The expressive power of video games

Reading Responses

1. What advergames have you played? Did they influence a purchase outside of the game?
   • I have played Chex Quest, Chipotle’s The Scarecrow, and Chick-fil-A and their app game. The Chick-fil-A game definitely influenced my purchases outside of the game because I was using the game to earn points, and I would even say the Starbucks holiday Scavenger Hunt game, which I would use to collect more points towards my purchases, so it felt like free money. 
2. Why do the advergames ”tooth protector” and “escape” work? What makes ” Chase the Chuckwagon” and “Shark Bait” fail?
   • These advergames work because they prioritize procedural rhetoric where the Brand’s message is conveyed and seen throughout the rules and mechanics, whether that be visual or verbally advertised to interact with the product or products, behavior which in turn builds brand awareness. “Tooth Protector” is a good example of the demonstrative mechanics with direct metaphors and active engagements for the user, while “Escape” uses performance features within a car for an optimal outcome for winning the game. Opposing those two games, Shark Bait and Chase the ChuckWagon, fail because of very surface-level branding instead of using mechanics to make an argument. These games rely on logos with no clear consumer understanding, which is why these games are a flop.
3. What does Volvo’s “drive for life” accomplish?
   • Volvo’s advergame Drive for Life is a great example of a game that achieves brand exposure but fails to create a persuasive argument for the product’s core value: safety. Their incentives are misaligned because Volvo is built on safety and caution, while the game is overall a racing simulator, which poses a huge risk of crashing and negative consequences in the game which is overall.
4. What company used in-advergame advertising?
   • Toyota used IGA to create its standalone “advergame.” Toyota’s primary example of this because they place branding inside their vehicles, such as popular titles like Super Monkey Ball.
5. What was one of the first home console advergames, and what beverage was it for?
   • One of the first Home console advergames was seen through the Kool-Aid Man game released in the Atari 2600, which was made to promote the powdered drink, and another prominent example was in 1938 of the Pepsi Invaders for the Atari 2600, but was also reused and designed for Coca-Cola sales. 
6. What makes “the toilet training” game sophisticated, and do you agree?
   • According to Bogost’s analysis and description of procedural rhetoric, it is considered a sophisticated game because it was beyond the demonstration to simulate a complex social process. The psychological and methodological aspects of parenting are what bring this game to life while also addressing parental anxiety.
7. What do advergames and anti-advergames have in common, and what principles do they share?
   • Advergames and anti-advergames have procedural rhetoric in common. Their goals are very much opposites, but they both use the rules and mechanics of a game to make a persuasive argument. The principles they share involve behavioral arguments, whether that be Systemic Simulation or Active Persuasion. Both types of games require the player to “do” the logic of the brand. They also share the same structural principles of Procedurality, Interactivity, Validation, and Metaphorical Representation, which both systems use to get their message across.

• What advergames have you played? Did they influence a purchase outside of the game?

Lego Online Games, Minecraft, Five Nights at Freddy’s. Now I haven’t played these in years as a kid I always wanted the toys and merch to go along with these games and franchises. To this day I still purchase Lego’s and I went to Halloween Horror Nights Orlando to go see the Five Nights and Freddy’s house to fulfill my childhood.

• Why do the advergames ”tooth protector” and “escape” work? What makes ”chase the chuckwagon” and “shark bait” fail?

In Tooth Protector the player protects teeth from germs and sugar. The act of playing already teaches that teeth are fragile and must be cared for just like real dental hygiene. In Escape Work you must plan, react quickly, and survive a disaster. This mirrors real-life emergency behavior. The game models the correct actions, not just explains them. They fail because the gameplay has nothing to do with them. These games use branding as decoration, not persuasion.

• What does volvo’s “drive for life” accomplish? 

It persuades players that safety is a skill and responsibility, not just a feature. Practicing safe driving through your gameplay could either persuade good or bad decisions on the road depending on how you drive.

• What company used in-advergame advertising 

7-Eleven used in advergame ads inside games placing branded products directly into gameplay rather than building a game around them.

• What was one of the first home-console advergames and what beverage was it for? 

Pepsi Invaders, it was a modified version of Space Invaders made for Coca-Cola sales reps, where players shot the word “PEPSI.”

• What makes “the toilet training” game sophisticated and do you agree?

It is sophisticated because it uses symbolic actions rather than direct branding, reflects cultural pressure, shame, and control, and persuades through systems, not slogans. I agree because I think it’s sophisticated because it expresses a social argument, not a commercial one.

