We are Chicago is a dialogue driven game where you play as Aaron, a
black high school student living in Chicago’s South Side. Aaron is trying to
graduate high school and attend college whilst trying to take care of his
family, stay safe, and avoid crime.
Whilst I highly respect the developer’s passion regarding this important
subject matter, the execution of the game leaves much to be desired. From a
technical standpoint, there are many bugs and glitches. The simplicity of the
graphics, particularly in scenes where there are gunshots or death, almost
forces a comical tone on what is meant to be a serious and grave event.
However, what I found to be the most problematic aspect of We are Chicago
would have to be the absence of consequences. Regardless of the actions and
interactions you choose to make throughout the game, the entire story, and most
importantly the ending, remained the same. Justin’s death is ultimately unavoidable.
The insignificance of the player’s decisions detracts from my immersion in
the game the most. From a game development perspective, it certainly feels a
little lazy (particularly for a narrative driven game priced at $14.99) to not
include at least some variety in the story’s ending. It makes me question whether
the interactive medium of video games is particularly fitting. As mentioned
earlier, the technical shortcomings of We are Chicago made it difficult
for me to truly appreciate the gravity of the story it was trying to tell. Perhaps
a documentary, article, or novel might be more impactful in delivering a
clearer learning experience of the lives of South Side residents. The
interactivity adds very little to the subject matter, due to the technical
shortcomings and one-dimensional narrative. The developers had a good
inspiration for the game but seemed to lack in other fundamental aspects of the
game design process. It makes me wonder whether any play testing was conducted
either. For such a short game, a fairly brief play test session should unearth many
of the flaws rooted in the player’s experience of the game.
Furthermore, Adichie’s “The Danger of a Single Story” also got me
thinking about the message that the one-track story line delivers to the
player. The inevitable ending of Justin’s death seems to deliver a singular negative
message. In We are Chicago, the danger of impressing a ‘single story’
upon the player is that it might reinforce stereotypes of crime and violence.
Whilst this is most definitely a significant problem in Chicago’s South Side, it
shouldn’t overshadow the positive stories that I’m sure many of the residents
have to tell. Balancing positive and negative outcomes by offering multiple endings
would surely illustrate a more holistic picture of life in Chicago’s South
Side.
With all this being said, I think the most important comments and feedback
for this game can only come from South Side residents themselves. It would be
interesting to know whether developers recruited any play testers who are South
Side residents. Afterall, it is their story to tell and they deserve to have an
input in how it is told.
We are Chicago and the absence of consequences
Well articulated! I really didn’t like how the developers are explicitly “sending a message” to the audience about how South Side Chicago ought to be. This also reminds me a lot about our discussions in class on serious/educational games, and how embedded narratives could serve the story better than forcefully gamifying a different medium. And as you said, this story could very well be better realized as a movie/book/etc.
Your thoughts here made me consider that it’s interesting to dissect the implications of making games “based on real life” as directly as this one. The point of We Are Chicago is nearly explicitly to provide insight into one possible person’s life from the South Side and the choices that they might face, but how much can a game really be representative of life- and what does it mean to game-ify lived experiences like this? My first instinct is that problems may arise from the fact that the stakes of any video game, no matter how well designed, can’t really measure up to the stakes of a lived situation unless the game actually reaches into your life beyond the playing experience. I think it’s proportionally a lot easier to make hard decisions in video games, when filtering out consequences we don’t care as much about can only weakly be punished. I wonder, therefore, if representing an experience (in this case, one type of experience on the Chicago South Side) through a video game to an “outsider” can actually diminish the feeling of importance of those stakes to some players, since they were able to see the previously unaccessed space in some sense and be active in it, but without the stakes those in the actual lived experience face, due to the inherent nature of gaming (and game-ifying).
I very much agree with you. When I saw the small pieces of text that said something like “x will remember this.” I thought my selections would change the outcome of the game and possibly give me different endings. However, what I realized was that my action do not have any consequences. It almost seems as if the developers of We Are Chicago very enthusiastic and motivated during the early stages of development, but lost it in the later stages and decided to make only one ending.