SPENT is an interesting and socially/politically relevant video game as the whole premise of the game focuses on issues of unemployment, homelessness, and poverty. I can understand how the purpose of the game was to educate players on said issues not only through inclusion of statistics/fact, but also through an attempt to put the players in the shoes of those who struggle with these issues in the real world. Producing an interactive game is indeed much more compelling and immersive than just throwing facts and lecturing individuals on the issues at hand. And while the idea of simulating an experience to allow players to get a better idea of what it would be like to struggle through these issues is well-intentioned and seems effective, SPENT fails to provide the appropriate degree of complexity to match the gravity of these issues.
In reality, the simplicity of SPENT may come off as trivializing the struggles of unemployment, homelessness, and poverty. The lack consequences for certain options, such as getting too little groceries or ignoring your bills, fails to emulate the situation in which those in poverty are in, in which failing to do certain tasks would result in great consequences. When I first played SPENT, I was expecting for there to be consequences for choosing “cheaper” options. For example, at first I was afraid to hang up the call from Consumer Collections Corp about the overdue charges on my vehicle, thinking there would be immediate consequences if I did hang up. However, after I played a few times I realized there was no real consequence, but we are only hit with a fact that my vehicle could get repossessed as many people’s are in the real world.
Further, this lack of consequences is not only relevant in the financial decisions we need to make in the game, but also the personal decisions. There’s a major lack of moral and personal consequences for some of the “cheaper” options available. For example, the game’s lack of consequences for not exercising, ignoring your health problems, and sending your kid to school sick trivializes the potentially major effects these decisions would have in the real world. In addition, having situations testing your moral compass such as the one pertaining to chipping in to help your co-worker who is out sick or saving that $20, could have had a great potential to add a degree of complexity and realness to the game, but instead was left as just another option to click to save some money.
In addition to the lack of consequences, the lack of details again takes away from the ability of the game to really put the player in the shoes of those who struggle with these big issues. One major issue I found with the game was that I did not even know how old my child was, which became an issue when I was first figuring out how much groceries I should buy or if my child was old enough to be able to take care of themselves at home alone.
Overall, although the game is well-intentioned and had the potential to effectively educate and spark interest in individuals on the issues of poverty and unemployment, the lack of complexity in SPENT ended up taking away from the issues and giving players the opportunity to just take the “easy” route towards the end of the month by choosing all the “cheapest” options.
Comments