Why chaotic evil choices matter in educational games
Introduction: a bit of self-promotion
Great news: the proof of concept for our video game, Influencer Solitaire, is online since February, and we’ve been enriching it since then.
You can test it from a computer by visiting: https://yuzupulse.itch.io/pixelmedia-videogame
Insights from our first activities with students and educators
Since the end of February, project partners have launched the testing phase for our resources, in particular for the video game.
These tests are conducted with educators (in formal and non-formal education, in training) and learners (students in high school and university, youth aged 16-30 in formal and non-formal education).
These tests allow us not only to measure to what extent the game is adapted to teaching media literacy, but also to gather feedback on what features work, and which ones work less.
Hey, what’s the game about?
‘Play your cards and dice well to become an influencer! Start as nobody and choose your actions wisely to climb up the influence ladder.’
In this cosy card game, choose all your actions and see your visibility rank climb day after day to become the very best, like no one ever was.
You can choose to make lawful good choices and refuse to spread fake news, or make chaotic evil choices by farming haters in community for all the visibility that they bring.
While there are winning and losing conditions, they are not tied to your morality.
In this article, we make the case for offering chaotic evil choices in educational games.
5 reasons why chaotic evil choices matter in educational game
Freedom to play
If your learners feel that a behaviour is expected in a game, and that is resembles what they do in class, the game might end up feeling too much like a disguised quiz. Offering the temptation of morally grey or dark choices is a good way not only to give some spice to the game, but also for your players to feel free to make their own choices.
This sense of freedom fosters the learners’ feeling of agency, which in turn strengthens Agency reinforces motivation
their motivation. If the game offers several ways to achieve a goal, it can tap into players’ creativity and curiosity to create their own path, or to try one and to exploit it.
Maybe they’ll try and fire up haters and spread fake news to get those easy views. If we’ve done things well, then this strategy will come with its own challenges and sanctions.
(Keep in mind we’re continuing to balance the game until this summer)
In game vs IRL behaviour
Players know how to make the difference between what they do in a game and how they behave in real life. In the real world, we make choices to the best of our information at the time of make the decision. In a game, we can experiment, and try some things… just because we can.
Comparing players’ diverse choices
Different players will explore different ways of playing. Some will focus on being morally good, others on trying to make all the morally worst decisions, and others will simply optimise their metrics and results.
This gives you as an educator a fantastic opportunity to let players present how they made their choices, and to discuss how that would translate in real life.
Increases participation in the pedagogical activity
Thanks to this discussion, you can also open the conversation up to let your learners share what they see in their own media and online realities. This allows you to discover what matters to them, how to best complete their media literacy education, and, more importantly, to identify what could motivate them to get informed in a better way.
The world isn’t good or bad
Yes that’s a sixth reason, maybe we’re a bit chaotic ourselves.
Our world is complex, layered, and full of contradictions. Good things happen every day, and so do bad ones. The same is true online: the internet can be a place of connection, creativity, and learning (but it can also be a space where harmful, misleading, or dangerous things occur!).
As educators, we can’t afford to look away from that complexity. In fact, looking at it directly is one of the most valuable things we can do with learners. Examining the things we don’t want to happen (the risks, the mistakes, the dark corners) gives students the tools to recognise them, think critically about them, and know how to respond.
Analysing difficult or negative examples isn’t about scaring anyone. It’s about building real awareness. Because a learner who has never been invited to think about what can go wrong is far less prepared than one who has.