<a data-flickr-embed="true" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/144545204@N05/40095710713/in/dateposted-public/" title="Stress"><img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7861/40095710713_13137e802c_z.jpg" width="618" height="421" alt="Stress"></a>
"Argh," cries Lara. "I am so stressed!"
She clicks and drags the arrow again to try and find the hammer.
"I keep messing up and am afraid I won't be able to stop Nathan from killing that girl in time!"
What should Lara do?
[[A.: Give up and quit. Cognitive friction sucks.|Quit]]
[[B.: Keep going ... after all, she'll get in the flow eventually.|Go]]
<big>[[What's going on?|Introduction]]</bg>Although marketed as a videogame, according to David Houghton (2014), //Life is strange I// doesn’t feel **“videogamey.”** In fact, he says the game world seems almost like **“a deeply naturalistic, playable indie movie."**
**Synopsis**
//Life is strange I// was released in 2015 by Dontnod Entertainment, a video games studio based in Paris, France. Described as a narrative or episodic adventure (Dontnod, 2018; TVTropes, n.d.), gameplay revolves around **photography student Max Caulfield**, the various moral choices she makes—big and small—and how she uses her “super time travel” power to effect the impact of these choices.
So, is this a game we’re experiencing <big>**or not**</big>? We found it was more like playing an **<big>episode of a TV show.</big>**
Bringing together the ideas of various scholars, let’s unpack the player ecosystem and if we can resolve this dilemma.
[[<img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7898/46352057904_524085376c_z.jpg" width="639" height="640" alt="Game ecosystem"></a>->Ecosystem]]
<img src=https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-TKX2VKNLMC8/V61NI1D-YrI/AAAAAAAAAm8/4EH5DJjmcVAe2gqkrvSFy1RMPnVbwcFhwCLcB/s1600/Consequences.png height=150% width=120% align=center>
It is a game that’s less about action than it is about **[[choices]].**
<img src= http://img.memecdn.com/can-amp-039-t-i-have-both_o_5363185.jpg height=80% width=80% align=center>
Quit, why would she quit? She hasn't even been able to decide is she will play "good" or "evil" yet.
[[Keep going!|In the beginning]]
Of course she should go on.
Getting into the flow is what makes games fun ... she owes it to herself and Max to keep making choices.
[[Get going|In the beginning]]<big>**//Everyday heros: Affect and ethics in Life is strange//**</big>
Life is odd sometimes. We get stuck in loops or moral dilemmas and feel uncomfortable and certainly not heroic. That’s no fun, or at least no fun in a game … **or is it?**
That’s what we’re looking at today: Affect (i.e., emotion), ethics and how game design can support the creation of ethical or morality-based games, specifically "Chrysalis, the first episode of <big>**//Life is strange I//**.</big>
First, some **<big>introductions</big>**:
[<img src='https://avataaars.io/?avatarStyle=Circle&topType=LongHairCurvy&accessoriesType=Blank&hairColor=BrownDark&facialHairType=Blank&clotheType=ShirtCrewNeck&clotheColor=Black&eyeType=Default&eyebrowType=Default&mouthType=Default&skinColor=Light'
/>[**Lara**]]
[<img src='https://avataaars.io/?avatarStyle=Circle&topType=ShortHairShortRound&accessoriesType=Blank&hairColor=Black&facialHairType=Blank&clotheType=BlazerShirt&eyeType=Squint&eyebrowType=Default&mouthType=Smile&skinColor=Yellow'
/>[**Sam**]]
[<img src='https://avataaars.io/?avatarStyle=Circle&topType=ShortHairShortFlat&accessoriesType=Round&hairColor=SilverGray&facialHairType=Blank&clotheType=ShirtVNeck&clotheColor=PastelGreen&eyeType=Happy&eyebrowType=Default&mouthType=Twinkle&skinColor=Pale'
/>[**Martha**]]
[<img src='https://avataaars.io/?avatarStyle=Circle&topType=LongHairStraight&accessoriesType=Blank&hairColor=BlondeGolden&facialHairType=Blank&clotheType=BlazerSweater&eyeType=Close&eyebrowType=DefaultNatural&mouthType=Default&skinColor=Light'
/>[**Susu**]]
In the <big>**next 55 minutes,**</big> we’re going to walk you through our analysis of “Chrysalis,” the first episode of //Life is strange//, by asking these key questions:
1. Is this a game?
2. If it's a game, can it be ethical and have flow?
3. if it's ethical, how does the architecture support this aspect of the game?
