Fable

• The ethics of game design has entered a new era in which the developers offer the players ethical choices of their own. In games such as Fable, where you can become a hero or a villain one choice at time, Molyneux puts the ethical choices in the hands of the player. You can slaughter an entire village, but the consequences come back to haunt you. Word will spread about your reputation and no one will trust you anymore. People will recoil in fear. Or, if you choose to be good, your good deeds can reap rewards from total strangers.

• He had to restrict the kind of activities the players could engage in because he knew that even with the M rating, the game would be played widely. Hence, he took children out of the game so that villains couldn't slaughter kids at school.

Fable is a good example of a contrast of ethics. Molyneux wanted to create a game to examine peoples ethics and the decisions they'd make in certain situations, but he obviously had to limit those options to fit the audience and consumer.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/130594/ethics_of_game_design.php?print=1

John Whitmore

"Some games are supposed to be fun," says John Whitmore, director of design at 2015 Studios in Tulsa, Okla., and co-creator of the Vietnam war game Men of Valor. "Some are trying to be more artistic. If you have the pretension of trying to be more artistic, you have to think about the ethical decisions that you make. It's hard to call a game like Grand Theft Auto high art. Some fantastic movies are racy. But porn doesn't quite make it to the Academy Awards."

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/130594/ethics_of_game_design.php?print=1

Peter Molyneux

• "We as an industry do have a moral responsibility," says Peter Molyneux, ex-CEO of Lionhead Studios "Anyone who does something for a mass market has a responsibility. You tread carefully on the lessons that you teach. That line that 'if a game is fun, it is okay'-that sounds trivial. If it is obvious this is an artificial world and you can't do these things in real life, then that is more acceptable. But if it parades itself as a real world, you have to be careful about that."

Peter Molyneux makes an interesting argument and one that has been fought before in movie classification. That more realistic games, set realistic scenarios have to be stricter with their morals as they obviously hold a more persuasive power due to it being so close to reality. Molyneux also say that on the other hand more fantasy style games have a more room to 'play' as their persuasive power is more diminished due to distance from reality.


I think Peter Molyneux is right it what he is saying, that game designers who design super realistic games do have to think about the statements they make about society and the morals they choose to portray in their games. The imagery in the game is so close to that of reality it could easily desensitize you to the barrier between reality and fiction. On a more personal level I feel that this quote from Peter Molyneux has opened my eyes more on how the industry works and how this could affect my future in the industry.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/130594/ethics_of_game_design.php?print=1

I really liked Dean's article on the Ethics of Game Design so wanted to get his view on 'can digital games change the world' to get a different opinion for my research.

Game Designer Ethics

"When it comes to the ethical choices that game developers make when they decide what to put into their creations, they face the same moral issues that artists in any other communications medium face. They must struggle with balancing their rights to free expression with the tastes of consumers and be concerned about the effects their content has on their audience. While it's easy for games to enlighten and enliven the human experience, they are still a form of media and expression, and thus possessed of the ability to influence those that play them.

But because videogames are a newer medium, game designers are still struggling with what kind of ethics code they should adopt. Legally, games qualify as a form of expression that is protected under the First Amendment in America"
- Dean Takahashi


This exert from Dean Takahasi's article entitled Ethics of Game Design shows the turmoil that artists go through when creating their work. They must express themselves and get their ideas to the audience but it must be packaged in such a way that the consumer wants it (which often distorts the initial image) but the artist must also be aware of what emotions and ideas that would generate within the audience. Dean goes on to state "While it's easy for games to enlighten and enliven the human experience, they are still a form of media and expression, and thus possessed of the ability to influence those that play them." From a games point of view, the designer must realise that although an art form it is still a form of media, and so has the ability to persuade its audience.


