Similarly to the Documentary and Soundmap projects, the key thing to note in the rubric is the idea that we must make an argument with our video game. Simply creating a neat set of hypertexts that tell some sort of story isn’t enough to show an understanding of the power of video games as a learning tool. From our readings, we’ve come to understand that video games can be used as rhetorical learning entities that influence gamers to think a certain way as they play the game. By making a game that doesn’t attempt to make a similar sort of argument, we would be defeating the purpose of the unit and failing to make video games that have academic value. Certain things, like how ‘fun’ the game is or how unique the storyline of the game is are probably not as relevant to the grading of the project. Instead, you’re probably looking more at the efficiently of which we’ve laid out the game. Given that not everyone is a creative mastermind, it’s probably more important to grade based off the effort put into the project than the creative intuitions of the game’s author. The reason that the rhetoric and the technical proficiency of the project are being graded more highly than the game’s originality is likely due to the fact that these are applicable features of writing that can be controlled by pretty much anyone. The purpose of the class isn’t to teach people skills they are not capable of obtaining, but to instill thought processes that can be applied to writing throughout any media. More so than both of our previous projects, writing in both a creative and technical manner is going to come into play for this one. By showing a solid rhetoric argument and putting in the amount of effort that is required to make the argument clear and concise, we will be able to show how we’ve better understood the power of writing as it can applied to even the most abstract of mediums.