So ... [[What do you think? Is this a game?]]
**<big>How come ecosystem?</big>**
I like this idea … it suggests that the gaming experience is an interconnected network or community and allows us to bring together several methodologies for game analysis:
<blockquote>
**Mechanics-dyanmics-aesthetics** (Hunicke, LeBlance, & Zubek, 2004)
**Gamplay, game-structure, and game-world** (Aarseth, 2003)
**Object inventory, interface study, and interaction map** (Consalvo & Dutton (2006)
</blockquote>
[[Okay, so how does this help us figure out if //Life is strange I// is a game?|Structured world]]<img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7826/33202563888_b1f2d314db.jpg" width="394" height="395" alt="Structured world">
Theoretically, a game has a structured world, i.e., we can identify content and mechanics.
Content is stuff like:
* <big>**Objects**</big>
* <big>**Characters**</big>
* <big>**Interface(s)**</big>
* <big>**Narrative(s)**</big>
And **"Chrysalis,"** the first episode of //Life is strange I//, definitely has this **<big>[[stuff:]]**</big>
Game mechanics are "the various actions, behaviors and control mechanisms afforded to the player in the game context" (Hunicke, LeBlanc, & Zubek, 2004).
The **<big>obvious</big>** mechanic in //Life is strange I// is being able to **<big>time travel</big>** … make a decision and change your mind so that you have influence the past, present and future.
**<big>But you can also:</big>**
* read the journal (to monitor your progress)
* stop and go back to the beginning of a scene
* or simply move around a micro-world (e.g., the dorms) without doing anything
So, with objects, characters, interfaces and narratives that facilitate mechanics, we have Max's world, right?
<img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7885/46164221705_9575b1667d.jpg" width="500" height="435" alt="Max Caulfield"></a>
Well, **<big>yes and no</big>** … there is this little thing called **<big>[[interactivity|Dynamics]]</big>** (Juul, 2001).
<img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7815/46354154534_1195c32ddd.jpg" width="379" height="367" alt="Dynamic gameplay">
Great content doesn’t make for a great game experience in and of itself—this is almost axiomatic. **Game experience** depends on what the player (or players) do once they are interacting with this structured world, i.e., **making choices, meaningful and otherwise** (Isbister, 2016).
Hunicke, LeBlanc and Zubeck (2004) define this interactivity, or the dynamics of gameplay (Aarseth, 2003), as what happens when player input(s) intersect with game mechanics … both result in outputs. In other words, **shi%& happens.**
In //Life is Strange I//, players think and act as they:
* move around different spaces
* meet different characters
* hear Max’s inner dialogue as well as her conversations with other characters
* encounter choices **(what is Julia’s last name?)** or do **(“Do I take the blame for Chloe’s drugs?”**
These interactions (with rules, objects, characters, narratives) make this game dyanmic.
Now, let’s deal with the pesky issue of **ludology vs narratology** or, in Juul’s (2001) words, the question of whether interactivity and narrative(s) can co-exist.
[[Yes?|ludology vs narratology]]
[[No?|ludology vs narratology]]
Before we tell you what you think, we'd like to know what you think ...
Yes, we've got a [[Poll]].
<img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7823/46357333174_1aaf0d252e.jpg" width="500" height="337" alt="poll">
Good to have taken the pulse of the room ... [[now we'll tell you what we think.|Is this a game?]]
