Resolved: Video Games should not have sequels as a matter of principle

Note: Because I have the luxury of making refutations/defenses last, I will only post my case here, in true PF debate style. Framework First, I shall offer a framework for the round based on an analysis of the resolution and debate theory. Following established theory in debate, the burden of proof (BOP) rests entirely on Pro with this resolution, as he is attempting to defend a positive, active proposition: that video games should not have sequels as a matter of principle. In other words, he is arguing that by principle video games should, actively, not have sequels due to a principle. What this means is that when judging the debate, you should not frame it such that I am defending the proposition that video games should have sequels, but rather that I am simply negating the proposition offered by Pro. In other words, it is my position that video games should not necessarily not have sequels as a matter of principle. Looking to the resolution, we can see that the resolution specifies that video games should not have sequels based on principle. Following the definition of principle, as a rule, and applying it to the video game industry itself, the following framework can be given by which to judge the debate: unless Pro can prove that the video game industry should not make sequels for video games across the board (and thereby following the rule governing its behavior, as the definition of “principle,” stipulates), Pro has not fulfilled his BOP and upheld the resolution in its entirety, and therefore cannot win the debate. However, even though the BOP for this debate, as above analysis reflects, is on Pro, I offer the following contentions to support negation of the resolution. Contention 1a - Video games are an art form and should be treated as such. Although the debate about the artistic merit of video games has raged on for years, the fact of the matter is that it is becoming more and more conclusive, despite the arguments raised by critics such as the late Roger Ebert, that video games are definitively a form of art and artistic expression, with more and more outside sources agreeing. In May of 2011, for example, the National Endowment for the Arts made video games eligible for artistic funding, essentially establishing legal precedent for video games as art [1]. Further, in a decision made only a month later by the Supreme Court of the United States secured the status of video games as a protected form of expression under the First Amendment [2]. Clearly, externally, games are becoming accepted as art. However, even within the video game community, games are becoming widely hailed as artistic, as an article from Game Informer demonstrates, with eight games discussed in detail as examples of art [3]. In short, video games are art, and due to their status, they should be valued as art. Contention 1b - Art uses sequels effectively, and the same can be said for video games. But, to the point of the resolution, sequels are used widely within the artistic world quite effectively, to develop themes more effectively. For instance, in JK Rowling’s Harry Potter series, she uses a total of 7 books, 6 sequels, to create not only a generally acclaimed large story arc, but to create things such as nuanced characterization and development of themes like love and death, all while developing her use of The Hero’s Cycle. The animated film studio Pixar developed a highly emotional and heartwarming story with their Toy Story trilogy, developing in a similar fashion themes of acceptance and coming of age, while developing a large, epic story. And, video games being an art form should be allowed the same liberties as other art forms. Further, there are myriad examples of video game sequels that are artistically meritous and effective. Irrational’s BioShock 2 (B2) and BioShock: Infinite (B3) expand on the themes of BioShock (B1), touching on themes such as choice, free will, even indirectly criticizing the nature of games themselves. B2 in particular also offers a rounding-out of B1’s criticism of political extremism, going from the Objectivist dystopia in B1 to a collectivist nightmare in B2, with B3 rounding it out further with an indictment of nationalism. Rockstar’s Red Dead Redemption too was effective as a spiritual sequel to Red Dead Revolver, even rivaling the quality of the first game. Essentially, the impact we see by affirming the resolution is that games no longer would be able to fulfill their full value as an artistic medium, which is detrimental to the nature of games itself. Contention 2a - Video game sequels allow for a wider audience to be attracted to an IP over time. With the release of every Call of Duty game, the multiplayer community for COD has grown and grown, even garnering the attention of local news outlets about midnight release parties. And, with the release of Black Ops II, the most recent installment, the statistics are staggering. At the time of this writing, there have been over 147 billion kills in BOII multiplayer [4]. That is a staggering number that shows a truly large group of players. And, at the launch of Blizzard’s World of Warcraft expansion (a sequel under the definition, expanding the original WoW) Mists of Pandaria, there were over 10 million subscribers to play WoW [5]. This, too, is staggering. To make it short, when successful games have sequels, they also serve a function of drawing in gamers, which is in and of itself a positive impact. Contention 2b - A large audience engenders a large sense of community. But there is also another positive impact to video game sequels. As sequels bring in more gamers, a greater sense of community and dedication is engendered among them. This can be seen following the example of WoW. At BlizzCon 2011, a convention for Blizzard and WoW fans, attendance reached about 27,000 attendees [6]. This clearly reflects a level of growing dedication among fans for games, which can be tied to the growing number of fans that came about as a result of sequels offering more time for fans to flock to IPs. This too is a highly positive impact of sequels. Not only do sequels offer the time to attract more gamers, but it also increases dedication and a sense of community, as evidenced with the thousands of WoW fans in attendance at BlizzCon. Conclusion And so, judges, when looking to this round, you must bear the framework in mind, with Pro carrying the BOP, as well as the specific framework mentioned in that section. However, there are also reasons to negate as well, namely that affirming the resolution denies video games the artistic liberties that they should inherently have as an art form, affirming the resolution reduces the flow of new gamers to the gaming community that sequels offer an opportunity for, and stemming from this, the flow of gamers fosters a stronger sense of community among gamers as well. Thus, the resolution is negated. References [1] http://www.escapistmagazine.com... [2] http://techland.time.com... [3] http://www.gameinformer.com... [4] http://elite.callofduty.com... [5] http://wow.joystiq.com... [6] http://trade-shows.findthebest.com...