"매 argument 의 made not by words, but by rules". Ian Bogost 의 Persuasive Games (2007) 의 coined — 매 systems/processes/simulations 의 medium 의 argumentation. 2026 의 LLM-driven dynamic narrative + simulation games (Civ VII, FrostPunk 2) 의 procedural rhetoric 의 mainstream.
Argument: "Bureaucracy dehumanizes"
Mechanic: Time pressure + paperwork + small reward for thoroughness, big penalty for missing detail
Result: Player feels the dehumanization rather than reads about it
→ Papers, Please
Resource scarcity as ideology
Argument: "Survival justifies authoritarianism"
Mechanic: Heat ↓ over time, citizens demand law book, only authoritarian laws prevent extinction
Result: Player chooses oppression "rationally"
→ FrostPunk
Simplification as critique
// Climate simulator: emissions only knob
// By omitting "carbon offsets", "green tech", argues these are insufficient distractions
consttempAtYear=(year: number,emissions: number)=>baseline+emissions*year*sensitivity;// What's missing IS the rhetoric
LLM-driven NPC dialogue (2026)
// Inworld-style: NPC values encoded as system prompt + memory
// The game's argument now adapts to player — emergent procedural rhetoric
constnpcPrompt=`
You are a refugee in an unnamed conflict.
Your values: family safety > nation > ideology.
You distrust both sides equally.
Respond based on the player's prior actions: ${recentActions.join(', ')}.
`;// The NPC's reactive logic IS the rhetorical move
Failure state as moral
Lose condition: Empire collapses if happiness < 50%
Encoded argument: "Subject welfare is instrumentally necessary, not intrinsically valued"
vs.
Lose condition: Game ends when one citizen dies
Encoded argument: "Each person has infinite worth"
Reward loop as ethics
Reward: +XP per enemy killed
Argument (unintended): violence is the path to progress
Reward: +XP per peaceful resolution
Argument: dialogue valued
→ Designers encode ethics whether they intend to or not
Counter-rhetoric (anti-game)
Players expect: shooter rewards aggression
Anti-game: every kill ages your character +1 year, game ends at 100
→ Mechanic refutes the genre's implicit argument
매 결정 기준
상황
Approach
Educational claim
Simulate causal model, let player explore
Empathy goal
Constrain player to NPC perspective
Critique of system
Make player IS the system, feel its pressures
Information delivery
Verbal/visual still better for facts
Complex policy
Procedural model + verbal scaffolding
기본값: identify the felt experience the player should have, design mechanics that produce it, then verify via playtest.
언제: analyze a game's procedural argument, brainstorm mechanics that embody a thesis, generate playtest probes.
언제 X: never collapse procedural rhetoric to "narrative" — the rules ARE the argument.
❌ 안티패턴
Skin over substance: stick a "climate change" theme on standard mechanics — argument absent.
Sermon mechanic: the only "right" choice — no agency, weak rhetoric.
Unintended argument: reward loop says A while writing says B — players believe the loop.
Antigravity Agent