The Rhetoric of Video Games notes

Ian Bogost’s article The Rhetoric of Video Games introduces the concept of “procedural rhetoric,” emphasizing how video games communicate persuasive messages through their procedural systems. Unlike traditional rhetoric, which relies on speech or visual cues, procedural rhetoric is rooted in the rules and mechanics that guide a game’s design and interactions. This approach allows games to represent complex social and political concepts through their gameplay structures, engaging players in experiences that can reflect real-world systems.

  • Core Components of Procedural Rhetoric:
    • Rules as Representation: Game rules serve as models of real-life systems, representing processes such as consumerism, political structures, or environmental dynamics.
    • Player Agency: By placing players within a rule-bound system, procedural rhetoric allows them to make choices and see the consequences, creating a participatory form of persuasion.
    • Dynamic Expression: Unlike static forms of media, games allow players to experiment within systems, revealing the underlying logic and biases of those systems as they interact with them.
  • Examples in Popular Games:
    • Animal Crossing:
      • Demonstrates consumer capitalism by allowing players to take out loans to upgrade their homes, reflecting the cycle of debt and consumption.
      • Through gameplay, players experience the pressures of material acquisition and debt, highlighting the repetitive nature of consumer-driven lifestyles.
    • The McDonald’s Videogame:
      • Simulates the corporate practices in the fast-food industry, forcing players to make ethically questionable decisions to maintain profitability.
      • By incorporating moral dilemmas (such as deforestation or animal treatment), the game critiques corporate greed and the ethical compromises in large-scale businesses.
  • Educational Potential of Procedural Rhetoric:
    • Promotes Critical Thinking: Games using procedural rhetoric encourage players to question systems, such as the motivations behind corporate practices or the consequences of environmental policies.
    • Systemic Understanding: Players gain insights into how complex systems operate by interacting with simplified versions within the game, allowing for deeper understanding of real-world mechanics.
    • Interactive Learning: Educational games can leverage procedural rhetoric to teach players about topics like history, politics, and science by embedding lessons within the rules and outcomes of gameplay.

Applying Bogost’s concept of procedural rhetoric to my Twine game

I can use the narrative and branching choices to similarly represent systems or ideas, where the player’s decisions reveal underlying themes. Instead of directly telling players what to think, the game could encourage reflection on particular issues by placing players in scenarios where choices lead to distinct consequences, guiding them toward understanding through experience rather than instruction. By designing these interactive elements carefully, my game could not only tell a story but also embody the rhetorical potential that Bogost describes, using procedural design to engage players in a more immersive way​

About the author

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.