(open-url: "https://pollev.com/marthabufton245")<img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7847/46354162934_7ce74b1945.jpg" width="383" height="338" alt="Aesthetic">
Hunicke, Leblanc and Zubek (2004) define aesthetics as the "desirable emotional responses evoked in the player" which can be interpreted as the feelings that designers hope players will have.
But here's where we can begin to think about the theme of the week—**<big>affect and ethics</big>**—and how design architecture can make a game "fun" by perhaps evoking/provoking certain feelings or emotional experiences along with "cognitivie friction" as players make choices.
//Life is strange I// has the following aesthetic components:
<div class="aesthetics">
* Narrative (the big story in of the episode and the mini stories of the scences
* Challenge (the quests)
* Discovery (new territory)
* Expression (moral self-discovery)</div>
Together, these components are designed to create an “emotional palette” (Isbister, 2016).
<img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7875/46354443594_3b687948f4.jpg" width="410" height="323" alt="Palette">
And the "Chrysalis" palette (or emotional range) includes **frustration, fear, laughter, guilt and [[tenderness]] ...**
<big>**Yes or no ... here we are ...**</big>
We think this is a non-issue. As Ang (2006), points out, game designers create “worlds and spaces that are shaped by game rules” and they also tell stories (p. 313).
In other words, games **“must also provide interesting play”** and can **benefit from a strong story line** because narrative and gameplay affect each other and ultimately the player experience (Ang, 2006, p. 313).
Now, one last point:
<blockquote>Game experience is **<big>physical, cognitive and affective</big>** (i.e., we act, think and feel when we play) … which leads us to the third component of the game ecosystem, **<big>[[aesthetics|Aesthetics]]</big>**</blockquote>
Having established that //Life is strange I// is a game, we can begin to think about what drives the gaming experience.
And we’d like to know how you felt when playing //Life is strange.//
<img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7832/46180289845_06e7d9276b_z.jpg" width="640" height="439" alt="Word cloud">
Let’s create a [[word cloud]] ...
Which means we can start by thinking about the players and how they feel when they interact with the game.
Flow is one way to think about players and how they feel, so we can start by asking, “Is this an emotional game?”
<img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7871/46370073974_df03a446dd_b.jpg" width="957" height="553" alt="Emotion">
But [[how do you know?|let’s explore]]
So is "Chrysalis" (and //Life is strange I//) a game or a [[playable TV show?]]
Let's talk ... and start with the **<big>results of the earlier poll</big>**.**<big>Rules</big>**
<div class="rules">
* Rules to play (e.g., using the arrow keys & mouse to move around)
* Rules to progress or win (e.g., finishing each quest to go on)</div>
<blockquote>(Ang, 2006)</blockquote>
<big>**Objects**</big>
<div class="objects">
* A pencil case
* A HiFi
* library books **(my personal favourite)**</div>
**<big>Characters</big>** (which we can't customize):
<div class="characters">
* Avatar (Max Caulfield)
* Non-playing characters (Chloe, Victoria, Prof. Jefferson)</div>
**<big>Interface(s)</big>**
<div class="interfaces">
* Icons: The butterfly, time travel spiral and journal
* Menus: The mouse for action options</div>
**<big>Narrative(s)</big>**
<div class="narratives">
* Each scene (a micro-world), such as the bathroom
* Each episode (a macro world made up of micro-worlds)</div>
And content **<big>"affords"</big>** (i.e., makes possible) or **<big>"constrains"</big>** (i.e., prevents) game **<big>[[mechanics]]</big>** (Sicart, 2013).We think it's a game, even though the story seems like the episode of a TV show sometimes. Why? Because:
* gameplay is privileged;
* and enhanced by a good story line with which the player interacts as they make choices and evalute consequences.
And both these characteristics potentially take our **experience in the game ecosystem** beyond **<big>"fun"</big>** and into **<big>“the flow zone.”</big>**
And if so, we can go on to ask if it's a game, **<big>[[can it be ethical and have flow?]]</big>**According to Sicart (2013), "An ethical game is the experience of a game by players who make choices that are based on their morality considerations from their understanding of the game" (p.90).