I think that this is a good starting point from which to continue to look at the moral issues and ethical implications that game designers face. I think another good avenue of research would be to try and contact Dean Takahasi and ask his opinion on 'Can games change the world'.


http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/130594/ethics_of_game_design.php?print=1

Spore

• "Rockstar does not generally discuss or acknowledge the procedural rhetorics they build into games like Bully. But other designers make more deliberate efforts to frame the ideas they put forward in their games. Consider the Will Wright/Maxis game Spore. In Spore, the player starts with a microorganism and grows it into a complex sentient creature, then a civilization, then a military power, and finally a space-traveling superrace. The game is a rich and complex one that clearly addresses a number of topics, most notably the tension between evolution and natural selection (creatures evolve, but the player carefully designs their attributes). But in a discussion of the game at the annual Game Developers Conference, Wright explained that the real topic he hoped to address in the game was astrobiology, the study of life throughout the cosmos. Often when we wonder if there is intelligent alien life in the universe, we assume that life arises naturally and evolves slowly. Thus the chance of finding intelligent life seems remarkably small; to do so would require the greatest of coincidences in a place as large as the (ever expanding) universe. In the theory Wright hopes to advance in his video game, intelligent life does not occur and grow naturally, but is cultured and transported from planet to planet by other, more advanced civilizations. The perspective on astrobiology Wright advocates borrows the concept of seed spread by wind or other environmental factors; these reproductive structures are called spores. Spore adopts the logic of this particular view on astrobiology, subtly arguing through its game play that the spread of life in the universe is most likely caused by sentient beings transporting other creatures from star to star. While a book might make this argument by explaining the process, in Spore the player discovers the argument by playing in the possibility space the game’s rules create. This act of discovering a procedural argument through play is endemic to procedural rhetoric."

Another exert from Ian Bogost's 'The Rhetoric of Video Games', this one explains the procedural rhetoric used in the game 'Spore' and how that poses the argument to the player through play and discovery.  It firstly uses procedural rhetoric to create an argument about the difference between evolution and natural selection, as in the game your microorganism evolve and get stronger, but the player picks and chooses the evolutions that the creature gets.

Spore also uses procedural rhetoric to make a statement about astrobiology, Wright puts across the idea that the spread of life across the universe is more likely cause by sentient beings than the slow, hit and miss process of evolution. The player then realises this argument through play and discovery in the possibility space that the games rules create.

This point in the research so far I think is a very important part. Spore is a massive example of procedural rhetoric in a mainstream entertainment game, produced and developed by a big company. It also shows perfectly how procedural rhetoric can be used to create a statement or ask the audience a question, which could very well have an affect on the audience. From here I want to go look at the ethical implications for the game designer who produces games that try to persuade or make a statement.

http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/chapters/026269364Xchap6.pdf

Bully

Bully

• Bully models the social environment of high school through an expressive system of rules, and makes a procedural argument for the necessity of confrontation. Confronting bullies is not a desirable or noble action in the game, but it is necessary if one wants to restore justice. The game privileges the underdogs—nerds and girls—and the player spends most of his time undermining the bullies and the jocks in order to even the social pecking order. 
• Bully is part social commentary, part satire. But it also bears the usual features of an entertainment title. While games like The McDonald’s Game are more didactic, games like Bully are more subtly expressive. Neither technique is inherently more or less valid than the other, but each accomplishes a different kind of video-game-based speech, each of which might be more or less appropriate in different circumstances. 

Bully is another really good example of procedural rhetoric being used to evoke an emotion from the audience. By boldly stating the games morals it makes the audience think about them and often in a much more personal way. Bully is also a good example as it shows the usual features of an entertainment tittle unlike that of the McDonald's game. It is unusual for big entertainment tittles to want to stray into the realms of making a statement about society, but this is not the case with Rockstar Games, producers of the GTA series they know what happens to games that make statements about society. 

