First Strike Season 2 Episode 6.1- Randomizer and 6.2- The True Final Fantasy

and

First Strike Season 2 Episode 6.1- Randomizer and 6.2- The True Final Fantasy

and

First Strike Season 2 Episode 5: Mining Crafts

Welcome Strikers to another intense episode of your favorite video game podcast! This week we talk about the 3DS, Team Fortress 2, and yes more!!!! So join in as we mine crafts!! Oh btw Nate's back....

Bioshock and the Future of Philosophy in Games

The video game industry is one of the fastest expanding forms of media in today’s society, however, compared to other forms of media like books, movies, even TV shows, games seem not to be in the same tier. Many people cite works from all of those forms of media to show different philosophical and psychological concepts. Video games, however, are still not referenced as “points of discussion” or “a philosophical debate”. So the question I ask is why. Why are video games not on the same tier as say books or movies? I would say there are two reasons; the first being that video games are still not taken by society as a serious form of self expression or art form, and the other reason being that there are not nearly enough games that are deep or philosophical enough to present those arguments. That is currently what is driving me to make games. The need and want for video game worlds to show the player ethical views, metaphysical matters, and theories on the humanity in general. I believe I can show in this paper how philosophy is a needed component in more games and how the lack of it drives me to create them. Through Bioshock, games of similar ethical nature, and my own concepts for the future of gaming I hope to show where my passion and ideas lie.

Bioshock is an astounding piece of work for many reasons. One reason is because I believe it is a great game overall. The mix of graphics, sound, and gameplay all flow together so nicely. The environment and story though is what truly makes the game. Bioshock is set in a 1960 underwater utopia called Rapture. Rapture at this point in time is a fallen Objectivist society, and that what makes this world so great. While exploring this fallen society, the player finds out the philosophy behind Rapture and what made it collapse.

To truly understand what happened to the society of Rapture though, the concept of Objectivism should be fully understood first. Objectivism is the philosophy of 20^th century writer Ayn Rand. Her philosophy holds that reality is an objective fact, reason is man’s way of perceiving reality and finding happiness and moral purpose in life, every man must pursue their own rational self-interest and the ultimate political system in laissez-faire capitalism (Rand). Rapture is built on these ideals by Andrew Ryan (a name play off of Ayn Rand). Rapture was once a glistening utopia, and through this downtrodden almost apocalyptic setting the character walks through, it can be seen what the city looked like in the days of yore. I really love this about Bioshock. It manages to present the philosophy of a society that has objectivism and have a character explore the falling of it. This is shown through voice clips scattered throughout the game of people in the old society, just viewing the world around, and by even seeing some of the people. It is now a world of chaos and disarray and the main character, Jack, must traverse through it (Gillen).

What really causes the fall of Rapture is the insertion of items and ideas against objectivist thinking, so what I believe the game is really trying to portray is a true objectivist society would work, but this one was flawed. There is a police station, an orphanage, underground trading rings, etc; all that lead to the downfall of the city. The most substantial factor probably being the changing ideals of the people due to Christian thoughts brought in through smuggled Bibles and more charitable projects that make people see the world as imperfect. Through all this it can be seen the corruption of the people. People in this world, splicers, are basically lunatics who have lost their minds and are in an all-out war against each other and everyone else. Splicers are people who have seemingly gone insane from the now anarchist setting due to no control (Unsub). This was triggered by the change of ideals within the people and furthered by the laissez-faire principles of the society. It seems almost that the developers of this game are trying to say that without a proper government, humans fall into chaos. It is a very strong and interesting viewpoint on the entire concept of the true state of human nature. This entire concept alone about the world of Rapture and the psychology behind it truly drives me to want to create a world that also portrays philosophical and psychological concepts in such a way. I want to create a game where society is the way I see it at perfection. It allows players to fully immerse themselves in a world in what I believe is the best form of media to portray such a concept. Games without a doubt in my mind provide an unparalleled immersion factor in all other forms of media.

The other part of the philosophy in Bioshock is the ethics system. While the ethical system is certainly not as deep as its other philosophical roots, the ethical system still is an important component of the game. The real main moral issue is the idea of killing the Little Sisters, girls conditioned to extract ADAM from the corpses around Rapture, to become powerful faster, or saving them and gaining less power (while getting presents over time that surmounts to the same amount in the long run). It is the entire idea of the end justifying the means. Is it worth it killing to gain power and complete the goal, or should a person always keep their moral self despite the end result. I think allowing this kind of thought pattern in a game really enhances a person to think more about their actions and what they are truly doing. It allows a soft of self-awareness in a game environment.