* In this game, the rules make players interact in specific ways in order to confront ethical issues.
* But the rules also force the player to interact with these ethical issues by requiring that some choices be made.
* The player would usually perceive that the character is making an ethical choice, however, in reality, the player is making a decision based upon their perception of the game [[rules]].The game brings players an emotional experience. //Life is Strange I// is an indie movie or adventure game, people are not watching or playing it, they are experiencing it.
<img src=file:///Users/susuwang/Desktop/Screen%20Shot%202019-02-12%20at%2011.39.36%20PM.png height=70% width=80% align=centre>
But with [[agency|player agency]]
//Life is Strange I// covers a lot of modern social, societal, and emotional themes.
The design is critical to creating the possibility of this [[experience]].
Overall, "Chrysalis," the first episode of //Life Is Strange I//, skillfully uses a combination of catharsis and exploration to create a compelling narrative for the player to enjoy. The game creates meaningful and engaging heuristics to immerse the player into the game. The game’s narrative uses social relationships and character development to make players relate to and enjoy the characters and ultimately care about their experiences and troubles.
The game gives the player agency through the choices the game provides, by doing so the player has a stronger emotional reaction to the content than what could be possible in a non-interactive medium.
<img src=https://terracatblog.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/img_0790.gif height= 80% width=80% align=centre>
Want to [[go back in time|In the beginning]] and see this presentation again?Let’s take the scene in episode one where Nathan had a gun for instance. Following this incident, Max had two choices:
* Report to Principal Wells and face Chloe’s disapproval
* Hide the truth and please Chloe.
<img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7813/46180223745_6268ac8d27_z.jpg" width="635" height="360" alt="Principal Wells">
So how are these choices and consequences linked to a player's emotional response during a [[gaming experience?| emotional response]]
<big>**Emotional Responses**</big>
Particular challenges such as these lead to a greater emotional response from players. Research found that actively engaging with the game, activates parts of the brain associated with motivation and reward, then it would for those who watched passively.
The ability to choose and control your actions gives rise to **flow**, which is the ease with which players can enter a pleasurable, optimal performance state.
<img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7919/47093917351_ea4775b165_z.jpg" width="640" height="337" alt="Flow zone">
According to Ibister (2016), there are [[8 factors]] that define the optimal state of flow.
(open-url: "https://pollev.com/marthabufton245")(open-url: "https://pollev.com/marthabufton245")<big>**When considering the emotional impact of games that sets them apart from other media, there are two unique qualities: choice and flow**</big> (Isbister, 2016)
**Choice** is when players have the unique ability to control what unfolds. Having actions with consequences, or interesting choices, unlock emotional possibilities. These possibilities exist because our feelings in everyday life, as well as games, are integrally tied to our goals, our decisions, and their consequences
In the game there are choices that can be undone, remade, and tailored to whatever future you wish to create. Most of these [[choices|Nathan Prescott shoots Chloe Price]] have consequences, but they are not always immediately apparent.
<big>Eight factors define **<big>an optimal state of game flow:**</big>
1. A challenging activity requiring skill
2. A merging action and awareness
3. Clear goals
4. Direct, immediate feedback
5. Concentration on the task at hand
6. A sense of control
7. A loss of self-consciousness an altered sense of time
When players discuss the emotions felt when playing a game, they are talking in part about being in the “flow zone.”
Did you feel any of these things while playing// Life is strange//?
<div class="objects">
* Curiosity?
* Excitement?
* Challenge?
* Elation?
* Triumph?
</div>
<img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7831/47041868332_bb0bc12762_z.jpg" width="640" height="427" alt="Excitement">
//<small>Photo by Val Vesa on Unsplash</small>//
According to Isbister (2016), all of these are [[social emotions]].
<big>**Social emotions**</big>
Game developers have been honing techniques that lead players through intentionally designed emotional experience. Layering techniques for evoking social emotions into this foundation gives games their unique power to create empathy and connection.