• What do advergames and anti-advergames have in common, and what principles do they share?

Both advergames and anti-advergames use rules, systems, and player actions to persuade through procedural rhetoric meaning the game’s mechanics make the argument. The difference is that advergames promote brands, while anti-advergames use the same tools to critique corporate power and social systems.

• What are the issues Ian Bogost raises about social games with Cow Clicker?

I think he sort of raises the question of the pointless activities we are entertained by in this society. Clicking something for the sake of clicking something again – and then his game which was supposed to be satire actually became popular for the exact thing he was “fighting” against

• How do social games like FarmVille enframe friends?

Games like these affect how we interact with others – how we give gifts, compare ourselves, base our value off of our qualities and material. Even how people make friends shifts and can make people look at the things differently if they’re used to being in a virtual, different environment.

• How do social games destroy time outside of the game?

It can potentially make us waste the time we have just to play the game again. If the focus is the game, that changes the way we interact with the time we have

1. What issues does Ian Bogost raise about social games with Cow Clicker?

• Some issues Ian Bogost raises about social games in his game Clicker are that these games will reduce play to repetitive, meaningless actions that are most often time- or enjoyment-based. The game is intentionally designed to rely on mental systems such as habit rather than meaningful interaction; it is meant to prioritize engagement and leisure.

---

2. How do social games like FarmVille enframe friends?

• Social games like FarmVille frame friends as people to interact with, not just for social connection but for in-game advantages. This can be anywhere from bonuses or virtual Goods to optimize the gameplay. The idea of the social relationship mainly focuses on the transactions between every interaction and also uses human relationships as data to strengthen bonds.

---

3. How do social games destroy time outside of the game?

• Social games can destroy time outside of the game simply through a hypnotic nature and influence beyond timer notification games especially with the anxiety about missing progress often this hypnotic state destroys the illusion of time not spent playing where there’s a lack in attention and mental energy being used to go back and forth between the game and life social games consume Leisure Time and can intrude everyday life but it removes the sense of obligation and can sometimes become an outlet during those Leisure times. 

This week opened my eyes to how game design focuses on capturing attention rather than just providing simple fun. The games we looked at often lacked clear endings or resolutions, with no defined final state.

Take Calvinball, for example. It shows how instability can reach absurd levels. Its rules change constantly, often in response to recent events, making it impossible to master or plan long-term strategies. At first glance, this seems chaotic, but it means the game only exists in the moment. The most stable this game ever felt while in motion in class was when Grace set a definitive goal, or end state to the game, with knocking down the chain of monkeys being the aim. Once everyone stops paying attention, the game ends. There’s no lingering need to return or feel like you’re missing out. This is very different from many modern games aimed at sticking in your mind.

On the other hand, Cow Clicker caught my attention due to Bogost’s critique. It’s not just that social games are shallow; they thrive with minimal gameplay. Cow Clicker reduces interaction to a single click every six hours. While this might seem silly, it’s a surprisingly effective satirical comment. The game doesn’t require deep involvement or focus; it just wants a spot in your daily routine. You are not really “playing” the game; you’re more like checking in.

Things become more complex when social mechanics are included. Games like FarmVille treat friends as resources instead of players. A friend becomes someone who can send energy, unlock progress, or fulfill a request you feel you should return. While these interactions are technically social, they become mere exchanges. This subtly pressures players to maintain connections that benefit the game, reflecting broader trends in the attention economy where social interaction is something to optimize.

A troubling aspect of these systems is how they blur the lines between game time and real life. Social games rarely require long play sessions, but they never really let you go. Timers, cooldowns, and notifications keep the game running in the background, making it feel less like a choice and more like a constant obligation.

So, considering all of this, I don’t think the issue is whether games have endings. It’s more about how they manage the player’s attention and time. Cow Clicker shows how easily attention can be drawn with minimal interaction, while Calvinball illustrates what it’s like when play occurs only in the present. Games like Townscaper suggest that endlessness doesn’t have to be exploitative. This week made me view motivation less as engagement and more as responsibility.

• Questions:
  • What are the issues Ian Bogost raises about social games with Cow Clicker?

Bogost made Cow Clicker as a satire to express how we view the core problems of social games. He made the argument that many of these games are too shallow, exploitive, and manipulative, which makes the game less meaningful on the gameplay aspect and more on keeping players engaged through them clicking their screen repetitively. Cow Clickers strip social games to the way players play. Clicking, waiting, sharing, to show how little interaction or creativity is being shown. Bogost is also critiquing the way in which games rely on artificial rewards, monetization tactics, and repetitive actions rather than actually playing the game. Which reveals how social games treat players as resources rather than the player

• How do social games like FarmVille enframe friends?

