The Ins and Outs of Game Mastering

The Game Master (GM), or Dungeon Master (DM), as it's known in some RPG's, is the core of a group of tabletop RPG players. The Game Master creates the story, acts for the NPC, and keeps track of the rules. They are, in essence, the leader of the group. Of course, being the leader puts a lot of pressure on them, and there are many things you have to do right. Here are some basic ones.

1. Be punctual. A Game Master needs to be on time, or a little early, for every meeting. You cannot have a role-playing game without someone to run it.

2. Be consistent. Rules you apply to your monsters you should generally apply to the players as well. Any time you make a decision about an unclear rule, or edit it for balancing or convenience, write it down so you know to make the same change the next time it comes up. This rule can be bent occasionally, provided it is not unfair to the players.

3.Solve arguments. If an argument arises regarding a rule or other game play feature, look it up or make a ruling. If it's about something out of game, request they take it outside, or restrain themselves temporarily.

4. Be fair. Similar to being consistent, you need to keep in mind the players limitations and capabilities, and challenge them accordingly. You want to feel difficult, but not impossible.

5. Be firm. The GM's rulings are final, and you need to enforce them. If a player disagrees, remind them that you are the one doing a majority of the work, and prepared all of this for them.

6. Know the rules. Know the basic rules for skills and combat, as they will come up often, as well as any rules pertinent.

7. Know the source material. You need to have a good grasp of the location you are playing in, and the story you are using. If it's a pre-made adventure, read it a few times. If you are making your own, prepare the necessary details, and story elements beforehand.

8. Have the necessary materials. You usually need dice, pencils, and paper to play, along with the rulebooks. Be sure to have these, as well as your notes on what you will do for the session.

9. Allow the players to make their own decisions. Never force a player into action. If they start to do things you didn't expect, roll with it. The best GM's can improvise well.

These are basic and simple, but proven effective (courtesy moi, and pretty much every GM I know) rules. If you want to be successful, and for everyone to enjoy themselves, remember and follow them. After this, the rest will come in time.

Creating a Role Playing Game Group

Finding a new tabletop RPG group to join can be difficult, and it can be easiest to start a new group among your friends. Assuming, of course, you can find a group of four or five others, there are several things you have to consider.

NOTE: This is intended for those who will host the meetings, which is often the game master/dungeon master (GM/DM).

One important one is location. There needs to be a place everyone can reach. Often the game master can simply host at their house, but sometimes that is inconvenient. Talk with the members of the group to decide if your house is a good location. If not, many larger towns have tabletop game shops with tables set up for people to meet. This is often nice as people can buy dice, or rulebooks, if they need too.

While deciding the location, deciding the time is also important. Saturday nights are often ideal, and having a weekly or biweekly schedule is usually best, as it keeps it fresh in the players minds. Fours hours is a good play time, though two works as well (especially in a weekly schedule). Occasional meetings of longer amounts of time are okay as well. It is very important to talk with members of your group about this, and to plan ahead of time. It is easier to cancel something than to plan it, and things come up. You pretty much always want at least four people playing, so if you would end up with less than that, it's probably a good idea to cancel.

Another very important thing is food. As you will likely be meeting at night, you probably want to eat something, or at the very least have something to drink. Beer and pizza is great for older people (or so I hear) with soda and pizza being the counterpart for minors. It it's past dinner time, than chips and drinks are great. Occasionally you could even role-play them into the game (give the players drinks, mark which people drink, and later say that those who drank got drugged).

As for actually playing the game, you will want a big table, large enough to lay out charts and other important information, and  for everyone to sit around. A dinner table usually works, but larger tables are even better. A large square is better than a rectangle of the same area because it keeps people closer together, and easier to communicate. I use a pool table with a hardwood cover I place on. 

Finally, its very important that the game master has the required materials, and a plan for what to do. There is nothing worse than a game master screwing up a pre-written campaign by not reading first. Also, if you write your own campaigns, prepare the things you will need beforehand, mark the pages of the monster manual you need and so on.

Basically, prepare, and everyone will have fun. Trust me, I've done it before.

Adapting Games to Other Media

Every once and  a while a game becomes such a big hit, it manages to grow into mediums other than games. Heck, an entire movie was based off of Battleship (or seemed to be, based on the commercials. I never found that movie interesting enough to watch fully.) How should this be done and what makes it successful?

