Reading Blog 2

When I first enrolled to enter into this course, I was told that “making games is very different from playing them”. Of course I already knew that. Games do not randomly appear in your consoles just like books do not randomly appear in community centers (but more on the books later). However, I did not realize that games are a lot more than just typing lines of code that will translate into interactive interfaces and pretty pictures. It also contains messages that the developer of the game is trying to bring across to the players. In the case of Frasca, I believe he plans to use video games to draw people’s attention to social issues, which is a really good cause though there are some points in his thesis that I disagree with.

To begin with I would like to address the issue of “problematic… or even illegal” modifications (mods) in the game, The Sims of the Oppressed. Frasca’s suggested solution to this problem would be to release the package as a collaborative, open-source project, so that there would not be a company that is responsible for the software and thus, the company can avoid prosecution when problematic or illegal characters are released. I do not think that releasing the game as an open-source project actually solves any these issues. Open-source projects are still owned by companies or individuals even if it is free (free as in freedom, not free as in beer), just like how Google owns the open-source Android. To solve the issue of illegal modifications, I would suggest different servers for different countries, so that restrictions may be set depending on country. I acknowledge that setting restrictions is equivalent to censorship. However, the possibility of having a homicidal mod in the game still disturbs me.

Next, I would like to talk about the game of “Play My Oppression”, the goal of which is not to present a solution to the participant’s problem but to use it to think and discuss. I feel that while this is a valid goal for the developers of the game, the participants of the game might be more interested in looking for proposals to their solution. This is actually what the author himself said in Chapter VI when he said that “this does not mean the solutions themselves should be discarded”.  Therefore, the participants should be allowed have different purposes for playing the game, and not have the view that ‘discussion is of paramount importance’ imposed on them.

One of the points that the author brought up was the awareness of bias that the player should have when playing the game. Since the game was created by the developers to convey some of their ideas, it is almost inevitable that their ideas will convey some of their bias. As I started playing Half the Sky (https://www.facebook.com/HalftheGame), I became quite skeptical about the gameplay. Although I am pretty sure that the non-profit organizations that provided support for the game have good intentions, I am doubtful that the solutions that they proposed in the game will always work. It does not encourage players to explore multiple perspectives either. For example, in the second quest, it does not matter whether I “Argue the Case” or “Offer a Solution”. Either way, I will always end up carrying books from the community center. It seems to overly simplify the problem and therefore, does not really bring across the message of helping women really well.

Scenario 1: Argue the Case

 

Scenario 2: Offer a Solution

When I first enrolled into this course, I wondered what kind of games I will be able to make. Looking at the mainstream popular games in the market, it seemed like I will just be helping my prospective bosses (if I even get employed in the first place) earn more money. However, there are now these other games (http://www.gamesforchange.org/) that are more meaningful. Perhaps games might really have the ability to do good for the world.