Which leads to the point the game tries to make, if the Little Sisters are killed, Jack unleashes a nuclear strike. He has been corrupted and fallen into darkness by his actions, however if the player chooses to save the Little Sisters, he escapes Rapture and basically remains happily ever after with the Little Sister. The point that I believe is trying to be made is that a person cannot just fall into darkness and then return to do a good act from the darkness. Gaining power and evil to try to use it for a good cause never keeps oneself at a proper point. Bioshock truly is a game that makes one think.

However, Bioshock is not the only game that presents this philosophical idea in games. There are others that do similar jobs. One of the greatest examples is Mass Effect (Wise). Mass Effect really gets into the intrinsic nature of morality in gaming, taking the idea of doing good or bad acts taking an actual toll on the games story in general. Mass Effect does a great job and is a great example of why this ethical principle needs to be stronger in a game world. Video games I truly believe can be a teaching tool to how people should act, a tool to show others in a fully immersed world the different ideas and the help give people the ability to think for themselves, but so far this has been done on a small scale basis. While Mass Effect, Fable, Bioshock, and other games present a slight morality example, I believe no game has truly evolved in terms of a true moral stance. Games should be taking a more moral path and root, maybe even present different ethical systems in one would truly allow a player to create a dynamic character while at the same time being able to think (Bromling). It would combine education and fun in a sense but on a much broader sort of basis. It would allow for a mean of education without a true realization of it. Games have been proven to raise awareness and present a more overall social awareness. Studies have been done outlining how games do help people think.

A study shows that teens who play video games in general and see acts of good in them are more likely to go out and perform civic duties (Kahne). 70% of teens who frequently play games go online to get political information compared to the 55% that infrequently play games. 71% have raised charity for organizations in the last 12 months (of when the survey was taken) compared to 51% otherwise. There are more statistics that can be found in the document but it goes to show when people notice issues in games they take notice and act on it. In the paper the author shows how games like Civilization can raise a person’s awareness on history and politics, a game like World of Warcraft can help with peoples social skills and leadership ability, and how games like Zoo Tycoon can actually help teach a bit of economic principle. Video games are definitely able to be used as a tool to teach others, it is just a matter of using them too.

This is mainly where my drive in games comes into play. I want to create games that allow people to be opened up to new worlds and experiences, games that make people think and learn concepts and issues. Not a form of edutainment, but entertainment that has some real powerful concepts behind it. People love reading books and watching movies that bring up issues, and that show different psychological perspectives of human beings. My greatest issue is “why don’t games do that?” I would say that gaming is the number one platform for doing this sort of experience, it is a fully immersive and interactive experience in which people can better control what they do, and this capability of control has yet to be taken to its limits. Gaming really has an entire part of it that is an untouched tablet. Sure people have dipped their feet in the water for these concepts, however it is still, as I have said, not a fully developed medium.

Another issue that has been explored in games, probably more than philosophy is the entire concept of morality in gaming. The idea of choosing one path versus another. An article from the Escapist says that a reason many games struggle to portray moral concepts, in their case Eternal Forces, is because the developers portray their moral system without conflict. Games need to take a stance of creating a realistic system of giving people ethical choice and letting them make decisions. As aforementioned, there are games that have a morality system but none that are extremely complex and truly portray consequence in actions (Crigger). My real strive is to create game that portray that. To create an interactive experience in which a person truly feels like the decision they make affects the game world.

As I have shown from the statistics, raising issues, showing concept, and points of view in games do affect the people playing it. They are more likely to act upon it so there is a difference. Games are a great way to get people aware of things and I think that is what is needed. If you look at the world there is too large of a majority of people who do not truly care for others, who act in selfish ways, who do not think. I really think that by engrossing people in a game that portrays those issues, the situation can be helped. Games are a great proponent to change and to help people. That is my driving force in designing games at the moment and Bioshock is what opened my eyes to the capabilities of what games can do.

Works Cited

Bromling, Laura. “No Humor in Heaven.” The Escapist 28 Aug. 2007: n. pag. PDF file.

Crigger, Lara. “A Lack of Faith.” The Escapist 3 Apr. 2007: n. pag. PDF file.

Gillen, Kieron. “Exclusive: Ken Levine on the Making of Bioshock.” Rock, Paper, Shotgun. N.p., 20 Aug. 2007. Web. 28 Sept. 2010. .

Kahne, Joseph, Ellen Middaugh, and Chris Evans. “The Civic Potential of Video Games.” Civic Survey (Sept. 2008): n. pag. PDF file.

Rand, Ayn. Atlas Shrugged. New York City: Random House, 1957. Print.

- - -. “Introducing Objectvism.” Ayn Rand Institute. N.p., 1962. Web. 28 Sept. 2010. .

Unsub. “Bioshock Plot Analysis.” GameFAQs. N.p., 16 Sept. 2007. Web. 28 Sept. 2010. .