This research really highlights how even main stream games have certain systems in place to make the audience react a certain way of feel a certain emotion, which then persuades then to make certain action or changes because of it. From here on I going to continue my research into more examples of persuasive gaming and the affects they have on the world. I also what to begin to look at this from a designers point of view, that if what I am creating has the ability to sway peoples opinions and ideas, what ethical implications does this have for me.

http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/chapters/026269364Xchap6.pdf

The McDonald's Game

The McDonald's Game

• The McDonald’s Videogame mounts a procedural rhetoric about the necessity of corruption in the global fast food business, and the overwhelming temptation of greed, which leads to more corruption. In order to succeed in the long-term, the player must use growth hormones, he must coerce banana republics, and he must mount PR and lobbying campaigns. Furthermore, the temptation to destroy indigenous villages, launch bribery campaigns, recycle animal parts, and cover-up health risks is tremendous, although the financial benefit from doing so is only marginal. As Patrick Dugan explains, the game imposes “constraints simulating necessary evils on one hand, and on the other hand . . . business practices that are self-defeating and, really just stupid.”26 Players learn to “read” this argument in the system of play and can interpret the relevance of the argument in the context of their own lives.

This shows that through the use of a procedural rhetoric the game has created a system in which the player is persuaded to act in a certain way to progress further in the game. This is then stated so obviously to the player through the game that it then makes that player think about this in the context of their own lives and practices.

The McDonald's game is a key example of procedural rhetoric used in a persuasive manner in videogames. It also highlights perfectly what I am researching and am sure will be a major part of my final essay. From here on I am going to continue looking at the mcdonalds game alongside my other research.

http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/chapters/026269364Xchap6.pdf

The Rhetoric of Video Games

Another way to understand procedural representation is in terms of models. When we build 

models, we normally attempt to describe the function of some material system accurately. Models of all kinds can be thought of as examples of procedural rhetoric; they are devices that attempt to persuade their creators or users that a machine works in a certain way. Video games too can adopt this type of goal; for example, a flight simulator program attempts to model how the mechanical and professional rules of aviation work. But since procedurality is a symbolic medium rather than a material one, procedural rhetorics can also make arguments about conceptual systems, like the model of consumer capitalism in Animal Crossing. Gee argues that modeling allows “specific aspects of experience to be interrogated and used for problem solving in ways that lead from concreteness to abstraction.”25 Games like Animal Crossing demonstrate that such models include, but extend far beyond physical and formal models to include, arguments about how social, cultural, and political processes work as well. 

Another exert from Ian Bogost's 'The Rhetoric of Video games', this gives a clear example of how games can make a statement about the world wether that be commercial or political through the use of procedural rhetoric. It once again uses Animal Crossing as its example, stating that the idea of consumer capitalism is portrayed through the games core aim of upgrading your house. Everytime your character pays the shop owner to upgrade your house that means that you then need more furniture to fill it which means you pay more to the shop keeper, getting in more debt whilst the shop keeper gets a bigger shop and keeps getting richer. Although the game doesn't say anything about the idea of consumer capitalism it makes a point for the audience to think about. This then persuades or makes the audience feel certain emotions about the world that they live in and hence the creation of the ACC community online.

This example has really helped me fully understand the idea of persuasive rhetoric in games and has fueled me to find more examples for my research.


http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/chapters/026269364Xchap6.pdf

The Rhetoric of Video Games

• Procedural rhetoric affords a new and promising way to make claims about how things work. As I argued earlier, video games do not simply distract or entertain with empty, meaningless content. Rather, video games can make claims about the world. But when they do so, they do it not with oral speech, nor in writing, nor even with images. Rather, video games make argument with processes. Procedural rhetoric is the practice of effective persuasion and expression using processes. Since assembling rules together to describe the function of systems produces procedural representation, assembling particular rules that suggest a particular function of a particular system characterizes procedural rhetoric.

Although it takes a couple of reads to take it all in, this exert from Ian Bogost 'The Rhetoric of videogames' really makes a lot of connections on how videogames portray rhetoric. For example because a computer uses rules to create a model and uses rules to make that model perform a particular function or so that a level performs or plays in a certain way in an effort to ask the audience a rhetorical question or make a statement about the world. If a game is then able to make statements to the audience or questions an audiences opinions and views about the world then on some levels it is then able to persuade those outcomes.


