I may be a little slow on the draw here, but the end of January brought about some major improvements to one of the best titles in the category of ‘Editorial Games,’ Harpooned. The game was created by Conor O’Kane in an attempt to bring attention to Japanese ‘research’ companies hunting whales in the antarctic waters south of Australia. In an article Conor wrote for Gamasutra he shared his reasoning:

Whaling is big news here in Australia. Every December when the Japanese whaling fleet passes by Australia to hunt in the southern ocean, we see footage on the television and read about it in the local newspapers. This is largely due to Australia’s interest in whale watching as a form of tourism, and also because Japan kills whales in and around the Australian Antarctic Territory.

So it’s a controversial and emotional issue in Australia, however for the rest of the world it’s not newsworthy and I suppose most people never give it a thought. I decided to make a game about whaling and specifically about Japan’s claim that their whaling is scientific, to draw international attention to the issue. Games have the ability to reach a younger and broader audience than newspapers or television and a game distributed on the Internet can have a truly international impact.

So my objectives in making Harpooned were:

* To draw international attention to Japan’s claim that their whaling program is scientific, not commercial.
* To reach people who would not normally read a newspaper article about whaling.
* To encourage debate and discussion on the subject.

So that is his objective, but did he pull it off?

When starting up the game you are presented with the full title, Harpooned: Japanese Cetacean Research Simulator. This sets the theme of the game. You now know you play the part of a Japanese Whale Researcher. That is your role.

Once in the game, you play in classic vertical scrolling shooter fashion. Your character is a ship that shoots harpoons at defenseless whales. The game features a number of different whales. Noticeably, there there are humpbacks, sperm whales and several others. The goal is to research whales by killing them and harvesting the meat. The game really makes this rewarding as the waters fill with blood as the whales take more damage and eventually explode into a spray of blood and chunks of meat you are supposed to collect.

Its not all fun and harpoons though. There are protesters that try to get in your way or cause damage to your ship. As of this latest update, you can now capture these protesters to get them out of your way.

“But where does the research come in?” you may be asking. It comes in during the messages presented by the game. At the beginning you are told to research whales. As the game progresses you meet up with the primary research vessel and transfer all the meat to it. The research vessel then researches the meat and uses that research to create pet food, whale burgers and cosmetics. After each unloading, you are presented with another research objective such as “The whales seem to be afraid of our vessels. Kill more to find out why.” Other messages mention that whales are dropping in number and you must kill more to find out why.

As the player makes it to the high scores list, they are added to a list of top “scientists.” The latest updates bring this high scores list online to share with everyone. Unfortunately, I was unable to make it on the list during my short play through. Finally, this latest update brings the game to the Mac. So all you Mac fans can finally enjoy researching whales like everyone else.

As for my claim that this is the best ‘Editorial Game’ out there, it is. Most games that attempt to make a political or editorial statement, fail horribly. They often are nothing more than a glorified “whack a mole” clone. Every now and then a decent one comes out, but this one puts them all to shame. Firstly, it has a message that transcends time and location. Secondly it is fun to play more than once. Finally and most important, it gets people talking.

Back to that Gamasutra article, Conor lists the types of responses he got:

The public response to the game fell into 4 basic categories:

1. People who played the game, got the message and approved. This made up around 90% of the responses.

2. People who were appalled by the blood and didn’t play the game. These were often the most vocal responses, and invariably they were opposed to whaling, but didn’t realise that the game was satirical. These were a very small, but vocal minority.

3. Young males who were attracted to the game because it was violent. Often they didn’t notice or care about the message within the game at first. However this group are internet-savvy. They like to post their impressions online and read other people’s comments. I was delighted to see many in this group who started to engage in serious discussion about whaling, after at first only being attracted to the game because of the blood and gore.

4. Pro-whaling responses from English speaking Japanese people. Usually these were along the lines of “Australians kill kangaroos, so you can’t tell us what we can or can’t kill”, “Whaling is our traditional right” or “If we don’t kill the whales they will eat all our fish”. I have had some very interesting discussions with these people and I’m grateful for those who have taken the time to present their side of the story.

I enjoyed playing the game and think that Conor picked the right avenue for his message. I also hope that those who decide to make other ‘editorial games’ will learn from this game and make something just as good if not better. There is a world of possibilities and potential for this genre of games.

No related posts.

Of the many complaints aired one was from Davis Mirza, a teacher at Pauline Johnson Junior Public School:

‘My kids, who come from a lot of different countries, who have to experience violence, who basically come here to seek shelter and safety, that’s the stuff they don’t need to see.’

This and the many other complaints voiced caused Sony to make the decision to have the ads pulled a week ahead of their normal schedule.

Sony has since made the decision to not allow any ads for their games to be placed within a certain distance from schools. What that distance is has not been determined.This has also brought up other concerns over whether Sony has a right to place their ads anywhere they choose as well as how far is far enough.

Canadian games are rated using the ESRB and are thus under the contractual guidelines of the ESRB advertising practices. According to these guidelines:

‘Companies must not specifically target advertising for entertainment software products rated “Teen,” “Mature” or “Adults Only” to consumers for whom the product is not rated as appropriate.’

According to this guideline, having an ad for an M rated game such as Killzone 2 on a bus stop next to a school would be in violation of the agreement they made with the ESRB. Judging by this policy and Sony’s actions it would be wise for any publisher to follow suit.

One other concern that may come up is recent bannings involving M rated games advertised on the sides of buses. In those instances the transit authorities were the ones making the decision to ban those ads and by all accounts wrong in that decision. First they banned M rated games from being advertised but still allow R rated movies and MA-17 rated TV shows to be advertised. Secondly, those ads were placed on moving vehicles that would possibly be seen by more adults than children.

This is an instance of Sony doing the pulling and making the guidelines of where their ads can be placed after determining that the ads were placed too close to schools. They have every right to make such a decision.

No related posts.