Bogost is arguing that social games like FarmVille turn friends into tools, rather than meaningful social connections. The friends are being enframed as resources, people you send requests to, receive bonus from, or use to unlock certain content. This reduces the friendship to the game’s actual mechanics. The value of a friend is measured by what they can provide in the game rather than by a real human connection

• How do social games destroy time outside of the game?

Social games interfere with people’s everyday lives by demanding that players constantly get on the game and play. From notifications and limited time rewards to players feel the need to return frequently, even when they’re not actually playing. Bogost argues that this is conflicting with our daily lives, for turning breaks, social moments, and downtime into a task they need to complete in the game. Rather than offering an escape, social games use real time to pull players back into the game, making it feel like an obligation of leisure.

• • Post thoughts on what we played in class

GETTING OVER IT

• – Was it fun? Yes, I enjoyed it and I could spend more time playing it.
• What were the player interactions? The player controlled a hammer which you used to propel yourself upward a mountain with obstacles in the way.
• How long did it take to learn? I still haven’t learned the controls, especially because I was on a track pad, but the concept was easy to understand.
• What was the most frustrating moment or aspect of what you just played? My lack of understanding of the controls made it difficult because that’s the whole premise of the game, if you don’t understand the controls you can’t progress in the game.
• What was your favorite moment or aspect of what you just played? I like the idea of failing and trying again, there’s no luck so you can hone your skills and get better.
• Was there anything you wanted to do that you couldn’t? I wanted to switch to an actual computer mouse, but didn’t have that opportunity.
• If you had a magic wand to wave, and you could change, add, or remove anything from the experience, what would it be? To be honest I don’t think I would change anything about the actual game. The whole point of the game is to be simple and difficult. I feel like adding stuff to the game would take away the goal of the developer.
• Is this a game you would play again? Yes ! I feel like I didn’t get enough time with the game and I want to play it more and actually make progress.
• Analyze the game using the 3 act structure.- Im not exactly sure, especially since they don’t actually have any character development but I guess you start at the bottom and the game ends when you get to the top.
• What are the collaborative and or competitive aspects of the game? Since theres no NPC’s or multiplayer its only posible to collaborate with yourself and get better. The competiton is with the player and themselves, if they fail in game they fail themselves. Its a mental battle about trying again.
• What is the game’s metaphor and which of the game’s mechanics standout? Not sure about the metaphor I only played for a bit but I’d say its about not giving up and trying again. The mechanics are super simple with only 1 form of control and I think thats what makes it standout.
• Describe the game in 3 sentences or in the form of a haiku.-

A difficult game

You will fail and try again

Skills grow as times pass

CALVIN BALL

• Was it fun?

I didn’t have alot of fun, theres no actual game.

• What were the player interactions?

The players passed the ball and created the game themselves, I wouldn’t even credit the game as Calvin ball.

• How long did it take to learn?

Calvin Ball took 4 seconds to learn. Learning the other players’ rules is what took some time to understand.

• What was the most frustrating moment or aspect of what you just played?

When Mason (me) made a rule, he instantly won the game. The game’s structure is flawed from the start.

• What was your favorite moment or aspect of what you just played?

I like it when people aren’t specific with rules and you think outside the box to get past those rules.

• Was there anything you wanted to do that you couldn’t?

Not really, you can do whatever you want in this game.

• If you had a magic wand to wave, and you could change, add, or remove anything from the experience, what would it be?

I would have some kind of structure for the kind of rules that are made, but then again that takes away from the freedom of the game.

• Is this a game you would play again? Not unless I was extremely bored. I’d play rock paper scissors before this game. The game can literally end on the first turn.

• Analyze the game using the 3 act structure.

Theres not a clear act structure but I guess it would come with adding more rules as the game goes on until the game is over.

• What are the collaborative and or competitive aspects of the game?

The competition is against the people youre playing with and the collaboration comes from trying to make a fair and fun game with the other players.

• What is the game’s metaphor and which of the game’s mechanics standout?

I guess the metaphor has something to do with giving the players complete freedom. The game’s mechanics standout because there are none lol.

• Describe the game in 3 sentences or in the form of a haiku.

I dont like this game

there is no structure to follow

there are better games

• TOWNSCRAPER
• Was it fun?

I didn’t play it but I don’t think it looks very fun.

• What were the player interactions?

