News

It's all fun and games until someone starts trying to communicate an idea.

Whether we're defending the world from terrorists in the latest big-budget Tom Clancy adventure game or trying to bomb Microsoft's campus in the free Flash-based game Redmond Raid, video games may be having an impact on the way we see the world.

Video games have become a powerful tool for delivering opinions. Political parties are creating games to promote their ideals; activists are crafting games to generate awareness of their causes; and individuals are building games to make statements about a wide variety of issues that are important to them.

One of the most well known games that makes no bones about trying to communicate an important idea is September 12th, available at newsgaming.com. In the game, players fire missiles at gun-wielding Arabs in a crowded city. Collateral damage is unavoidable. Civilians mourn their losses and come to hate the source of their anguish so much that they become soldiers themselves, exponentially increasing the number of potential targets. Players soon discover that the game is really a no-win situation, mimicking, according to the game's developers, a real war.

"The video game medium can expose us to a subject in a new context," said Dr. Henry Jenkins, director of comparitive media studies at MIT. "It's a medium that can explore issues."

Dr. Jenkins has been playing video games since the mid-70s, has written about the cultural effect of video games for well over a decade, and has testified in front of the U.S. Senate about violence in games.

"More and more games are becoming a vehicle for social commentary," said Dr. Jenkins.

He believes that the video game medium can act as a catalyst for discussion of social issues, much like books.

"The Tom Clancy books express the author's point of views, and so do the games," said Dr. Jenkins, referring to the successful military-themed games inspired by books written by popular author Tom Clancy.

"Like an artist in any medium, [Tom Clancy] is exploring the way he sees the world. He happens to see it in a more militaristic view than I do, but the games are expressing ideas, and that's a step forward for the medium."

Steven Lerner, a Canadian university student, runs Albinoblacksheep.com, a popular Canadian-based website that provides access to a wide variety of games available for free on-line. On one occasion he was forced to remove a game due to complaints he received. The object of the game, called Kaboom!, is to use a suicide bomber to blow up as many people as possible on a busy street.

"I thought the point they were trying to make was to make fun of the suicide bomber," said Mr. Lerner. "But everyone was getting offended. People were saying it was rude to the victims. So I took it off."

In fact, Kaboom! enraged several Jewish organizations as well as Israeli and American politicians, who demanded that the game be removed from the Web.

But many video game academics believe that games like Kaboom! should not be utterly censored. They argue that games such as these provide a insight into our society and can give rise to important discussions about not only the issues they depict, but also the medium of video games.

New York-based website socialimpactgames.com is devoted to exploring and cataloguing video games with a purpose other than just to provide entertainment. The site methodically logs all types of so-called 'serious games', even those that convey discriminatory messages about culture, race, and religion.

Marc Prensky, the site's administrator and a notable commentator on education and video games, provides warnings when necessary that certain games may be offensive to some players.

He stated that he catalogues these games "because they exist. I am trying to illustrate that games are a medium for the expression of ideas—any ideas. I am in favour of discussing ideas I or others may find objectionable, not of banning or eliminating them. Games with ideas that you disagree with are a great basis on which to begin a discussion."

Dr. Jenkins agrees that public knowledge of bigoted games can be beneficial.

"Some games that came out after September 11th frighten me because they tap a racist anxiety felt after September 11th consistent with other racist forces in society," said Dr. Jenkins. "The advantage is that they can bring people with racist beliefs into the spotlight, make us aware of their existence, beliefs, and activities."

The video game medium is being used as a tool to propagate positive messages as well. There are several games that attempt to shed light on social issues, such as Escape from Woomera, which allows players to learn about life inside a controversial refugee centre in Australia, and EyeWitness — Nanking Massacre, an "interactive situation simulator" that provides players with insight to a massacre that took place in mid-20th century Japan.

Another of these constructive games is The Political Machine. A PC strategy game, The Political Machine sees players become a campaign manager for a U.S. presidential election. To win, players must convince each state's electorate to vote for their candidate.

It soon becomes apparent that U.S. elections are not as much about philosophies and principles as they are about political strategies and number crunching.

Brad Wardell, the game's developer, began work on the game shortly after the last presidential election.

"The idea for the game came up after the Florida recall," said Mr. Wardell. "I just thought it was ridiculous that an election could be decided the way that one was."

Mr. Wardell has watched many people play his game and is fascinated by what he's seen. People may begin playing the game in strict accordance with their own political beliefs, but if they do there is little chance that they will win, regardless of what those beliefs might be. So they begin to make concessions in order to win.

"People will cave on their own ideals to win the game," said Mr. Wardell. "And it's just a game. What do you think that means? Imagine what politicians must do to win."

While Mr. Wardell admits that the game can provide a new way to view the American presidential election process, he is adamant that it was created primarily to entertain.

"If you have an agenda developing a game, you should be up front about it," said Mr. Wardell. "This is a game first and foremost. People already interested in politics will play the game."

Dr. Jenkins believes this is typical behaviour; people play games that interest them. That could mean that games, though an effective medium for communicating ideas, are unlikely to have any real influence on players' social views, except to reinforce what they already think.

"Like any media, games have the greatest impact when they reinforce beliefs, and the least impact when they challenge beliefs," said Dr. Jenkins. "The danger is in reinforcement."

Dr. Craig Anderson, a professor at Iowa State University who has spent several years studying and writing about the effects games have on players, agrees that games that promote certain ideologies aren't likely to sway people who have already made up their minds about an issue.

"[Games with political agendas] may strengthen pre-existing beliefs, but are relatively unlikely to change the whole direction of the beliefs of most players," said Dr. Anderson. "That is, a gun control advocate might become more firmly convinced of his or her gun control position by playing a pro-gun control game, but is unlikely to become a gun control opponent by playing an anti-gun control game."

However, according to Dr. Anderson, there are good theoretical reasons to believe that people who haven't already made up their minds about an issue can be swayed by games. In particular he worries that people who haven't taken a stance on issues involving hate and discrimination can be influenced by games with hateful and discriminatory ambitions.

"To my knowledge, there are no studies that have specifically examined this issue in the video game domain," said Dr. Anderson. "But such studies are important and should be conducted."