1 free read left. Create a free account for unlimited reading + AI research.
Create free accountArticle
G|A|M|E – The Italian Journal of Game Studies
The authors argue that most game code waits in a state of readiness for the player, drawing on Alexander Galloway's concept of the "ambience act" and Mckenzie Wark's reflections on boredom.
NorthPoint Courtesy Services is an experimental indie game and accompanying design essay by Daniel Cox and Matthew Beale of Old Dominion University, published in 2016 in a peer-reviewed games journal. The game inverts the first-person shooter genre by placing the player in the role of a job applicant who is gradually revealed to be a non-player character (NPC) awaiting execution by another player. Through mundane forms, reaction tests, and mini-games designed to mirror tutorials, the work critiques the ethics embedded in FPS design and the subservient, algorithmic position of the nameless enemies players routinely destroy. The authors explicitly frame their project as a reflection on player-centric ethics drawn from Miguel Sicart's writing on computer game ethics.
The design rests on a deliberate choice to privilege inaction over action. The authors draw on Alexander Galloway's concept of the "ambience act" and Mckenzie Wark's reflections on boredom to argue that most game code exists in a state of readiness, waiting for a player's arrival. The game's aesthetic, modeled on retail job-application kiosks, and its title, an acronym for NPCs, reinforce the theme that enemies are designed to succumb to the player. Limited player input, altered form responses, and predetermined outcomes all reinforce the sense that the player's choices are ultimately meaningless, a condition the authors present as a mirror of algorithmic agency.
The essay acknowledges several limitations, including a short length that could have included additional documentation screens and mini-games, and the risk that the intended critique may not reach players unfamiliar with the FPS genre. The authors deliberately omitted a closing explanation, leaving the ending open to player interpretation, a decision they regard as central to keeping players at the center of the critique. The work is freely available for download, and the accompanying essay situates it within a body of literature on FPS subjectivity and game studies.