Part 1: Notes on “The Rhetoric of Video Games” by Ian Bogost
Animal crossing
- Game about everyday life in small town (“Animal village simulator”) that models commerce + debt
- Player starts penniless -> Tom Nook gives shack + job
- Work -> pay off mortgage -> upgrade -> more debt
- Loop: debt -> goods -> bigger house -> more debt
- Simulates consumer capitalism cycle
- Nook’s shop upgrades as player pays -> visual model of wealth redistribution
- NPCs = non-materialistic -> contrast player’s consumer behavior
- Player’s debt -> Nook’s wealth -> critique of capitalist system
- Theme: everyday labor, debt, materialism, social comparison
- Game = model, not moral lecture; simplification draws focus to real-world patterns
- Shows how games model social systems directly through play, not just story
Play
- Common view: play = leisure or distraction from “real work”
- Bogost argues that play = “free movement w/in rigid structure” (Salen + Zimmerman)
- Rules = make play possible, not limit it
- “Possibility space” = actions allowed by rules
- Kids invent and change rules -> explore space of meaning
- Analogy: in literature, haiku / Oulipo -> meaning emerges from constraint
- Oulipo = designed new expressive limits (lipograms, palindromes)
- Same logic -> video games = designed rule systems
- Playing = exploring system’s “possibility space” -> discovering meaning
- Rules themselves construct meaning
- Games = procedural models of reality (e.g. war, cities, debt)
- We read meaning by exploring rules via play
Rhetoric
- Classical = persuasion by speech (Plato -> Aristotle)
- Aristotle: rhetoric = “observe available means of persuasion”
- Expanded beyond speech -> any expressive act (writing, art, media)
- Kenneth Burke -> rhetoric = identification (symbolic connection)
- Not just persuasion -> expression of values, social function
- Modern rhetoric = elegance, vividness, clarity in comms
- Visual rhetoric -> persuasion via images (ads, film)
- But visual rhetoric insufficient for process-based media
- Need new form: rhetoric of procedures/processes, not words or visuals
- Video games = procedural medium -> require procedural rhetoric
Procedural Rhetoric
- Definition: using processes/rules to make arguments
- Like verbal (words) or visual (images), but through systems
- Persuasion + expression via rule-based models
- Programming = authorship of argument through code
- Games = ideal medium (high process intensity)
- Make claims about how things work -> not through story, but through rules
- Models = rhetorical devices -> persuade via simulation
- Ex: Animal Crossing -> capitalism loop
- Ex: McDonald’s Videogame (Molleindustria) -> success requires corruption -> critique of capitalism
- Manage farms, slaughterhouse, PR, etc.
- Must bribe, deforest, feed cows wrong food -> “necessary evils”
- Procedural rhetoric: greed + corruption = inherent to profit system
Ways of using procedural rhetoric: interrogating ideology
- Games expose underlying ideologies (hidden logics)
- Ideology = unseen structure behind social behavior
- Ex: America’s Army
- Recruitment + discipline sim
- Enforces Rules of Engagement (ROE)
- Breaking rules -> punishment (Leavenworth cell)
- “Honor points” = proceduralized moral system
- Argues obedience, teamwork, rule-following = moral good
- Procedural rhetoric reveals values embedded in systems
- Useful to critique or unpack ideolog
Ways of using procedural rhetoric: making and unpacking an argument
- Games can explicitly make claims about systems
- Ex: Take Back Illinois -> political game on policy reform
- Models tort reform, education, econ development
- Subgames interlinked (education <-> economy)
- To “win,” must follow campaign’s policy logic
- Procedural argument: efficiency through conservative reform
- Ex: Bully -> procedural argument for standing up to injustice
- Models social hierarchy of high school
- Confrontation = necessary to restore justice
- Ex: Spore -> procedural argument for astrobiology
- Models life as seeded by intelligent civilizations
TLDR
- Games = models -> players explore rules -> learn system meaning
- Playing = literacy -> understanding systems + values
- Learn to read + critique procedural arguments
- Parents/teachers guide critical play
- Procedural literacy = understand how rules shape outcomes
- Teaching programming = teaching procedural rhetoric, not just code
- Kids can write arguments in code (e.g. MIT Scratch, Alice, etc.)