**<big>Social emotions</big>** are provoked when designers offer interesting choices that keep players in flow.
For example, often the choices you in make in //Life is strange// result in a prompt: “This action may have consequences.” When this prompts appears, you have the choice to rewind time and opt for a different outcome if you feel uneasy about your original choice.
Likewise, Max expresses worry or regret regardless of what she chooses because the dilemmas have no clear sense of victory.
But designers able to also start evoking another class of feelings in their players—the rich array of social emotions we experience in [[relationship with others|Feelings]].
Feelings such as affection, companionship, empathy, grief or sadness are provoked by game play because they mirror the way our brains make sense of the world around us. This is what Ibister (2016) refers to as **grounded cognition.**
**Grounded cognition theory** helps explain what it is about games that changes the range of emotional experiences possible for players when they take on an [[alternate identity|avatar]] or social situation during play.
When you take on an alternate identity in a game, it is known as an **avatar.** Maxine Caulfield, or Max is the playable protagonist of //Life is strange// and the player’s avatar. She is a geeky, introverted, 18-year-old aspiring photographer who attends Blackwell Academy in Arcadia Bay, Orgeon.
Throughout the game, Max is surrounded by a lot of **non-player** characters (NPCs). Game designers use dynamic and reactive engagement with these characters who populate a game’s story world to add to the emotional palette of games as a medium.
Chloe, Victoria, Nathan, and Professor Jenson are examples of these. They display humanlike actions and reactions that interact with the avatar in emotionally meaningful ways and align with the choices made throughout the narrative of the game.
So, why do we care about [[game characters?|Sicart]]
According to Sicart (2013), characters (avatars and NPCs) are emotional objects that demand emotional attachment. By increasing cognitive friction, emotional experiences also increase.
Sicart (2013) explains that “in the context of ethical gameplay design, cognitive friction can be used as a tool to create emotional experiences. It explains why some objects are better experienced emotionally rather than rationally, and because ethical gameplay //The design of ethical gameplay// is a type of emotional design, it can be created by consciously applying cognitive friction.” (94)
So can an emotional game like //Life is strange I// also be an ethical game?
[[Yes|Are you sure?]]
[[No|No it isn’t]]
[[Don’t be silly. There’s //always// a grey area| what defines a game as ethical?]]
[[Is it?|Sicart]]
[[Let's go back and try again.|Sicart]]<big>**//What defines a game as ethical?//**</big>
**Ethical gameplay** is the experience of a game by players who make choices that are based on morality considerations that are derived from their understanding of the game system.
In ethical gameplay, we need to understand how information about the game is communicated to players and how they related to the gameplay experience in moral ways. Players need to face situations in which their choices matter, or face worlds and narratives in which their presence invokes moral dilemmas.
//Life is strange I// is a game of choice and consequence. The rules influence players to interact with these ethical issues, forcing them to make a choice. The story is littered with ethical and moral choices, which might help or distort a player’s [[moral compass|wicked problems]].
These ethical and moral choices can be thought of as **wicked problems.**
They are wicked because of how complicated they are to solve and how fundamentally different they are from other problems in other disciplines (Sicart, 2013, 99). Wicked problems tease the ethical minds of players and need to involve them and their complicity.
Based on the adaptation of Rittel and Webber’s formulation of the elements of wicked problems, Sicart (2013) would argue that //Life is strange I// is not in fact an ethical game.
**<big>NOT</big>** an ethical game? [[Why?|because]]
For Sicart (2013), the game would not be ethical because …
**An optimal wicked problem** would not present the player with information about **the potential outcome of the game.**
<div class=”objects”>
In the bathroom scene the outcome was revealed. If Max did not set off the fire alarm, Nathan would have fired the gun.</div>
<img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7888/33218654488_959d4aac68_b.jpg" width="810" height="540" alt="Nathan shoots Chloe">
Solutions to ethical dilemmas are **<big>good or bad,</big** not **<big>correct or false.</big**
After selecting the wrong choice, the game urges you to time travel back and select the correct answer.