Wise, Joshua. “Weighing Morality in Games.” Kotaku. N.p., 30 June 2010. Web. 19 Sept. 2010. .

FSP: S2 episode 4- Going Tokyo

Hello and welcome to another podcast. Sorry for the delay. This week we cover TGS! Enjoy Strikers as we start going on a more regular basis again.

FSP: S2 episode 3 - "Serious Business"

FSP: S2 Episode 2 - The Conference of Games

FSP: Season 2 "The Rebirthening"

FSP: E3 2010 - Day 1 Wrap up

First Strike Podcast: Episode 8 - It's E "Effing" 3!

First Strike Podcast: Late Night Special

First Strike Podcast: Episode 7- Masters of the Universe

Last Strike: Red Steel 2

This week I finished up Red Steel 2 so it's time for a Last Strike review on the subject. For those who don't know what the game is, it's an action game set as a Japanese Western that relies heavily on the wii motion controls. My overall experience with the game was enjoyable but there are certain things that just irk me about the game.

First what I liked about the game:
The wii motion controls are actually very smooth and feel pretty natural. It's easy to use and doesn't mistake your intentions. There were some slight problems with the game considering my vertical slash a stab but that did not occur frequently and was hardly a game breaker.

The game is fun, for what there is to do. The game is especially fun as soon as you unlock your full arsenal of moves. Then you have a lot of options when dealing with different situations.

And now, what I disliked:
The game has little content. There are 6 types of enemies other than bosses and the challenge mode involves replaying the campaign. The campaign is fun but that's all there is to do and since it's linear, there is very little replay value.

The game is too easy. On medium difficulty I got through most encounters without even getting hit and with the introduction of "the cobra" even the final boss went down in two hits. The move variety is good but some moves are so much better than others you won't want to use your entire arsenal of moves.

So overall:
The game is fun and the controls work, but there is little to work with and some of the moves are hideously overpowered so you won't want to use anything else. I would rent the game instead of buying it as the game is short and easy enough to be beaten in one or two days and you probably won't want to go back.

Last Strike: Cave Story

Every so often I used to pick up Cave Story and play a little, but this year in Digital Imaging class I was fortunate enough to have nothing to do, and what a better way to spend my time than by playing Cave Story. Today therefore marks the day where I in fact completed the game with the Good Ending (I'm going for True Ending next week). I do not think it needs to be said but Cave Story really is a fantastic game and it is hard to believe it is indie. All components of it are just simply so on top. Cave Story I believe truly shows how anyone can still make not just a game, but a game that is AAA and has that originality component to it. So lets go into a little more detail on what makes Cave Story so amazing.

Blast From the Past: Battlezone

This week's blast from the past is an old game called Battlezone.

The game is a fictional version of the space race between the USSR and the USA. Where each side attempt to claim ownership of different planets by occupying them with army forces. You are a marine and can fight for either side of the conflict. Depending on what side you play for you will get different vehicles but the sides are essentially balanced.

Battlezone is a tactical first person shooter. You fight by getting into a vehicle (you can shoot while on foot but it is very ineffective) of some sort, usually a tank of varying degree of toughness or an artillery platform. From inside that vehicle you can more around and shoot other vehicles or give orders to vehicles around. You can deploy turrets to guard strategic locations or air drop supplies for your troops. Once the vehicle you are in is destroyed you are ejected from the wreckage and you walk around the map, looking for another vehicle. You can of course just grab the one of your nearby NPC allies. They won't object.

The picture on the right is a screenshot on Mars. At the top left of the screen is a list of all your available troops. From there you can issue commands to said troops. At the bottom left of the screen is the 3d map, showing the terrain and any vehicles in the vicinity. At the bottom right is your health bar, split into shield and armor. Shield is easy to repair while armor is much harder to fix. The list beside that are the weapons available to your vehicle. Most vehicles have more than one weapon to add diversity to the battle.

I say the game is a strategic first person shooter since a large part of the game is about commanding team mates. By yourself, you are not very effective so you need to create the correct vehicles for your allies. If there is a choke-point you are likely going to have to defend, build turrets and deploy them there. Have artillery back up the turrets and then be ready to airlift supplies when they run low. If you need to attack the enemy, order some of your troops to follow you and lead the assault. By yourself you won't be able to accomplish much.

After several missions on the moon, the enemy team will "up the ante" and try to colonize mars. After Mars, Venus is the next target. I do not know where the space race goes after Venus as that is the furthest I have gotten in the game. I'm talking about this game because it introduced me to the first person shooter genre and got me to play more first person shooter games. Unfortunately the game is now hard to find and won't install on windows Vista or 7, so replaying the game is not going to be easy. The game itself was incredibly fun though so I hope I can find a way to do so soon.