Games in Japan quite regularly get Manga or Anime adaptations. Persona 4 has a manga, anime (with a followup "true-end" movie), and had two live action stage shows (each half of the game). Now, I know not how successful the anime was (presumably very, to get dubbed and released in America), but I do know it's quality. It is the best show based on a video game I have seen, including the few video game movies that exist. Why though, is it good?

It took the rough plot of the game. The general plot stayed the same, which is very good. People who were unable to play the game were able to watch and understand it rather easily, and those who had played it were in a familiar area.

It also added some things. Many little jokes were added, and the Protagonist, by necessity mostly silent in the game, talks, and has a very sarcastic sense of humor. Some jokes were lifted from the game, but they were usually the funny choices, as oppose to the good ones when you got to choose. Small subplots were added, although many from the game were altered slightly, or completely remade in order to fit the time constraints and the format.

It was animated. I feel like, generally, movies or shows based on games need to keep roughly the same art style. Persona 4: The Animation was consistent with the games artwork and cut scenes. While this is partly due to it being an Anime, it makes sense. As the characters look the same, you get the sense that they truly are the same characters.

The voice actors were the same. Similar to the above, it gave you the feeling these were the same characters as in the game.

It stayed true to the spirit of the game. Everything that happened would have made sense to have happened in the game. None of the characters had traits changed (though some had them explained more) and one particular added character was referenced heavily as a joke in the game and brought into the anime.

Finally, it didn't take itself too seriously. This was an anime based on a game, and it is pretty clear. The animation itself isn't the best, but it makes up for it with great writing that is funny. This truly makes it fun to watch, and even in serious situations you're never more than a minute away from a joke.

While this applies particularly to animated movies based on games (perhaps the best choice, as game engine technology becomes better), most could also be taken to live action films. Resident Evil wasn't my favorite movie because it was confusing, and relied on knowledge of the first game (which I did not have, I had knowledge of the second game). Still, as games increase as a media, so will film and t.v. adaptations.

The 1% of Gamers

This 1% isn't the rich (although they may very well play games). No, this is different. Very few gamers actually spend time reading reviews, or on a game blog for example. I am of these "1%," and if you are reading this, you are too.

This isn't made up. Monthly 17,500,000 people visit IGN (source here). That is the most popular game focused website in existence, and of the other websites on the list provide, probably 99% of the people to visit those have also visited IGN.  This may seem like a lot, but many, many more people than that own consoles. 82 million total units for the Playstation 3 have been sold (source here) Say we assume a 10 million are replacement units. That leaves 70 million, discounting people with just the Xbox, or that play games on a PC, which would add quite a few. Roughly a third then are regular viewers of video game websites.

So why does this matter. Well, those third tend to be "connoisseurs" of games. While some may buy three or four games a year, these people probably buy more, and may look at reviews and stuff before they buy them. While others may buy the new Call of Duty, or Grand Theft Auto, they will pick those up, and some more obscure titles. Game creators target these people specifically, as they consume the most games. Anyone who plays niche games, other than first person shooters or sports, are likely to fall into this, as they need to look at the new, less publicized titles that cover their interests.

While the 1% may really be more like 30%, the idea still stands. Only a fraction of those that play games look into things like my blog, or video gaming websites. Thus, these websites are tailored towards them. They are not immune to the Call of Duty craze, but may be more even handed with it than other sources, or the average FPS gamer.

This is actually something I did not know until very recently. I assumed most gamers were like me, and looked at articles about games and stuff. If you didn't know, welcome to the 30%. You're home (likely, unless you are reading this in another location, in which case, you're there.)

Explorers: An In-Depth Exploration

This marks my climactic conclusion to my epic posts about Bartle's gaming types. Here is Bartle's original article, and my response to it. My posts on Killers, Socializers, and Achievers, are linked under such. My primary sources here are my own experience, and of course, Bartle's article on the subject. Please read my response to Bartle's article before reading this, as otherwise it will make little sense.

This post will focus on Explorers. I self-classify as an explorer, and am very intrigued by the niches within the group. I will be exploring the sub-classes that I have observed in my experience playing games, and as such, this is open to interpretation by various means. I also do not claim it is an exhaustive list, and admit that many more subtypes are possible.

First is the Cartographer. This Explorer likes to look around and find new things in the game, especially secret or hard to reach areas. These are the people that now the fastest way to get anywhere, and are often capable of very quick speed runs of events or quests due to their knowledge of the location. This role remains the same between online and offline play.

