Deception and deduction games have always appealed to me because they provide an interactive experience that keeps players actively engaged, with stakes in the game. Among Us is a perfect example, as it is goal-oriented game on iOS or Android, created by inner sloth (Marcus Bromander) for social events between friends an family, similar to other unilateral or team-vs-team games (depending on the number of players, there may be more than one imposter), such as Mafia. While the outcome of the game is fairly simple—it’s a zero-sum game where either all the crewmates win or all the imposters win—the roles of the players create two distinct sets of mechanics and goals. In addition, the setting of the game is simple, as it pits both teams against each other, with the resource being the number of people left on each team.
For example, if a player is a crewmate, they can perform tasks and report bodies (as shown in the picture). If a player is an imposter, their objective revolves around eliminating crewmates by killing them and strategically sabotaging parts of the ship. The duality (depending on the role you are given) of Among Us keeps the game fresh, as it randomly assigns roles to players, allowing them to experience two different sets of mechanics, goals, and dynamics within the same game. All players are in the same space, a spaceship, which further unifies the experience. This variety helps keep the game engaging over the long term. By changing the player’s goal, Among Us does not become too predictable or boring, unlike simpler games such as tic-tac-toe, which can be easily overlooked once players understand the mechanics.
Another well-designed aspect of Among Us is its simplicity in design, along with its mechanics and dynamics, which help make the game aesthetically pleasing. The game provides a narrative or drama that directly incorporates the player into its framework. It establishes a social environment that fosters fellowship among crewmembers and imposters. Additionally, it offers discovery—learning how to perform the different tasks of a crewmember and exploring the map as a first-time player (as shown in the picture).
One of the strongest features of Among Us is the clarity of each task, which helps players enjoy experiential learning and progress without feeling overwhelmed or burned out. Each room or location within the bounded map has a unique mini-game, making it fun and satisfying to complete tasks. The checklist and the desire to be the first to complete tasks further enhance this enjoyment.
For a beginner, the first few rounds might involve figuring out the basic mechanics and tasks, either as a crewmember or an imposter (as shown in the picture, where I’m exploring the map and checking rooms). A more intermediate or expert-level player will begin developing new strategies to reduce the time needed to complete tasks (thus limiting the amount of time imposters have to eliminate teammates), or finding ways to outwit crewmembers (such as faking tasks or self-reporting as an imposter). The numerous possible tasks, the unpredictability of gameplay, the endless possible accusations or defences during emergency deliberation/when trying to root out the imposter, and the randomization of roles give Among Us many variations, which contribute to its success and prevent it from becoming boring.
While, there are many elements that help Among Us become a successful game, there are some weaknesses in its gameplay experience, especially for dead crewmates. Once dead, the player is no longer able to participate in discussions (one of the most fun parts of the game, where you can defend or accuse your friends) and are no longer actively part of the game anymore. Even though the game tries to compensate for this by allowing the ghosts to “haunt” the imposters, they are no more than glorified spectators. While, I have nothing against spectating, its still much worse than being an active participant in the game. If the game could include a unique set of tasks (more in a supportive role to the remaining players) or something that allows them to have a remaining stake in the game (other than helping the team win, as before when they were alive they had that incentive but also the will to live).
Another mark of criticism that might be given to Among Us is the argument that the game is lacking in moral ethics, as it encourages players (friends or family, or even strangers) to lie to one another. This criticism, while at the surface seems reasonable, I personally don’t agree with it, especially in the setting of a video game, where the stakes are nowhere near as in real life. In real life, lying is generally accepted to be bad, and is taken seriously, especially in terms of trust between two people or parties or in professions (an engineer, doctor, politician/decision maker) where lying would lead to significant consequences. In addition, in deception games, where lying is already an expectation, the act of lying is not as harmful (in terms of personal trust between two people) as its already expected by the other party and is the whole premise in the game. For example, in a game where deception is not expected, lying might be taken more seriously by the other players as it might be seen as a violation of trust, a form of cheating, or at negatively perceived (e.g., lying in Stardew valley that there was never an item in a chest even though you took it).
Therefore, as long as lying is an expected element of the game and leads to no consequences, this criticism of Among Us, or more generally, deception games is unfounded, and does not detract from the game at large which remains a perfect embodiment of several proven ways of game success, and is a perfect game for any player to enjoy with a group of friends or family.
