Games

"Detroit: Become Human" is a video game made by Quantic Dream coming out in 2018. It's a choice based game shaped by the player and there has been controversy over the acceptability of it's brutal story telling/choice based outcomes. The main character may supposedly choose to act or not act in a situation that can result in the death of a child by her father's hands or the main character killing the father instead. People are calling for the scene to be taken out from the game. Some say the former outcome will fuel abusers' fantasies while others worry the latter outcome will put victims of abuse in danger by inspiring them to seek violence in return. Neither situation is unique, as in, such events have been written about and occurred in films and art before. People want to draw the line so harshly for video games and what they can portray because of the interactivity. Is it fair to treat video games so differently? Provide examples of highly controversial video games depicting violent or disturbing scenes from the past, and speculate on whether their reception will shape Quantic Dream's decisions in addressing such concerns. Are these concerns valid?

We cannot deny the impact that video games have made and continue to make on our popular culture. Consider the evolution of the gaming industry. How, in fact, has it evolved? How has it become more mainstream? What do video games offer us emotionally, mentally, and sometimes physically? What can we learn from video games that we can apply to every day life, as well as in our intellectual and educational pursuits? After analyzing these factors, consider how (and perhaps, if) video games should be taught, possibly someday at a university level. What universities might already do this, and how do these courses operate? How are they taught? What do they offer?

You'd be strapped to find a gaming review that doesn't address grinding. Grinding is usually a process of gaining character experience, including repetitive tasks such as farming items or engaging in enemy battles. Over and over and over again – ad nauseam. In recent JRPGs, the concept of auto-battle has been introduced. In games such as Square Enix's Bravely Default and Atlus' Persona 4, the player is granted the ability to create an enemy-shattering battle strategy. This strategy, once plugged into the game's battle system, can be automated. No more memorizing moves or smashing X. The game plays itself.

By eliminating the need for grinding, does the inclusion of auto-battling present an upgrade for JRPGs? Or does automating battle systems cheapen the game and ultimately result in developer-condoned cheating?

Possible approach: Comparing and contrasting auto-battle in other games.

With the increased market share of Euro Style table top games (TTG), which typically emphasize collaborative and strategy based game play, a mainstreaming of TTG has occurred. The success of launching independent or related games through crowd founding sites such as Kickstarter and Indiegogo indeed appear to support that a tangible popularity in TTG can be mapped financially and through social media. This can also be seen in the rise in popularity of streaming shows such as 'Table Top' hosted by Wil Wheton, which rather than more niche gaming such as RPGs has placed an emphasis on "family" appropriate and collaborative game play. Even low level concept games such as 'Cards Against Humanity' have become known as "gateway games" that encourage non-gamers into becoming avid TTGs. However, is the rise due to this increased popularity of collaborative gaming or simply due to the social media format of sharing in common activities? Have co-operative games really changed the face of TTG or is this just a fad?

eSports and competitive video gaming competitions have become a serious industry in recent times and are poised to change the overall video gaming industry in big ways. Attracting the attention (and funding) of corporations primarily involved with traditional sports, eSports is set up to not only affect the way future games are developed, but is also set to make some serious revenue. What's your take on how the involvement of large sporting corporations and the rise of elite gamers will effect the overall video gaming industry?

With recent repacking and re-releases of old titles, what are the most egregious examples of bringing out the same versions of games for that yankee dollar?

Break down how important well-written plot and dialogue are to video games. While obviously pure action games like Smite and Overwatch don't need much of a plot, and nothing resembling dialogue, what about games with a campaign mode? Does steering away from Hollywood cliches, poorly-constructed storylines and so on significantly improve the quality of a game? Or does gameplay/cinematography/etc. always trump the quality of the writing?

As esports and professional video gaming become a much bigger part of the wider world, there seem to be many people that show resistance.
A tournament of an online game (can't remember which game) was televised on ESPN recently and I was shocked by some of the comments. "These people weren't bullied enough in school," took the cake from the pool of negative comments.
Do you think gaming should make it's way into the mainstream world via television broadcasts? Should it stick to game-centered shows and websites rather than leak into the professional sporting world?