Next is the Historian. Historians explore the lore and history of the game, as opposed to the land itself. They look at the backstories of the characters, the history of magical or special items, and the even past events between players of note. They are likely to know the sorts of things a character would do, or are able to predict the trend in item abilities and such. These Explorers are very useful to achievers, or power minded killers, as they know where to find powerful artifacts. Offline Historians know a lot about the history of a game, and may spend time working on those games Wiki's to distribute their knowledge. Online Historians may have a role chronicling the history of a guild, or keeping track of which player managed which in-game exploit and when. They may be looked upon to solve arguments between players about past events.

Of course, there exists an Explorer who just likes to mess around with things. This is the Experimenter. Experimenters find items, and try to use them to do various things. They, like Cartographers, are likely to find hidden areas. However, they do so by messing with all the things in a room and accidently causing a hidden door to open, rather than actively looking for it. They also are the first to discover what unlabeled items do, and the practical uses for seemingly pointless items. Some Experimenters may have a greater purpose or overall goal (finding all the items in game, or mixing all possible potions, for example), while others mess with things just for fun. Offline Explorers may add their knowledge to an online database, while those that play online may be called upon to help others discover what they can do with something.

Finally, there are Hackers. There are two types of hackers. One is the "hack to win" idea, which are usually unskilled wannabe achievers, or griefer-type killers who want everyone to die (For my purposes, lower case "hackers). The other, which is the Explorer Hacker (upper case "Hackers), goes into the games code to better understand it. Their hacks are rarely as destructive as the first group, and often result in the creation of an unusual item with strange effects, or to simply see how editing what they can will change the balance of the game. The Hackers need not actually do any hacking, they may simply manipulate glitches and such to see how it effects the game. Offline, hackers and Hackers are relatively harmless. Online, however, hackers of both types often receive lots of hate. For hackers this is definitely deserved. Explorer Hackers may not deserve it so much, but their experiments in glitching the game can have detrimental effects on gameplay, which makes it usually not a good idea.

Explorers as a whole are mostly out to learn about the game. They enjoy it immensely, and tend to become some of the best people to ask about features of the game. One game can keep them busy for a long time, especially if it allows many opportunities for discovering new things.

 

Articificial Intelligence: Priorities of Game Making

In the current gaming market, graphics are a big deal. Everyone worries about how nice the new game will look; how pretty the explosions will be, how detailed peoples faces will be. However, something far more important than this, which is rarely emphasized, is the A.I. part of the game. A.I. requires significant computing power, as well as very good programmers.

A.I. is one of those things that can make a game truly great. Too often now the formula for success in an FPS is "Shoot at enemy. He jumps in cover. Wait for his head to come up. Shoot at enemy. Enemy Moves to cover. Rinse. Repeat." However, a clever designer could give them  other options.  Sneak around to another area is possible, or put just their gun out of cover and shoot wildly, or even just run the heck away after getting hit. This would add to the realism, and to the challenge of the game. Decision making in A.I. is often decent, but very few games reach the excellent mark.

Another part of A.I. that needs to be implemented is evolutionary learning, or learning to take different actions based on it's outcomes. In fact, this already exists to a degree (check paragraphs seventeen and eighteen). But it is very rarely used because it requires a large degree of research and understanding on the developers part. They must understand how people play the games, as too implement this formula correctly, and they must also account for a wide range of possible behaviors, creating animations for them, and variables, and etcetera (I'm still not an expert on how game programming works, beyond the ideas of cause and effect and such. Someday I'll get there). However, doing this would cause gamers to be challenged in ways that they have never been before.


Link used above, in case it won't work.
http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/04/08/whatever-happened-to-video-game-ai

Toukiden II - A Review (and Analysis)

I posted once regarding my excitement in the (then) upcoming game Toukiden - Age of Demons. Now that this game is released, I've played it quite a bit. I spent a good eight hours in the demo, most of which was spent trying to get all the possible equipment, which takes a while. The full game, which I ordered online, arrived yesterday. This accounts for my late post, I was very busy playing this amazing game.

It plays like Monster Hunter, with a little bit of Soul Sacrifice, and even a smidgeon of mechanics resembling those in games like Persona (Using Japanese heroes to back you up, friendship mechanics). It's great fun, and has more of a story than Monster Hunter has ever had.

This game was quite clearly inspired by Monster Hunter, and takes many similar mechanics. However, as the saying goes "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." The weapons are easy to use for anyone who has played Monster Hunter, or a similar game, before. However, they all also have unique differences. The dual blades in both games are similar in their basic attacks, but in Toukiden, a big part of the style requires jumping into the air to hit hard to reach places. For the most part, you cannot block in Toukiden, so evasion is even more important.