Understanding this has really helped me to develop my ideas and understanding of persuasive gaming and how it works. I am now interested in finding more examples of these games and deconstructing them to broaden my understanding of persuasive gaming and its affect on the world.


http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/chapters/026269364Xchap6.pdf

The Rhetoric of Video Games

We often think that video games have a unique ethos. Video game players have their own culture and values. Video game players often self-identify as “gamers” and devote a major part of their leisure time to video games. They discuss games online, follow new trends, and adopt new technology early. Video game play could be understood as a “community of practice,” a name Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger have given to a common social situation around which people collaborate to develop ideas.4 In this sense, the people who play video games 

develop values, strategies, and approaches to the practice of play itself. For example, a large group of Animal Crossing players contribute to an online community called Animal Crossing Community (ACC for short) to discuss the game, share things they’ve made, find strategies, or look up the value of different fish, insects, or furniture.5 Within this community, as in all communities, cultural values develop, both by design and by evolution. For example, ACC offers players the option of “getting adopted.” A veteran “Scout” is assigned to a new member as a “foster buddy” to help the newbie “learn the ropes of ACC . . . They’ll also help you with any of your Animal Crossing questions, and may even give you a free item as a welcoming gift!”6

This exert from Ian Bogost's 'The Rhetoric of Videogames' shows how digital games are already changing the world on a social level. ACC is an online community, where people who play Animal Crossing gather to discuss the game and share things they've made. They also work hard to create a friendly environment by othering new users a veteran user to help them out for a bit. This shows how a game like Animal Crossing has developed a community with its own cultural values and opinions that wouldn't have existed without the game.

I think this exert has really opened my eyes to how far games have already developed even though they're still a young artform. The fact that online communities have begun to develop around games shows that games have the ability to inform and persuade people opinions and perceptions of the world. It also shows how they have an affect on a global level. Continuing my research, form here I'm going to continue along this research path finding more examples of videogames impact on the world.

http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/chapters/026269364Xchap6.pdf

Persuasive Games

• Bogost calls this new form "procedural rhetoric," a type of rhetoric tied to the core affordances of computers: running processes and executing rule-based symbolic manipulation.
• He argues further that videogames have a unique persuasive power that goes beyond other forms of computational persuasion. Not only can videogames support existing social and cultural positions, but they can also disrupt and change those positions, leading to potentially significant long-term social change. 
• The field of media studies already analyzes visual rhetoric, the art of using imagery and visual representation persuasively. Bogost argues that videogames, thanks to their basic representational mode of procedurality (rule-based representations and interactions), open a new domain for persuasion; they realize a new form of rhetoric.

These quotes from Ian Bogost book 'Persuasive Games' really highlights how games have changed as a medium. No longer are they the childish play thing of a couple of teenagers, they are now used by multi dollar business's in an effort to sell more of their product or convert us to their brand. It also highlights on the core question in this research , 'Can digital games change the world?'. It states that many games 'support' social and cultural positions, for example xbox live, and what they do or dont do could have a very significant affect on their audience.

• Not only are the majority of our owners connected, but they are also spending more time connected to the Xbox Live community on Xbox 360 than ever before. The average number of gaming sessions on Xbox Live on Xbox 360 is currently at 25-a-week, which is up dramatically from the average of 6 sessions-a-week we saw on the original Xbox. 
• In fact, online gaming through Xbox Live is now a proven form of mainstream entertainment. The 18-34 male audience is comparable in size to the same audience tuning in to see the most popular network TV shows like CSI or The Office. 
• Xbox Live on Xbox 360 continues to grow as a social community; we are seeing an average of 600,000 text messages sent every day between members on the service. 

This shows the insane size of xbox lives audience, and their potential to persuade without you even playing a game on it. xbox already has Microsoft programs loaded on it such as media centre so that if you happen to go out and buy a PC then it will be compatible. As well as this xbox live has so much market space on its user interface with different movie rental companies fighting for space on your screen.

I think this was a really good starting point for my research and has sparked a lot of ideas of where to continue research into. I think from here I'm going to look at 'procedural rhetoric' in more depth and find examples of this in games, as well as this I would also like to continue my research in xbox live and the persuasive power big companies have over thier audience.

http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=11152

http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/10545/Latest-Xbox-Live-Facts-and-Stats/