top of page
Search
Steven Wyman

The Dangers of the ARG

I was very interested in the alternate reality game, especially because it isn’t something I’m familiar with at all. There are tons of interesting aspects of this media form that could be explored, but what struck me most about the ARG was the “This Is Not A Game” aesthetic, and it’s interesting ethical implications.

As described in the S.E.E.D. reading, this aesthetic practice refuses to acknowledge the game’s fictional nature, instead insisting that the events of the narrative are real. While the efficacy of this deception is open to debate (how many students actually believed they were getting messages from the future?), I am more interested in examining the nature and ethics of this undeniable deception, and the effects this might have on both the game and its participants.


Let’s start here: why is this form, also known as immersive gaming, a good thing? What does it achieve? Jane McGonigal, cited in the S.E.E.D. reading, seems to argue that by blurring the line between reality and fiction, a game can provide players with a greater sense of political agency and accomplishment, because in-game achievements will seem to have real impact. In the examples we examined, it is argued that this can create a stronger sense of real world agency for players. However, it could just as easily be argued that the eventual, inevitable reveal (the “it was a game all along!” moment) would undo this sense of agency. It might even have the opposite of its intended effect: revealing that player achievements had no impact could create a sense of social impotence, because players worked so hard to achieve something that was ultimately meaningless.


Another potential issue I see is more fundamental: blurring the fiction/reality divide creates problems. In psychology, an inability to distinguish between reality and fiction is a textbook marker of serious mental illness. How dissimilar is that to the ‘real’ environment of an ARG? Surely people can understand that what is happening is a game, and is this fictional, but is that always the case? What if a player is convinced? Or multiple players? What if a narrative is so immersive and compelling that it drives players to drastic, unpredictable, dangerous action? Granted, I don’t know what safeguards might be put in place to prevent this, and based on the anecdote about the S.E.E.D. riot Patrick offered in class, it is clear that the team had ways to step in. Still, the criticism remains as something ARG developers MUST keep in mind, unless they plan on re-enacting the 1997 Michael Douglas thriller The Game.


Still, I do understand the appeal, especially as an escapism addict. Reality sucks, and it’s nice to be occasionally free of it’s restraints, the more immersive the better. Perhaps my distrust of the ARG’s particular brand of deception is rooted in my own personal experience with the reality/fiction divide. Growing up with conservative parents in a rural area, I had to go to great lengths to prove to those around me that I remained capable of distinguishing between reality and fiction (no, my D&D books don’t advocate blood sacrifice, my Magic cards don’t contact demons, and playing Assassin’s Creed won’t make me murder people). In my experience, blurring that line can be dangerous, to both mental and physical health.

15 views3 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Digital Media and the Human Condition

As this is my final blog post in the final week of class, I feel like it is appropriate to think on the class as a whole. During our...

3 Comments


rissb
rissb
Nov 26, 2018

Ah, I see. I guess my perspective is that if their actions are taking place in real time with real motivation, they might still retain that sense of social agency. Like in the riot example, those students likely still felt like they enacted some change, since their actions did directly impact the rest of the game. Then again, they might not know that their actions did that. So I can also see how an ARG that paints a story about enacting real change might be problematized in that their actions towards a real-life issue would be fictional. But I do still think that the skills and experience and knowledge gained would also give them a kind of agency at the…

Like

Steven Wyman
Nov 26, 2018

Oh I agree that the experience is still absolutely worthwhile, for a variety of reasons. The McGonigal article cited in the reading was specifically arguing that blurring the line gave participants a sense of “social agency” (pretty sure that was the term), because the participants feel like their actions accomplish something real. So for example, Patrick talked in class about how the players wanted to organize a riot, and how they turned that into a non-violent demonstration, which is an awesome teaching moment. But it seems at least possible that, if the players are organizing based on the assumption that the events are real, the realization that they’ve been working to respond to fictional events may deject them. “I did…


Like

rissb
rissb
Nov 26, 2018

I think your perspective on the ARG is really interesting. I appreciate your note that this blurring could be a bit problematic, and I think the planners of an ARG should keep this in mind. In most cases though it does seem like the players would start to realize that they were a part of something planned, not something real. However, it would be cool to compare some ARGs that use the "This is Not a Game" aesthetic verses ones that immediately let the player know that they are part of a game to see what this aesthetic does for the player's outlook and participation.


I also want to challenge something you said. You argue that the eventual reveal of…

Like
bottom of page