has an excellent video that deep-dives into The Bizarre World of Fake Video Games [2025]). What distinguishes gaming, then, is the degree to which critique is built intrinsically into play. To play is already to interpret, to test limits, to negotiate rules; to create within and around games is to render that negotiation visible. The contributors to this special issue trace these negotiations across diverse contexts, demonstrating how gaming cultures operationalize creativity as critique in ways both subtle and spectacular.
2. Articles
[2.1] We are very excited to present the articles in this issue. The subjects range from online communities and engagement and analog games, to platforms, modding, and producers.
[2.2] Online communities and engagement are driving forces in fan communities, and the scholars have not ignored this prime area. Kristine Ask and Tanja Sihvonen employ Actor-Network Theory to examine fan expressions on TikTok through the Call of Duty fandom, ultimately leading to the use of memetic communication as the building block for the fandom. Christine Tomlinson takes this fandom participation and examines it through the growing lens of artificial intelligence (AI) interaction. Tomlinson specifically looks at chatbots as a form of growing fan fiction surrounding video game fans. AI chatbots offer a new form of interactive fan fiction that is providing a new avenue for fan communication and community building to occur. A similar vein is found in Andrew Bailey's examination of the archival function of fan reviews on the platform Steam. Bailey argues that Steam acts as a platformized community archive that extends the lives of the games.
[2.3] Platforms themselves take center stage in an examination by Rhys James Jones, Claire Louise Price, and Simeon Smith of the Game Boy platform. Jones, Price, and Smith argue that Game Boy's lifespan has been extended far beyond its original intent with the growing accessibility of creation tools for digital games, allowing for the platform to stay relevant in a diverse media ecosystem.
[2.4] Fans as producers can also be seen in Anna Katrina Cerafica's work on video game modifications as forms of unmonetized capitalist artifacts. Using the mod of Fallout: London as a case study, Cerafica argues that these paratextual additions by fans act as a pastiche and end up working as a commodity for the source materials themselves. Kimberly Dennin also examines how original producers of commercial video games end up benefitting from the work of fan producers, specifically illustrating the work done in League of Legends. Dennin argues that paratextual relationships center queer resistance when producers of video games listen to fan producers in authentic ways.
[2.5] Video games are not the only types of gaming featured in the issue. Analog games also have a moment. Paul Booth and Maria K. Alberto examine fan-driven activities and labor that are associated with analog games, proposing a framework that explores the creator and fan relationship. Austin Anderson turns more specifically to table-top role-playing games (TTRPGs) to examine the participatory cultures surrounding Dungeons & Dragons through the practice of homebrewing. Anderson ultimately ends up proposing a taxonomy that illustrates the homebrewing practice through the genre of TTRPGs.
3. Symposium
[3.1] The symposium articles present novel ways of approaching fandom studies from two different areas of study: players and representation and modifications and player communities.
[3.2] To kick off our symposium articles, Egan Henderson and Tony Payment take a closer look at the gender performance surrounding video game cosplay. Exploring the potential for euphoria and experimentation found within video game cosplay, Henderson and Payment in particular argue for more connections to be built between player and character, especially when considering cosplay as the way to create performative euphoria.
[3.3] Examining gender from a more critical perspective are articles from Weronika Wadecka; Evgenia Amey, Fabienne Silberstein-Bamford, and Xiaofei Yang; and Victoria McDermott, Matt Jardin, and Graham Sachtleben. Wadecka examines how Genshin Impact character design has been claimed by queer female games, in particular, to empower those players to explore performances of female queerness in what is read as a traditionally masculine gaze. Similarly, Amey, Silberstein-Bamford, and Yang examine the female player perspective when considering the role of fan fiction. The authors argue that fan fiction provides more context and opportunity for flexibility and exploration in relationships that video games structures can supply. When considering those female players, the types and pairing of relationships see a more diverse application. McDermott, Jardin, and Sachtleben take these gendered perspectives and turn to the world of esports. The authors examine how historically marginalized groups within esports manage their identities and communication in the public discourse that surrounds esports. The potential socioeconomic power within these discourses have the opportunity to hold space for more folks.
[3.4] Turning toward modifications, two articles explore the larger communities surrounding creating and employing mods, and one examines a specific modification's impact on the fan community.
[3.5] Steven Dashiell illustrates how video games structure a particular way of playing that players can push even further, called jury-rigging. When players jury-rig a game, they engage in hardcore playing that limits players to a singular life. There is death or there is winning. Taking this approach to fan communities, Egor Novgorodov argues that modding in video games requires fan participation and coordination, which brings in paratextual conversations surrounding fan play and communities. Those paratextual relationships and fan communities come to fruition in Rachael Robertson's article examining the A Dance with Rogues mod within Neverwinter Nights as a piece of fan fiction. Using Jenkins's work on knowledge communities, Robertson argues that A Dance with Rogues acts as a form of community feedback and fan production, with a little help from fantasy novels.
4. Book reviews
[4.1] We have two excellent book reviews in this issue. Kathryn Fedchun analyzes Christopher A. Paul's Optimizing Play: Why Theorycrafting Breaks Games and How to Fix It. Fedchun critically examines Paul's argument that when players optimize playing a game, they ultimately break the game, rendering the game's longevity or popularity as a limited experience. Fedchun offers up an interesting counterpoint to Paul, pointing to players as a resource for creative video game play.
[4.2] The second is from Geneveive Newman, examining Bo Ruberg's latest book How to Queer the World: Radical Worldbuilding Through Video Games. Exploring the overarching theme of "the technical is political," Newman points to Ruberg's arguments surrounding worldbuilding in video games as political acts within cultural production.
5. Acknowledgments
[5.1] The following people worked on TWC No. 47 in an editorial capacity: Poe Johnson and Mel Stanfill (editors); Taylore Nicole Woodhouse and Tanya Zuk (assistant editors); Jennifer Duggan, Adrienne Raw, and Khaliah Reed (Symposium); and Melanie E. S. Kohnen (Review).
[5.2] The following people worked on TWC No. 47 in a production capacity: Jillian Kovach (production editor); Lys Benson, Robin F., Beth Friedman, Jillian Kovach, M. Lisa, Christine Mains, and A. Smith (copyeditors); Claire P. Baker, Natalia G., Jacks, Jillian Kovach, M. Lisa, Fiona M., Christine Mains, Rhine, Rebecca Sentance, Latina Vidolova, and Yumi (layout); and Kristina Busse, Jillian Kovach, Christine Mains, Ember Phoenix, Aileen Sheedy, and Latina Vidolova (proofreaders).
[5.3] TWC thanks the board of the Organization for Transformative Works. OTW provides financial support to TWC but is not involved in any way in the content of the journal, which is editorially independent.
[5.4] TWC thanks all its board members, whose names appear on TWC's masthead, as well as the additional peer reviewers who provided service for TWC No. 47: Chris Alton, Ed Chang, Caleb George Hubbard, Mary Ingram-Waters, Cameron Irby, Andrew Kemp-Wilcox, Mark Kretzschmar, Aaron Trammell, Ethan Tussey, Welmoed Wagenaar, Esther Wright, and Joshua Zimmerman.