|
SBrianZ's 1979 Revolution: Black Friday (PC)
|
| [March 28, 2018 11:50:30 PM]
|
In my final session, one key game-play aspect really interested and surprised me. This small feature was the the developing of photos in a black room. The game keeps tracks of the amount of photos you take during a certain event, and leaves blank spaces on a roll of film when you forgot to take a certain photo. The game has certain requests when developing film.
One request was to find the photo of where another character, Abbas, gets stabbed. It seems that the game prompts the chance that while you are in certain events. You may miss photos and impact the story. The camera you use helps you progress the story through different ways, in this case it was solving a crime. I originally thought that this game was just going to be point-and-click, but I was completely wrong. Another sort of feature that is similar to the photo system, is also with collectibles you notice on the street. Examples include Abbas' wallet and the knife that stabbed him.
These sort of situations are quite different in the case of choosing to be good. Now the choice of lying arises. In the photo scenario, you could have easily pointed out a photo that had nothing to do with Abbas' stabbing. In this case you could thwart the case. Sure, telling the truth is more favorable then lying to those that we believe are good. You even had the option to pick anyone within the group that you believed to be the man who stabbed Abbas. In this case, that character dies. I wonder if any of the characters actually stabbed Abbas. Maybe none of them did, and this result was just "fake freewill".
The game is interesting. I really do want to write about this idea of decision making, and how a game can force you to pick a certain answer through ethical and moral presentation.
read comments (1)  -
add a comment 
|
| [March 27, 2018 06:14:12 PM]
|
In this session. The game starts with a student named Bibi leading a portion of the Iranian protest and revolution against the shah, as well as another speaker, Abbas. You document this process, and meet the parties leader for the revolution, we also meet one of the leading members of the more violent protest. This is where the game gets interesting.
You as the player get to decide how you want to handle your dissidents and protest against the shah and his military police. You as the player get to decide with violence or peace.
As previously mentioned, I talked about "empty free will" being a possible aspect of gameplay. That your actions may have some sort of impact on the gameplay, but not severely. The decision of throwing rocks at soldiers seems to have no effect on the game itself for the player other then relationships, but I will see further on. When games have these situations, it seems to send a message to the player that your moral decisions are equal and unimportant. That the decision between the two having the exact same result means that they don't matter. An example of this is seen when the player has the option to throw rocks at the military police. When this situation arises, the only sort of thing that gets effected seems to be relationships, rather then a more serious outcome.
Their are also different kinds of events that actually appear to have an impact in the game. Abbas, a leader of the peaceful protest gets stabbed during a skirmish and commotion between the military police and the citizens. If you fail to save Abbas and treat his wounds, he will die. I'm assuming that if this character dies then the game will change and different interactions will not be present. This sort of interaction though seems a bit interesting since it makes the player feel like they are forced to save Abbas. Even though we as the player have the choice to not save a life, we morally will. We kind of feel as if the game is forcing us to be a "good person" to save this characters life. The decisions feel more as good v.s bad, instead of good v.s good.
I wonder if in the next session, the forced decision situations will feel more like good v.s good, instead of good v.s evil.
add a comment
|
| [March 26, 2018 11:25:45 PM]
|
Before even starting the game. I was quite intrigued to see that this piece of work is based on real events and real people. I'm familiar with these types of games involving this sort of subject matter, such as games about the Syrian refugee crisis.
At the beginning of the game we learn that this game takes place during the U.S. hostage situation in Iran. We start off in a photo room developing film and attempting to escape from the Iranian military police. The game-play has tell-tale vibes, with each action you make, your story changes. I kind of wonder how many options can split from one decision, or if this is some sort of empty "free-will".
After getting captured by the police. We meet Mr. Shirazi, being threatened by a corrupt higher up within the Iranian police department. Mr. Shirazi is the supportable cause of the Iranian revolution and the overthrow of the Shah.
By having this sort of beginning scene where our character is being beaten while ropes are tied around his wrists is an easy way to define who is good and evil in a sense. Who is the "protagonist" and who is the "antagonist". It's this sort of ethical consensus that we as players make when we see the "weak and defenseless" get harassed.
The game also has this interesting feature where you play as the man who photographed an documented the Iranian revolution. These photos you take within the game are then compared with the actual photos that were taken. This sort of collectible is like an educational reward for the player. It seems like the goal of the game so far is to try to recreate history in a way since they reward you with historical information and context.
The game also seems to cover topics such as fake news, world politics, and knowledge of Iranian culture.
The game is quite interesting. I look forward to continue playing.
add a comment
|
|
|
 |
SBrianZ's 1979 Revolution: Black Friday (PC)
|
|
Current Status: Playing
GameLog started on: Monday 26 March, 2018
|
|