After players make a choice, they **<big>cannot reload</big>** to a state that is prior to that choice. **<big>Death is an option.</big>**
Time travel is a key game mechanic, allowing the player to reload the avatar to previous states. To top it off, death is an option. Especially in the very last scene when Max is trying to follow the deer through a tornado, getting pelted with rolling logs, avalanche rocks and broken-down trees along the way.
So the player knows at least some of the potential outcomes. Plus, although there are moral dilemmas, they do not seem very [[wicked|Moral dilemmas]].
While this first episode creates some moral dilemmas and doesn’t make Max’s moral state clear, the problems do not necessarily create a lot of cognitive friction and do not seem very weird.
Interacting with ethical issues inside the game may be perceived as an moral choice, when really, they are only making a decision based on their perception the game rules. Players are trying to find the best possible outcome.
So let’s look at your responses to our first word cloud … so clearly we had some pretty strong feelings when playing the game.
And what about what makes it an ethical game … thoughts?
Now that we answered the question, “Is the game ethical and does it have flow?” let’s explore the ways in which its [[architecture|Architecture1]] supports the ethical aspects of the game.
**<big>“Compelling games don’t happen by accident”</big> **(Isbister, 2016, p. 21).
<img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7892/46373153914_6a61b141ea_z.jpg" width="634" height="356" alt="Architecture1">
So, just to recap, an ethical game is one where “regulation, mediation, or goals require from the player moral reflection beyond the calculation of statistics and possibilities.” (Sicart, 2013, 24).
What is an example of a game without the need for moral reflection?
<div class=”objects”>
Is it enjoyable? Compelling? Immersive?
</div>
[[So how does one structure an ethical game?|Architecture2]]
Sicart (2013) describes three elements that are present in the experience of ethical gameplay.
<div class=”objects”>
the game world
the game rules
the game mechanics </div>
So how do these three elements work together? As Sicart (2013) says, “Players experience a gameworld that is constrained by rules, and they interact within it by means of game mechanics.” (p. 27).
<img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7881/47096701871_f55c758805_z.jpg" width="640" height="480" alt="Architecture2">
What does this mean?
<div class=”objects”>
* Players must voluntarily reflect on the game’s purpose, meaning and impact
* The game allows for appropriation and moral interpretation </div>
So, if designers want to create an ethical game, they should ask themselves [[ 3 questions|Architecture3]].
<div class=”objects”>
How is this gameplay situation a moral “wicked problem” for the player?
How can designers trigger player complicity (why should players care about this situation)?
In what domain will the ethical cognitive friction create the “wicked problem”?</div>
Creating **<big>wicked</big>** problems means in part avoiding “trolley problems,” tame problems that involve a decision that looks moral but is only a consequentialist calculation of outcomes.
For example, when Max takes the blame for Chloe’s weed, the designer has created a tame problem.
[[Now let’s go back to game flow.|Architecture4]]
What does the “flow chart” of //Life is Strange I// look like?
[[Types of Interactivity|Architecture5]]
There are several types of interactivity possible in a game:
<div class=”objects”>
* External/internal
* Ontological/exploratory</div>
If we apply this model to //Life is strange I//, what does the structure of interactivity look like in this game?
<img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7899/32154989607_70c14e8e76_o.png" width="553" height="422" alt="Exploratory">
[[External-Ontological|External-Ontological]]
[[External-Exploratory|External-Exploratory]]
[[Internal-Ontological|Internal-Ontological]]
[[Internal-Exploratory|Internal-Exploratory]]
Good guess, but [[not good enough.|Architecture5]]
Wrong answer. [[Take another shot!|Architecture5]]
You got it! //Life is strange I//is an Internal-Ontological game.