This game is very fun, and I recommend it heartily. However, it is not for everyone. If you do not like games like monster, or are looking for something challenging, it is not for you.

Socializers - An In-Depth Exploration

This will be my third analysis of one of Bartle's gaming types, and the fourth of my post on the topic. I have posts for Killers and Achievers, as well as a general post outlining the types in its basic form. What I have I get from my online game experience, and from this article by Richard Bartle, which I have used in all of these writings.

This posts topics will be Socializers. Socializers are gamers who play a game for social benefits, "interacting with others," as Bartle would say. Socializers make up a significant market, and are the most dedicated players of games such as "Words with Friends." This may seem a pretty narrow-minded group, and there are less clear types than the others I've looked at so far, but in reality, there are several unique groups of Socializers.

Keep in mind that the following are based on my personal observations, and do not have any respectable research behind them. They are, for the most part, theoretical.

First is your basic In-Game Socializer (IGS). IGS's are more of a catch-all group than anything else. Generally, this is anyone that talks to another person in the game, for satisfaction outside of the game (no-in game reason to do so). They may talk about the game, or life, or gossip about other players. It's truly about pure social interaction for them, without any other motives.

Given the IGS's, I would also call Out-of-Game Socializers (OGS's) as a group. This may sound like an oxymoron, but allow me to explain. These people have friends in reality that also play this game. While they may not play the game with their friends, they talk about it with them. This is another form of socializing based on games. This is particularly related to the other types, as you have to do, or see things in the games to talk about them. Thus an OGS type Socializer also likely falls into one of the other main types while playing the game as well, most likely Achiever or Explorer, but a Killer type OGS may also have some interesting stories to tell.

Next are the Role-players. The Role-players are people who like to escape into the virtual world and become their characters. They will talk about things in game terms, and will try to not break the fourth wall. Often large MMO's will designate special worlds as role-playing worlds, but as this is a rare subtype, it can be difficult to find one with people who actually role-play.

Finally is the Politician. This is the Socializer that uses social action as a means to an end. They want to gain some control in the game world, through running an in game guild, establishing a following, or being known as a person to trade with for items. They thrive on being known and relied on, and are more concerned with their online popularity than traditional Socializers. The more people that know them, the better.

Socializers very rarely cause any problems in a game, besides the occasional annoyance. Additionally, knowing some Politicians can be beneficial in an MMO, as they usually have access to good information and items to sell, and their reputation benefits from helping. While Socializers might not be the most interesting or most common group, they are rather unique in their function and role in a game.


Disclaimer for Mrs. A. I was only able to complete about 250 words in class. The rest were added later.

Game Rewards Programs

Many places offer game reward systems, stores and companies alike. Xbox Live, Play Station Plus, and Game Stop Power Up Rewards are some popular examples. What do these services have to offer members, and which is, objectively, the best?

I'll start with Game Stop's power up rewards. Something nice about this one is that you can get it for free. A limited version, without any other specific benefits, gives you points for everything you buy, as well as access to some special offers. However, paying the fourteen dollars a year for the pro version is where is starts to really shine. In addition to several discounts and a bonus on your trade ins and point earnings for spending money there, you also get a free year of game informer magazine. Purchasing a year of game informer from their website is twenty dollars a year, which actually makes it cheaper to get with the game stop benefits.

Then, of course, is Xbox Live. Xbox Live does have a point reward system that works similar to the above, and is entirely free. However, this system is based off of surveys and services you use from Xbox instead of the purchases you make. However, if you have a high Gamerscore (A points total based on the number of achievements you have accumulated) you do gain points based on game purchases, up to 300 for a dollar. However, if you are not an Xbox Live Gold member, you can only earn points through surveys. This has the end result of a more stable, but less pronounced, growth of points.

Also for Xbox is Xbox Live Gold, previously mentioned above. This service has a monthly fee that's primary draw is allowing to play online using the Xbox 360 or Xbox One. This also allows you to use most internet based apps, such as Netflix, which are not usable otherwise. Xbox Gold also gives you two free games a month, which you can keep after you cancel the service, and special offers. If you have an Xbox One it allows innate recording of games, as well as Skype and some other nifty services.

