In Persuasive Games, Ian Bogost argues that most political videogames have failed to take advantage of the procedural affordances of the medium. Instead of using procedures to make arguments, political games have mostly put new skins on existing games or have merely used games to deliver textual arguments. In How to Do Things With Videogames, he extends this argument, suggesting that political games should be less about politicking (winning elections) and more about specific policy issues. Games are particularly well suited for the latter, since they can simulate complex political processes via computational procedures.
Students in a courses called "Digital Rhetorics" created video games in an attempt to address Bogost's concern. In groups, students used the programming language Scratch to create a game that made a procedural arguments about various political issues.
Teaching Assistants for this class created sample games that demonstrated the possibilities of Scratch and that showed students how to make procedural arguments:
Links to student games are below. Most students in these classes had no previous programming experience.
Designers: Wade Berger, Rasmus Helsted, Ashley Hinck, Elisabeth Miller
Bascom Hill Defense draws upon and subverts the genre of tower defense games wherein players strategically utilize towers against oncoming enemies. These games almost immediately parallel the removal of Native Americans from their lands. Native Americans have lived in the Madison, Wisconsin area for more than 12,000 years. Through the 1848 Morrill Act, the Ho-Chunk nation ceded 10 million acres for the construction of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, destroying fourteen effigy mounds.
Juxtaposing tower defense games and the displacement of Native Americans, we challenge players to take on the role of a Native American faced with the prospect of colonization. Players employ traditional tower defense strategies, using soldiers, protesters, and negotiators to stop shovels, settlers, soldiers, bulldozers, professors, and peace-pipes. Our game’s rules disadvantage the player, a situation that has continuously occurred for Native Americans. This game’s rules, like those of universities, job searches, and economic development, give whites unearned privilege. As Brenda Allen explains, “privilege refers to advantaged status based upon social identity” (See Allen's Difference Matters: Communicating Social Identity, Waveland Press 2004). While traditional tower defense games give the player a fair fight, our game does not. Players experience the frustration of lacking privilege in a system that claims to be an even playing field.
Our game does not attempt to communicate historical and cultural specificities, complexities, and nuances. We recognize that no game can exactly simulate individuals’ experiences with different intersectional identities and histories. However, we hope that the game communicates the frustration experienced when the rules of a system award privilege and disadvantage according to race.
Designers:: Rocco Bulmer, Phil Dougherty, Britney-Lee Hessel, Mary Maradik, Daniel Schneeberg
The Mifflin Street block party of 2012 is not the same Mifflin that it was in 1969. Mifflin
originated as a political demonstration protesting the Vietnam War (See "History of the Mifflin Street Block Party," by Megan Costello). After 43 years, Mifflin has gained the reputation of being a block party that is infamous for out of control intoxication and danger. In PartyBuster 5000, you are playing from the perspective of a policeman patrolling the Mifflin block party. As a new recruit, you must try to keep the fun tradition of Mifflin alive, but you also must keep the event safe. With different rule options appearing on the opening screen, you must decide if you want to be strict and enforce all the rules. You also have the option of imitating the tactics of the police that patrolled Mifflin in the 1990’s. They washed their hands of Mifflin. While some of the Mifflin block parties of the 90’s were peaceful, there was a violent riot in 1996. Mifflin is a complex celebration. In 2011, a local band venue sponsored Mifflin, increasing attendance. Despite the fact that there was a police presence at the event, two people were stabbed during the Mifflin celebration. As you play through PartyBuster 5000, you will see that controlling Mifflin is not an easy task. If you relax rules, attendance increases and fun increases. However, with lenient rules and a large crowd, violence and danger also increase. On the other hand, you could choose to be a strict officer, ticketing as many attendants as possible, but then the fun tradition of Mifflin is lost. In addition, you will see that there are lots of distractions that pop up while you are trying to patrol the streets, and this makes your job even more difficult. You experience, first hand, why Madison authorities struggle to find a balance between keeping the exuberant tradition of Mifflin alive and keeping the environment of Mifflin safe.
Designers: Antonio Cartegena, Chelsey Metcalf, Anthony Paese, Emily Schneider, Schuming Zhang
Controversy has followed Wisconsin governor Scott Walker since his 2011 Budget Repair Bill, legislation attempting to fix the tremendous state deficit. The Bill had severe consequences for the collective bargaining rights of state workers. During his tenure, he has cut millions from government spending, including education, healthcare, government jobs, local government aid, Planned Parenthood and more. In the upcoming budget cycle, Wisconsin faces a deficit of over three billion dollars.
Walker, Wisconsin Ranger puts the player in the dubious position of Scott Walker. As the governor, players must traverse a Wisconsin landscape, slashing the aforementioned venues of government spending to balance the monthly state budget. However, as the game aims to show, cutting costs has its consequences. Not only must the player balance the monthly budget, he must also keep the constituent approval rating at or above 25%. The game reflects budget cuts in three aspects: First, it tracks the amount of money left needed to balance the budget. Second, Walker's approval rating fluctuates in proportion to his cuts. Third, the cuts affect the population of badgers protesting Walker in the final scene of the game. At the end of the game, if the player has both balanced the budget and kept a good approval rating, he wins. However, achieving both is incredibly difficult, meant to illustrate Walker's dire plight of both balancing the deficit whilst appeasing his myriad constituents.