And here are the feature of Internal-Ontological games:
<div class=”objects”>
* Player is cast as a character
* Player’s actions determine fate of story
* Narrative is created dramatically, not diegetically</div>
So how can a game [[tackle morality|Architecture7]]? Nope! [[Try again.|Architecture5]]
As Lange suggests in "You’re just gonna be nice”:
<div class=”objects”>
* Players often play with their own moral compass
* Player dislike when they feel their actions/choices do not influence the plot
* There seems to be a shift away from binary morality in video games
* More realistic and truly “interactive” as a result</div>
<img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7812/33221626848_5ffa1e3087.jpg" width="400" height="400" alt="Architecture10">
[[Discussion|Architecture8]]
“A good game is a series of interesting choices” (Meier in Isbister, 2016)
<img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7922/33221655108_c793c56499_o.jpg" width="850" height="400" alt="Architecture11">
Let’s come back to flow:
<div class=”objects”>
* “Flow Theory”
* Use of “social” emotions
* Internal avatars
* Compelling NPCs</div>
As we know, flow is all about fInding the “sweet spot” between challenge and ability.
<img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7842/32154982427_dc0e1bdf1c_o.jpg" width="348" height="270" alt="Social Emotions">
As Lara has shown us, flow is about feelings. Even in a solitary (single player) game like //Life is strange I//, players can feel social emotions like guilt or regret.
Why is this possible in a game but not a [[movie|Avatars2]]?Because we interact with the game world … experiencing it through our avatar as well as the NCPs. These interactions create understanding and empathy
Does the avatar of Max in //Life is strange I// create an emotional [[response for you?|NCPs]]
Players engage with virtual NPCs the same way as with people.
Designers are able to create real participation and involvement through virtual social interaction.
<a data-flickr-embed="true" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/144545204@N05/47096806261/in/dateposted-public/" title="NPCs"><img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7896/47096806261_65bdbce78f_o.jpg" width="1894" height="1066" alt="NPCs"></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Can you think of any other ways the architecture of a game may incite emotional responses and ethical behaviour?
[[To summarize|Conclusion]]
The interactions with rules, objects, characters and narratives make this game dynamic. The design architecture can make this game "fun" by perhaps evoking players’ certain feelings or emotional experiences along with "cognitive friction."
There are dark twists and heartbreaking reveals and stakes both large and small, and the supernatural element of time travel, which is one of the primary mechanics of this game.The interactions with rules, objects, characters and narratives make this game dynamic. The design architecture can make this game "fun" by perhaps evoking players’ certain feelings or emotional experiences along with "cognitive friction.
There are dark twists and heartbreaking reveals and stakes both large and small, and the supernatural element of time travel, which is one of the primary [[mechanics|mechanics2]] of this game.
So, although maybe not an ethical game by Sicart’s definition, this is a morality-based game.
<div class=”objects”>
* In this game, the rules make players interact in specific ways in order to confront ethical issues.
* But the rules also force the player to interact with these ethical issues by requiring that some choices be made.
* The player would usually perceive that the character is making an ethical choice, however, in reality, the player is making a decision based upon their perception of the game.
</div>
The game brings players an emotional experience. //Life is strange I// is not an episode of TV show or adventure game because people are not watching or just playing it, they are **experiencing it.**
<img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7890/40132163843_2cb2e55e13_o.png" width="578" height="510" alt="Susu">
Through the [[avatar(s) and NPCs|avatar and NPCs]]
**Avatar:** The design offers players opportunity to experience the world through the character’s creating understanding.
**NPCS:** The creation of real participation and involvement through real social interaction.
And //Life is Strange I// covers a lot of modern social, societal, and emotional themes. The design is critical to creating the possibility of this [[experience|experience2]].Overall, **<big>"Chrysalis,"</big>** the first episode of //Life Is Strange I//, skillfully uses a combination of catharsis and exploration to create a compelling narrative for the player to enjoy. The game creates meaningful and engaging heuristics to immerse the player into the game. The game’s narrative uses social relationships and character development to make players relate to and enjoy the characters and ultimately care about their experiences and troubles.
The game gives the player **<big>agency</big>** through the choices the game provides, by doing so the player has a stronger emotional reaction to the content than what could be possible in a non-interactive medium.
<img src=https://terracatblog.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/img_0790.gif height= 150% width=150% align=centre>
Want to [[go back in time|In the beginning]] and see this presentation again?