Gamification is an interesting idea. Take something boring or serious and add elements of a game so that people…care about it more? Or are at least aware of the issues at hand. This seems to be what Phone Story tries to do, by narrating the tragedies associated with the creation of the device it is meant to be played on. The games themselves are straight-forward adaptations of common flash games: a clicker, a catching/bouncing game like Brick Breaker, a slingshot/ catapult game, and a drag-and-drop game. These types of games don’t tend to hold people’s attention for long as they’re just not that fun compared to the multitude of other things we can do with our phones. But they don’t need to be, because fun isn’t the point. Phone Story is a perfect display of using games as means to an end. The plot could very easily be a short film, documentary, or video, and the graphics would likely be more powerful than the 8-bit-like guards whose mouths are either open or closed (when they’re closed, it looks like they’re smiling). It could have even been a visual novel where you actually learn a character’s name. But the gamification seems to have two main purposes: holding your attention for just long enough and forcing the issue of complicity. The simple games are easy and familiar, and because of that they hold your attention just long enough for the narrator to get through their script (and even if you weren’t paying attention, you subconsciously heard it). The simplicity also frustrates the player and makes them want to play again because the level seems like it should be beatable. Forcing the issue of complicity is more complicated. Everyone with a smart phone has in some way contributed to the issue of global exploitation that is the central theme, but realizing this in a different medium, say film, allows the viewer to say “I was complicit in this, but I won’t be anymore” for a few days until their guilt subsides and they purchase a new IPhone. Telling us that we are complicit while using our phones and playing the role of an enabler/enforcer/worker, gives much less room to dodge (as the cute green face loves reminding us). In this way, it’s a smart game; but there are some issues.
There are several dangers to gamification, but I want to talk about two here specifically. Games based on serious topics should never be geared towards, or played by people who already care about those topics. This is an extension of the psychological principle that you don’t reward someone for doing something they enjoy (e.g. getting ice cream every time your child finishes a book, when they already enjoy reading). The brain will slowly stop associating the task with pure enjoyment, and instead begin viewing it as a means to gain a reward. Similarly, playing simple (I assume complex games requiring deep thought don’t do this) games about a topic you care about may erode the initial passion about the subject and replace it with a drive to have more fun. The second is trivialization, and this one applies more specifically to Phone Story. The reason why this inhumane system of global exploitation is so devastating is because it ties together other large societal issues such as child labor, suicide, rampant consumerism, and overwhelming capitalism. Phone Story subjugates these issues and uses them as a tool to force you to care about this bigger issue, but in doing so glosses over them, minimizes them. Suicide becomes a cute little game about catching bodies falling from buildings just entertaining enough so that the user can ignore the two-minute narrative. Sometimes it’s okay to use games as a tool, but it should not be okay to use human lives as a tool (ironically, just like smartphone makers do).
Comments