Finally, of course, is Playstation plus. At the moment I write this, joining Playstation Plus (for a monthly fee) nets you the benefit of almost $400 worth of free games across the Playsation 3, Playstation 4, and PS Vita immediately, with the bulk of these games being on the PS3. New games are removed or added from this list frequently, and you can only play the games given if you continue to pay for Playstation Plus. If all you have is a Vita or Playstation 3, it grants you special beta game access, the previously mentioned free games, game discounts and some online save data storage for you games. If you do have a Playstation 4, Playsation Plus allows you to play online (online play is free on the Vita and Playsation 3).

If nothing else, and you go to Game Stop at all, you should get the free membership. There is no reason not too, as it allows you to get bonus items (eventually). If you have an Xbox, there is nothing to lose by getting the live reward program either, although it is very slow. However, I would personally recommend the Pro game stop membership, if only for the game informer magazines, which I love. I also find Playstation plus to be better in principal than the Xbox Live gold, but if you want to play online on an Xbox, you need to drop the money for it.

Sources used are below -

https://www.gamestop.com/poweruprewards/

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/rewards

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/live

http://us.playstation.com/playstation-plus/

What Makes an Effective Game Trailer

Recently, I took a class on video game marketing and design. In addition to doing some basic game creation, we looked at what made certain marketing strategies effective. Among the ones we looked at were Skyrim's teaser trailer, and the Assassins Creed III E3 Trailer. I am going to be analyzing some of the techniques used to make good trailers.

A good trailer is very important to the marketing strategy of games. It is the first glimpse the public gets at the game, and helps form an important impression with the viewer.

First, if you haven't seen it, take a look at the Skyrim trailer below.

The idea of Skyrims marketing campaign was rather simple. They released very few trailers, and of the three they released, only one, the last, showed actual gameplay footage. They wanted to keep audiences hinged, waiting for every little bit of Skyrim news they could get. The strategy worked very well, and one hacking group even threatened to hack Bethesda (Skyrims developers)  unless they released more information on Skyrim. Bethesda laughed. They also used it to break out of the niche role that fantasy games usually play. Instead of focusing on the fantasy elements that dedicated fans already knew would be included, it focused on the mood and tone of the game, which opened up its appeal to others as well. Focusing on the tone or story can garner support from people who would never have played a game of that genre otherwise. This was very effective, and the game sold almost twice as many copies as it's predecessor.

The E3 trailer for Assassins Creed III too, is impressive. You can watch it here (blogger won't let me upload it as a video). This video too, focuses heavily on the setting and themes of the game. It frames the video with shots of a bald eagle, simultaneously stating it takes place in America, and implying freedom as a theme. The voice-over confirms this. The scenes shown display the revolutionary war, as shown by the Redcoats and George Washington. This game won quite a few marketing awards, for various reasons. Opposite to Skyrim's marketing campaign, Ubisoft (the creators of Assassins Creed) practically flooded the market with advertisements. This was also effective, especially because Assassins Creed appeals to a large amount of people. People who like stealth games like Assassins Creed, People who like fighting games like Assassins Creed, and people who like games with historical influences like Assassins Creed.

As a third example, I'll look at the Toukiden trailer, once again, below.

This trailer shows a common trend among trailers released later in the marketing campaign. Specifically, not only is this a trailer, but it is also the intro video to the game. While I like this trailer, I find it less effective than the ones above. This trailer does not hint at the theme of the game, and simply focuses on what you will do in the game. However, there is another trailer for Toukiden that I feel is very good. That is its anime style trailer, found here (Again, blogger wouldn't let me upload it). This one, in addition to providing some background for the game, provides story information and shows the tone of the story. While it is a tad melodramatic (in the style of many anime's) it shows a good picture of what the game aims for story wise.

At it's core, what makes a game trailer good is not gameplay, it's the tone you give off while marketing, and making the viewers interested in the story. Additionally, clever use of trailers can be used to avoid some of the stereotypes given to certain game genres.

Sources Used (In addition to the videos above):

http://www.thecmosite.com/author.asp?section_id=1385&doc_id=243912&

http://www.vg247.com/2013/04/19/assassins-creed-3-sweeps-2013-game-marketing-awards/

Killers - An In-Depth Exploration

My teacher finally put the kibosh on the annoying question-don't answer format, so I have some more leeway now. I'll be taking full advantage of this fact.

So, as for today's topic, I'm going to go back to Bartle's gaming types. My original post is here, and my expansion upon achievers is here. Here's the original article I'm basing this off of, in it's academic format - http://mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm. Today I'll look at the enigmatic killers, and develop some subtypes I see as part of this group.

