The Game's Afoot

When I started this blog, I talked about how it was nessecary for a game to be ethical. When I wrote those words, I thought I would be talking only about ethics in game sales and pricing, not the actual content of the game itself. Thankfully very little such content makes it to the shelves (there are truly horrible games out there, although I will provide citations for this claim so that they gain no more exposure than they need to), but there is one example that I would like to discuss (without taking to strong of an opinion on it) of a game handling a controversial topic. Hearts of Iron IV is a game made by Paradox Development Studios, whom I have discussed a significant amount in the past (including my discussions on DLC policy through the examples of their games Europa Universalis IV and Stellaris). In the vein of their other historical games, it's a World War II simulation game that focuses primarily on the military strategy and diplomatic actions of the various great powers...

Before I begin, I have to make it very clear that Team Fortress 2 is a stupid game. I say that as a fan of the game. I say that as someone who thinks that Team Fortress 2 is one of the best first-person shooter games on the market. And yet, it remains remarkably stupid. For those of you who don't know, Team Fortress 2 (or TF2) is a first-person multiplayer shooter game made by Valve, a game development studio responsible for some of the greatest games of our generation (such as Portal and Half-Life) and running the online game market Steam, which now sees near-ubiquitous use among PC gamers. These facts only serve to make the sheer absurdity of TF2 all the more surprising. This stupidity is perhaps best expressed by the promotional videos Valve made for Team Fortress 2. For each of the 9 classes of the game (and, as an additional joke, a sandwich)  Valve created a video animated in the game engine entitled "Meet the [class]", showcasing the abilities and general ...

Important Note: None of this should be taken in any way as to endorse cheating in multiplayer games, especially those in which significant amounts of money (like online poker) is on the line. Those who engage in such cheating are morally reprehensible and I have no tolerance for such behavior. That being said, there is a place for cheating in video games. To explain why, we first need to examine the goals we seek to achieve when we play video games so that we can see how cheating can help us achieve those goals. (This list will not be exhaustive due to word count, but we can get a general idea). Firstly, many people play games in order to let out feelings that they couldn't let out during their daily lives. This method of playing games is best served by games such as Skyrim , a role playing game that allows the user to feel like a powerful wizard or warrior, or by cathartic games such as Call of Duty that can help provide a healthy outlet for aggression. It is for this kin...

To what I assume is no one's great surprise, I am an avid Dungeons and Dragons (D&D) player. I've been playing since I was 12 years old, and before that I'd wanted to play since my father first told me about the game when I was 6. During this time, I've played two different editions of the game, which I believe both offer lessons to those looking to design roleplaying games (or, indeed, any kind of game). I started playing Dungeons and Dragons with its 4th edition, which I (along with many other players) consider something of a failure of design. This is not to say in any way that it was a bad game, or that I did not have fun playing it. Rather, I mean only that the game did not live up to the expectations of its storied franchise by failing to properly combine mechanics and flavor into a unified whole. Conversely, the 5th edition of Dungeons and Dragons was very much a lesson in how to intertwine flavor and mechanics into an effective game. (It was also better ...

When giving a review of a teacher for a classmate, one popular comment for a good teacher in whose class one received a suboptimal grade is that "She's tough but fair"; in other words, it is easy to do poorly, but if you do end up with a bad grade, it will be for a legitimate reason. If I had to pick a video game that best represented this concept, I would have to select Dwarf Fortress. For those of you not familiar with the game, Dwarf Fortress is about playing either as a single adventurer roaming the world or running a colony of dwarves trying to build a fortress (hence the name of the game). A screenshot I took of one of my forts in Dwarf Fortress, showing its unique graphics (if you look closely, you'll see that everything is an ASCII character) Dwarf Fortress is not a terribly popular game. It has a devoted fan base, but that base is very small. There is, of course, a very good reason, and that is the "tough" part of the "tough but fair...

There was a time in video game history when purchasing the game meant just that: you paid some amount of money and received in return a complete video game with all of its content on your new CD. As any avid gamer knows, now is not that time. For large titles, it is still common to pay a set sum of money (these days, mostly $60) and receive a game in return. Unfortunately, while what you receive is generally a game, it is becoming rarer and rarer to receive a complete game as a result of this transaction. It is almost impossible to find a game made by a major development studio without some kind of downloadable content, expansion, or cosmetic addition available for purchase. I would like to make it clear that I don't believe that such practices are inherently bad. For example, my favorite childhood game, Rise of Nations, had an expansion available that added new nations and campaigns to the game. Nonetheless, it remained a complete and fun game without any additional...