I did not think you were trying to start war :). Exchange of ideas is always a good thing. Definitely, game’s seriousness has to be included in the mechanics otherwise you can disregard the representational layer too easily.
The game you’re mentioning seems to be quite a thrilling experience.
All best and good luck with your blog :)
 Sonia

First of all, thank you for the comment and the clarification. I have not provided the context for the sentence I have quoted since I thought it would still preserve its actual meaning or at least what I have thought the meaning was. Now I can see why I was wrong; I overgeneralized the quoted part, relating it to video games in general.

I think my mistake can at least lead us to the conclusion that if somebody intends to create a “serious” game, this “seriousness” must become a part of the game’s mechanics, not only its background. The player needs to feel the weight of a situation the game portrays. It is a shame that designers of the titles you have mentioned in your article do not seem to learn from games created purely for entertainment. I am always shaking when I remind myself of the scene from “Splinter Cell: Double Agent” in which I was to choose between shooting an innocent, imprisoned helicopter pilot or not. Not shooting him meant that I would loose trust of a terrorist organization I was to infiltrate. Shooting him, on the other hand… well, what can I say - try to kill somebody already tortured with cold blood by shooting him in the head, at point blank range. Shocking.

Anyway, believe me, I have read your article with care and I was not trying to start a flame war or anything like that.

Looking forward to reading your future pieces!

I absolutely agree with you in that moral consequences in games such as Fallout 3 or Mass Effect do influence the gameplay and in consequence change the player character’s experience (especially when taking into consideration the rich personality scale in Fallout 3).

HOWEVER, you missed the point of my article, from which you’ve taken the quotation. I was referring to “serious games” (the definition of serious games may be found in the text) and Fallout or Mass Effect, despite touching some important questions, do not belong to that category. My comment, thus, was posted only in relation to serious games, particularly news games and persuasive games. If you think about the sentence I wrote in terms of “Presidential Pong”, you will get my point. It is a fairly uncomplicated game, focused solely on the mechanics. The only variable that makes it a “serious game” (I do not quite agree with that classification) is its reference to politics. However, when you play that pong game, you do not think about the representational layer (the politicians, the meaning of the game), but about scoring your 5 points. The same principle applies to most of serious news and persuasive games I’ve played.

Again, Fallout 3 or Mass Effect are complex cRPGs and in this type of games the most important feature is character development and CHOICE, which leads us back to you point. And in case of such games, it is usually the moral choice, since it gives some level of reality to the gameplay.

TRY NOT TO CITE ME OUT OF CONTEXT ;)

Best,
Sonia (Fizek)

http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=10074

Why? :-)