Turning public opinion in computer games

[clyde]

Seems like combat power-fantasy is often talked about in game criticism, but how about the power-fantasy of turning public opinion. One of my most satisfying narrative moments was in Dragon Age Orgins when

I confronted Loghain at the Landsmeet and watched as various representatives gave their backing to me publicly. I had spent the game as an outcast, considered an enemy of the state. But through the game I was able to turn public opinion to show that they had been misled all along.

I got to play as a whistleblower. I love that. Of course, we had to seal the deal with a violent duel (video games).

if you've forgotten what happened or never plan on playing.

 

Mass Effect has similar objectives in more than one case, your overall objective is to prove that you are speaking the truth while someone of superior ranking or reputation commits slander against you. I feel like a political outcast in real life, so this theme really resonates with me in games. I'm far more interested in exposing a government official's nefarious abuses than saving the universe from the reapers or the Blight. This is a power-fantasy that I am susceptible to; Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, the Game. I've only seen it done in a scripted fashion slight'y permutated with player decisions, and it's always incredibly campy to the extent of embarrassing naivete. I eat that shit up. I would love to see it done well with systems instead of a script, but I can't imagine how that could be done in a satisfying manner. There's got to be that Matlock moment. My character has lined up a surprise witness whose testimony is irrefutable. I need DNA exoneration. That way I can feel politically effective for a moment rather than feeling like I'm a marginal doomsayer, bumming out the working class with complaints of expected government abuses.

 

I don't know if these political power-fantasies are healthy or not. They certainly don't represent techniques for real change. These games lean heavily on good and evil, but Bioware, less than most. Martin Luther King Jr. should make a game, or Ghandi. But they would probably be MMO's. I don't enjoy playing MMO's, they remind me that I'm not special. No, those two would probably claim that games are a form of escapism and that I should be out in the streets. But eventually a game designer will approach the potential and show me how much fun it is to take on city hall with the grass-roots support I've managed to compromise.

 

 

 

[Merus]

I think this'd be a great basis for a game with non-combat oriented conflict. Or even a game with it, where you wanted to deemphasise combat as the only solution.

 

It's usually pretty hackneyed because there's no depth to the persuasion mechanics. Even something like SMT has more complex persuasion.

[clyde]

I think this'd be a great basis for a game with non-combat oriented conflict. Or even a game with it, where you wanted to deemphasise combat as the only solution.

 

It's usually pretty hackneyed because there's no depth to the persuasion mechanics. Even something like SMT has more complex persuasion.

Is there a lot of persuasion in Shin Megami Tensei?

[chummer]

Telltale Games presents House of Cards: The Game: Poker Night At The Inventory 3

 

Joking aside, while you're obviously aiming towards more large scale interactions, I think maybe the basis of what you're looking for could be found in a game like The Walking Dead, no? While I spent the first two episodes trying to appease everybody, by Ep. 3 I was on a mission to gain trust with at least a few people and convince them that if a time for action came, they should follow my lead.

 

That being said, do you have an idea of how you'd like to explore political machinations through a game? Looking at what you've listed, are you satisfied with dialogue choices or do you feel there are other systems that could meaningfully add something to the theme's execution?

[clyde]

Walking Dead definitely has a Lord of the Flies feel to it. 

I haven't figured out what it is I want yet, so I haven't come close to describing an effective game mechanic. Do I want a game to make me feel politically relevant? Or do I want a game to teach me how to be politically relevant? I'm not sure. Ideally, a game would make me feel like I have political relevance at the beginning so that I get a taste of success. Then through the course of the game, I'm introduced to systems that require compromise, but with an approachable pace that will encourage me. By the end, I'd like to have a realistic perspective of what activism is actually capable of and the techniques that make things happen. 

Games usually imply that political differences are solved by shooting down helicopters, I'd prefer to distance myself from that idea. I don't have a realistic concept of how public opinion changes, so it's hard to brain-storm possible game mechanics. Maybe some sort of asynchronous multiplayer game where you play as Frank Luntz? You receive a list of instructions that you then have to word in such a way that a group of players will firstly decide to follow your instructions (in competition with another player who is in your same position, who has described the instructions in their own way) and then actually perform them accurately. Grading the group's accuracy would be necessary to make sure that the player doesn't just write "Bacon!" and get more clicks. 

But see. Can you imagine feeling like you are stopping a war of aggression with mechanics like that? I would just feel like a power-hungry weasel. It's a really interesting problem. 

[clyde]

This conversation has encouraged me to play Fate of the World again. Whew. That game is so stressful.

[Merus]

I think, for instance, starting a revolution would be an interesting theme. You'd start off with a small group, and they're precious so you can't sacrifice them particularly willingly. You'd start off with small guerilla operations for resources and defence, and talking to people to get an understanding of how they see the current regime and try out some untested arguments. Some people will be convinced, but most will bat back with either a thought-terminating cliche or an actual argument that reflects what they're more concerned about. Some will try and report you, so you need to feel people out first. As you learn what clues to look for, and get more resources and support, you can start going after bigger targets to try and provoke specific responses from the regime, which in turn allows you to try and change minds that were previously sure the regime would never do what you just made them do, or secure better resources and defences. Eventually you'd be ready to take to the streets and your influencing and directing would let you push the riot on a larger scale to surround the palace.

 

Shin Megami Tensei has you persuade (or threaten, or bribe) enemies to switch sides. On your own, you're not particularly effective, but if you recruit demons you can use them to contribute their power and combine them to get new demons. Each demon has its own personality, and how they're feeling is affected by a bunch of factors, including how you've fought in the fight.

[clyde]

After reading that, I'm reminded that Mount&Blade has some of these political elements. I'm pretty sure that you can talk to generals and gain their support by doing them favors and talking shit about the generals they don't like. I'm not very good at it though so, I never got anywhere with that.

[SecretAsianMan]

I sense you're after something more subtle, but I feel Democracy 2 is worth a mention.  It's a straight up government simulator where your policy decisions directly affect public opinion.  Granted it's an older game (Wikipedia says it was released in 2007) but it's the most straight forward one I can think of relating to this topic.