The player clicked the screen and could either make a building or destroy it.

• How long did it take to learn?

Not very long because there are only 2 things you can do.

• What was the most frustrating moment or aspect of what you just played?

I think I would get bored after 2 minutes with just clicking the screen.

• What was your favorite moment or aspect of what you just played?

I guess the best part of the game would be the noises and not even the gameplay.

• Was there anything you wanted to do that you couldn’t?

Have more options for buildings and structure.

• If you had a magic wand to wave, and you could change, add, or remove anything from the experience, what would it be?

I would add different kinds of builidings, new terrain so you dont just build over the ocean and could maybe go underground.

• Is this a game you would play again? Nope. It doesn’t seem fun and I think there are way better options.

• Analyze the game using the 3 act structure.

1. Start over the water
2. Make a cute little city
3. keep making that cute city cause the game doesn’t end

• What are the collaborative and or competitive aspects of the game?

Actual no competition anywhere, you collaborate with yourself and your creative mind to keep clicking the same button.

• What is the game’s metaphor and which of the game’s mechanics standout?

The metaphor is to never be satisfied and always want more, probably. The mechanics stand out because they’re extremly simple.

• Describe the game in 3 sentences or in the form of a haiku.

super simple game

click and click and click and click

the city grows large

• Read/Play: Cow Clicker, http://bogost.com/writing/blog/cow_clicker_1/, The Graveyard, Townscaper https://youtu.be/hqq25n6cQqo?si=leLV3KMoWNIXzbaM

• Questions:
  • What are the issues Ian Bogost raises about social games with Cow Clicker?

Bogost brings up the point of how simple and absent-minded games nowadays are. People will absent mindedly click their screens in order to get “rewards” that help you click more. He then mentions microtransactions that just let the user click more. There’s no skill or story, it’s just clicking.

• How do social games like FarmVille enframe friends?

Farmville-like games use your friends to their own benefit. They have you invite friends to play the game so the player can get rewards. The rewards are miniscule and you can’t even play with your friends, you can just send them some materials and thats it. They didn’t make the game for you and your friends, they made the feature to have you get more people to play their game.

• How do social games destroy time outside of the game?

They destroy time outside the game because you constantly need to log on to collect the rewards, or else you can progress. Most games you can get on once a day and play for a little bit and still progress, but in these social games like farmville you have to log on every couple of hours to collect resources and progress in the game.

Aleah Dudek

• What are the issues Ian Bogost raises about social games with Cow Clicker?

Bogost created Cow Clicker to reveal how shallow and exploitative many social games are by intentionally designing a game built around meaningless interaction, where the core mechanic, clicking a cow, has no real purpose or depth, mirroring how many social games rely on repetitive, low-effort actions instead of meaningful gameplay. He argues that these games prioritize manipulation over fun, using addiction loops, notifications, and artificial rewards to keep players engaged rather than genuinely entertained, while also emphasizing monetization as design, where progress is often locked behind payments and the primary goal becomes extracting money instead of offering creative or emotional experiences. Ultimately, Cow Clicker demonstrates the automation of play, where players are no longer truly playing but performing routine tasks like workers in a system, making the game intentionally boring to expose how many popular social games are already boring, just disguised as fun.

• How do social games like FarmVille enframe friends?

Bogost argues that social games enframe friends by turning real human relationships into tools for the game system, where friends become resources rather than people. Players interact with them mainly to send requests, gain bonuses, or unlock items, reducing social interaction to spam and obligation instead of genuine connection. Rather than communicating with friends out of care or interest, players message them because the game requires it, transforming friendship into a mechanic and making one’s social network part of the game’s infrastructure.

• How do social games destroy time outside of the game?
• Bogost claims that social games don’t just take time, they colonize it by operating in real-world schedules that force players to structure their lives around the game, creating a state of constant half-playing where users are always thinking about logging in, checking notifications, and feeling pressure not to fall behind. Instead of being a contained activity, social games bleed into daily life, fragmenting attention and turning free time into a continuous background obligation.

1. Ian Bogost issues with cow clickers is the are addicting and time wasting because they always want to keep clicking instead of being engaging with another activity.
2. Games like Farmville enframe friends because you can change what happens to your farm and people will see and if someone doesn’t, they will feel out of place, and no one likes to feel that way or have FOMO or fear of missing out
3. Social games do destroy the social aspect because you’re on your phone I think non electronical social games like card games and board games are okay but other than that social games are not really the greatest I play a lot of single player games where i can play with friends which I do but also I can play solo and have no issue with it.