A killer is a player that gets their kicks by imposing themselves on others. Theoretically, this could be in a beneficial way, as someone could make it their mission to give out objects or in game objects to other players, but it more often manifests itself as the killing of other players. I, personally, see a few subdivisions in the group that I will be explaining.

First is the Griefer. This is the popular image of the killer - a player that kills other players to have fun. These people enjoy destroying others, and often prey on the week or untalented. Basically, these peoples favorite part of the game is knowing that they've angered, or at least annoyed, someone else. On a practical note, if you are playing a game, and someone goes after you to make you mad, complement them on killing you well, and giving you an interesting time. This will generally confuse them, and at least prevent them from being as pleased by killing you as they could be.

Next is the Challenger. This is a player killer who finds people who they would have a good fight against, where the battle could go either way. They then challenge them, and fight against them to see who is better. This form of the killer is focused on proving themselves and improving themselves. They tend to be less aggressive than the Griefer, and may even allow the target to leave unharmed if they do not wish to fight, or alive, if they just wanted to see if they were better. There is no real way to spite a challenger, besides perhaps refusing to fight back. They might lose fun and go away, but usually they'll kill you for being a coward. That said, they usually pick on people with a chance of beating them, so if you fight your hardest, you can sometimes win.

Third we have the Looter. The looter is motivated by stealing objects from other players, and as such they will target players wearing the most expensive equipment. These players are often motivated by greed (needing the money from the item), and sometimes laziness (getting it by taking it off of someone you killed could be, in theory, easier than getting it other ways). They target people based on what they could get (monetarily) from them. A way one can sometimes avoid them is to appear as if you are using weak items until you are far away from them, as they may pay you no attention.

Lastly, there is the Vigilante. This type of killer targets other killers (usually Griefers and Looters), hackers, and general jerks. They may see themselves as above the rules, but may also try to defend the weak. Griefers will usually be their main targets, with Looters also pretty high up. However, they may put aside their differences with the other types to take down a hacker, which will always be their target it one is exposed. Vigilantes despise those that cheat or exploit others, and so will do much to destroy them. Sometimes, the Vigilante will also kill the guy standing around being a jerk, or arguing with a bunch of people for no reason. Some Vigilantes may  also have Challenger tendencies, but will always allow the other party to back out. Generally, you will not have to deal with a Vigilante, unless you are hacking or being a jerk, in which case you probably deserve it anyway.

I would like to mention that killers that act in beneficial ways (as mentioned in the third paragraph) do exist, but I have never encountered or seen anyone do so. As such, I am leaving them out due to lack of experience.

Killers, while they can be annoying, do provide some important roles. Griefers help newer players learn skills, albeit in kind of a mean way. Those that fight Challengers generally learn a couple of things. Looters help bring rare items back into the economy, by selling some of the ones they find. Vigilantes, of course, help keep some of the other killer types in check.

This is the second post expanding upon Bartles gaming types, and I plan on finishing with the other two sometime later. If you have any ideas regarding other types of video game Killers, please post them in the comments section.

Pushing the Limits of Gaming - How Far is Too Far?

I may have mentioned before my respect for games that push the limits regarding thematic matter and controversial content (provide of course, it's handled tastefully). These games can open up powerful discussions and show that games are capable of spreading messages and tackling difficult issues.

These games need to be made more, but companies need to know the limit. Or the current limit at least. A game too controversial would be unprofitable, as well as reflect badly on the developers. However, by continuously pushing at the limit in deliberate strikes, we can slide it back, allowing games to provide important messages. However, this means the companies need to devote resources to studying current events, ethical issues, and other controversial topics. They would also have to be able to create these things the correct way. A story from the viewpoint of a murderer evading the cops would be interesting, but it would have to show a horrible life, various difficult decisions, and if the game did not glorify the action. Making battles legitimately horrifying and uncomfortable experiences would allow an amount of emotional resonance between the player and character. Some games, like Spec Ops: The Line, already do things like this to make the game effect the players more.

Companies should put more resources into figuring out topics and themes that would stretch the boundaries and make interesting stories and points rather than using the same established formula over and over again. Now I'm not saying someone should come out tomorrow with a game about infanticide, but some small indie developer with nothing to lose could find something that people don't want to talk about, like human trafficking, and make a point about using games to make useful points, or provide a new perspective on an issue. This would prove gaming as versatile a media as the television for providing moving stories with real world impact.