PT1: Notes on The Rhetoric of Video Games by Ian Bogost
What is procedural rhetoric?
- Procedural rhetoric = persuasion through rules and processes
- Games make arguments through their mechanics, not just visuals/text
- The WAY a game works IS the argument it makes
- Different from written, oral, or visual rhetoric
How do video games persuade?
- Games are REPRESENTATIONS of how systems work
- Players interact with rule-based models
- Learning happens through playing/experiencing the system
- Players discover the argument by engaging with procedures
Main example in reading: McDonald’s Videogame
- Anti-advergame criticizing the fast food industry
- Players manage 4 areas: pastures, slaughterhouse, restaurant, corporate HQ
- Game designed so you MUST use unethical practices to succeed
- Shows systemic corruption (can’t win by being ethical)
- Argues the problem is the SYSTEM, not individual choices
- Really makes visible the hidden processes of fast food production
Why are simulations powerful?
- Players experience cause-and-effect relationships
- Can reveal hidden ideologies and assumptions
- Make complex systems tangible AND understandable
What can procedural rhetoric do?
- Expose political/social issues through interactive systems
- Challenge dominant worldviews
- Show how real-world systems operate
- Create empathy through experience (not just observation)
- Serve as tools for education and persuasion
Limitations mentioned?
- Not all games have intentional rhetoric
- Players may miss or reject the argument
- Simulation is always a simplification
- Designer bias shapes the model
Some key terms:
- Procedural rhetoric – persuasion through interactive rules
- Simulation – working model of a system
- Advergame – game made for advertising
- Systems thinking – understanding interconnected processes
Summary
Bogost argues that video games persuade through “procedural rhetoric” – the arguments embedded in their rules and systems rather than just narrative or visuals. Unlike traditional media, games let players experience how systems work by interacting with them. His main example, the McDonald’s Videogame, demonstrates this by forcing players to use unethical practices to succeed, thereby arguing that fast food industry corruption is systemic. This goes to show how games can be used as powerful tools for exposing ideologies, teaching complex concepts, and even challenging assumptions about how the world works.
PT 2: Adventures with Anxiety
State the game’s target audience, name, creator, platform, short summary overview of the game played (mention how much time and story was played). Also, provide a link to the game’s webpage.
- Target audience: anyone who may be dealing with anxiety, or want to understand how anxiety impact everyday functioning, mental wellbeing.
- Name: Adventures with Anxiety
- Platform: itch.io
- Short summary of Adventures with Anxiety: I played “Adventures With Anxiety” for about an hour, exploring almost all of the choices in the game and reaching two similar (but slightly different) endings. In the game, players can take on the role of the human’s anxiety, represented as a hyperactive red wolf, and my job is to influence the human’s decisions in daily life, with things like social situations, work, and self-care. Depending on the choices I made, I saw different outcomes: sometimes my “anxiety” successfully protected the human, and other times it backfired, which led to more stressful or overwhelming situations. By going through multiple paths, I got a sense of how different approaches, like being overprotective versus letting go, can affect the human’s experiences.
- Link: https://ncase.itch.io/anxiety
*The two images to the right show the two endings I experienced. Both times, Anxiety won, but also shows to what extent they ‘won’ (and at what cost of the human did anxiety triumph).
Discusses the game’s genre (action, adventure, farming sim, etc). and what impact (if any) this had on the game’s message. If it’s multiple, or more difficult to describe a genre due to a mix/unique mechanic or vibe, make sure to mention that as well!
I would describe “Adventures With Anxiety” as a mix of narrative adventure and interactive simulation, with elements of choice-based storytelling. The unique mechanic of playing as the human’s anxiety, rather than the protagonist, blurs typical genre lines, which makes it difficult to categorize the game as strictly as adventure or as simulation. But I think it this genre mashup really served the purpose and message of the game, which is that anxiety is an active force that shapes our experiences, not just a passive feeling. By allowing me to guide decisions and see consequences unfold, the game effectively communicates the weight and unpredictability of anxiety. The visuals and interactive dialogues are playful, minimalistic, albeit at times quite overwhelming when anxiety gets out of control, making the heavy subject matter a bit more approachable while still encouraging reflection on emotional and psychological experiences.
* Image shows interactive dialogue between human and anxiety
Discusses connections of the game to other course concepts covered from reading/lecture.
Playing “Adventures With Anxiety” strongly connected to Henry Jenkins’s Four E’s of narrative design for me. The game creates Evocative Spaces by visualizing anxiety as a hyperactive wolf and situating it in everyday scenarios, making abstract emotions more tangible. Enacting Stories comes through my role as the anxiety, where my choices directly shape the human’s experiences, allowing me to perform the narrative rather than passively observe it. Embedded Narratives appear in each situation, showing pre-written consequences for different choices—like overprotecting the human versus letting them face challenges. Finally, Emergent Narratives arise as I experiment with different paths and endings, revealing patterns and insights about anxiety’s role that aren’t explicitly stated. Together, these elements make the game a very hands-on exploration of perspectives, and choices.
*Images show the drastic ‘switch ups’ or turns that anxiety took in different paths that I took, which unveiled different dialogues and reactions from human and anxiety.
Mentions facets of the game that act as inspiration/criticism you hope to take into consideration while making your own games. This includes any notable “gimmicks” or unique factors, or medium by which the game communicates their message.
The game really inspired me with its role reversal mechanic, where I played as an emotion rather than the character. I think it’s a clever way to convey abstract concepts, and it’s something I would like to experiment with in my own game designs. I like writing narratives with heavy topics, but sometimes it can be too heavy, so the minimalist visual style and humor in this game make difficult topics more approachable, which shows how aesthetics can reinforce the message without overwhelming the player. On the critical side, some choices felt repetitive, and a few consequences seemed exaggerated for comedic effect, which slightly broke the connection I had with the game. I hope to learn from this balance between clarity, engagement, and realism when designing games. I also appreciated how the medium of a small browser-based game enabled quick exploration of multiple endings, emphasizing learning through experimentation, which could be effective in educational or developmental games.
What message did the game attempt to get across? How did it do so, and did you think it was successful (through your perspective)? Overall, how did the game make you feel? Does it suffer from ludonarrative dissonance, and if so, was the rhetorical outcome still effective despite this?
The game’s central message is that anxiety can be both protective and limiting, and how it manifests depends on decisions and context. By putting me in the role of anxiety, it conveys this idea in an experiential way, showing both the human cost of overprotection and the benefits of measured caution. From my perspective, the game was highly effective: I felt a mix of humor, empathy, and definitely tension as I guided the human through challenges. There was minor ludonarrative dissonance. The over-the-top consequences sometimes felt exaggerated compared to real-life anxiety, but it didn’t really weaken the rhetorical impact. Rather, I think it amplified the metaphor by making the lessons memorable. Overall, the game left me reflective about the complexity of emotional influence and empowered me to consider how design choices can communicate nuanced psychological ideas.