- Games = expressive + rhetorical medium, not mere distraction
- Goal: play critically -> uncover meaning beneath surface
Part 2: Analysis of “Depression Quest”
Overview of game
Link to game’s webpage: http://www.depressionquest.com/dqfinal.html
The game Depression Quest by Zoe Quinn, Patrick Lindsey, and Isaac Shankler is an interactive fiction game hosted on the browser (web app). Players experience depression from the POV of a mid-twenties human being with a boring job and a loving partner. The target audience is likely older teens or younger adults (e.g. college students or new grads) who may share experiences with the protagonist. The genre of this game is narrative (story-driven) and psychological.
Connections of game to course concepts
In the game Depression Quest, the creator incorporates narrative-based procedures to shape the possibilities of play—specifically to model both depression and societal expectations surrounding mental health. Players progress through the story by selecting one of several dialogue or action choices (typically between 1-5), deciding what the depressed protagonist should do next. However, some options appear visibly crossed out (Figure 1), suggesting that while the protagonist may internally desire to take those “better” actions, depression prevents them from perceiving such options as achievable. As the game continues, more of these positive choices become inaccessible, forcing the player to make self-destructive or avoidant decisions—such as “Stay in bed,” “Doomscroll on phone,” or “Lie: don’t tell your mom your feelings.” These mechanics don’t restrict play arbitrarily; rather, they define the game’s possibility space to mirror the constrained mindset of someone in their mid-twenties experiencing depression.
Figure 1. Crossed out choices mirror perceived limitation actions from depressed character’s POV
Regarding procedural rhetoric, Depression Quest uses these choice-based systems to make a powerful statement about the realities of depression—specifically, that people who are depressed cannot simply “try harder” or “get up and work,” as those around them often suggest. The crossed-out choices compel the player to make poor decisions knowingly, creating an uncomfortable awareness that reflects the protagonist’s internal conflict between wanting to get better and being unable to act. This mirrors the tension between personal struggle and society’s dismissive attitudes toward mental health—for instance, the girlfriend’s frustration or the mother’s insistence that the protagonist is merely lazy. Ultimately, the game’s procedural rhetoric highlights the ongoing stigma surrounding mental health and illustrates the immense difficulty of taking even the first steps toward recovery or seeking help.
Inspiration / Criticism
While the medium and rules of this game were typically of most interactive fiction games, I loved how the creators reflected the protagonist’s sense of limited actions from his/her depression through crossing out the choices a player could make. The more poor choices I made, the more future choices were crossed out. At times, the crossed out choices also directly reflect the character’s mental state. For example, the character expressed that at a party, he felt awkward to randomly join a group and start a conversation with them, especially since people already know he was introverted—the option to join a group was out of the question and was reflected through the choice being crossed out.
Another small element I enjoyed was the hyperlinks to more context in the beginning scene (Figure 2). Instead of just giving full context in a long paragraph, the hyperlinks allow players to peer into the social circle, relationship etc of the character they are going to play. This is something minor but something I want to incorporate in my own game.
One criticism for the game I have is that I wish there were more diverse types of actions. I felt that most of the actions were redundant (e.g. agree/disagree, text/ignore, tell truth/lie). However, this may likely be due to the creators wanting to make the narrative realistic and not unrealistically adventure/action-driven.
Figure 2 Hyperlinks to more context such as “named Alex” and “social circle”
Reflection Questions
Overall, the game aims to teach players that depression is not something people can simply “get over” or fix easily—and that this struggle is made even harder by society’s tendency to treat mental health issues as taboo or misunderstood. The game conveys this message through its narrative structure: as the player makes more poor decisions, the number of available options decreases, with the more positive choices becoming visibly crossed out. This mechanic reinforces how depression limits a person’s perceived possibilities for action.
The game made me feel more sympathetic and empathetic toward people experiencing depression. It highlights that depression is an internal health issue that isn’t always visible from the outside, and that helping someone with it can be difficult because there is no single cause or clear solution. It also made me reflect on how I would approach supporting a friend or family member dealing with depression—learning to help them gradually, one step at a time, without pressuring them to simply “try harder” or “do better.”
The game does not suffer from ludonarrative dissonance. In fact, its limited choice system directly mirrors the lived experience of depression—the gameplay itself reinforces the message that depression constrains one’s sense of agency and control.
