Video games are forms of multimodal technical communication, conveying complicated information about game goals, mechanics, game physics, and more, to the player in a way that usually feels integrated into the game itself. This article highlights ways that games use interaction to convey information to players, classifying the communicative elements in several popular games into C.S. Pierce's classes of sign (decoratives, indicatives, and informatives). This paper asserts that technical communicators can take cues from video games to design technical communication products that better meet contemporary users’ expectations of agency and interaction—allowing them to explore and discover on their own.
AmareN.ManningA. (2007). The language of visuals: Text + graphics = visual rhetoric tutorial. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 50(1), 57–70. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2006.890851
2.
AmareN.ManningA. (2013). A unified theory of information design: Visuals, text and ethics (1st ed.). Routledge.
BarskyE.Bar-IlanJ. (2012). The impact of task phrasing on the choice of search keywords and on the search process and success. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(10), 1987–2005. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22654
5.
BlacklerA. L.GomezR.PopovicV.ThompsonM. H. (2016). Life is too short to RTFM: How users relate to documentation and excess features in consumer products. Interacting with Computers, 28(1), 27–46. https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwu023
6.
BogostI. (2007). Persuasive games: The expressive power of videogames. MIT Press.
7.
BourelleA.BourelleT.JonesN. (2015). Multimodality in the technical communication classroom: Viewing classical rhetoric through a 21st century lens. Technical Communication Quarterly, 24(4), 306–327. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2015.1078847
8.
BrockK.MehlenbacherA. R. (2018). Rhetorical genres in code. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 48(4), 383–411. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047281617726278
9.
CabezasN. R. (2023 , October 26-28). “To us were left the splendors of creation”: Horizon and the role of technical communication in a posthuman landscape. Proceedings of the 41st ACM International Conference on Design of Communication, 263–265, Orlando, Florida, USA.
10.
CampbellJ. L. (2023). Identifying digital rhetoric in the telemedicine user interface. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 53(2), 89–105. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472816221125184
11.
CrawfordC. (2012). Chris Crawford on interactive storytelling. New Riders.
12.
deWinterJ. (2014). Just playing around: From procedural manuals to in-game training. In deWinterJ.MoellerR. M. (Eds.), Computer Games and Technical Communication: Critical Methods and Applications at the Intersection (pp. 69–85). Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.
13.
deWinterJ.MoellerR. M. (2016). Computer games and technical communication: Critical methods and applications at the intersection. Routledge.
ErikssonP. E.ErikssonY. (2019). Live-action communication design: A technical how-to video case study. Technical Communication Quarterly, 28(1), 69–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2018.1528388
16.
FossS. K. (2004). Theory of visual rhetoric. In SmithK. L.MoriartyS.KenneyK.BarbatsisG. (Eds.), Handbook of visual communication: Theory, methods, and media (pp. 141–152). Routledge.
17.
FullertonT. (2019). Game design workshop a playcentric approach to creating innovative games (4th ed.). CRC Press.
18.
GeeJ. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. Macmillan.
JohnsonE. K. (2019). Waves: Scaffolding self-regulated learning to teach science in a whole-body educational game. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 28, 133–151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9753-1
21.
JohnsonE. K. (2021). ELLE-ments of learning: A framework for analyzing multimodal technical communication strategies in an educational VR game. In D. Economou, A. Dengel, A. Peña-Rios, H. Doods, M. Mentzelopoulos, A. Klippel, K. Erenli, M. J. W. Lee & J. Richter (Eds.), Immersive Learning Research Network Proceedings of 7th International Conference, iLRN 2021, Online, May 17-June 10, 2021. Immersive Learning Research Network. ISBN 978-1-7348995-2-8/21.
McDanielR. (2009). Making the most of interactivity online version 2.0: Technical communication as procedural architecture. Technical Communication, 56(4), 370–386.
MohrP.KerblB.DonoserM.SchmalstiegD.KalkofenD. (2015). Retargeting technical documentation to augmented reality. Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 3337–3346. https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/2702123.2702490
28.
NormanD. A. (2009). The design of future things. Basic Books.
29.
NovickD. G.WardK. (2006). Why don’t people read the manual?Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM International Conference on Design of Communication, 11–18.
30.
PeirceC. S. (1974). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Harvard University Press.
31.
QuiringO.SchweigerW. (2008). Interactivity: A review of the concept and a framework for analysis. Communications, 33(2), 147–167. https://doi.org/10.1515/COMMUN.2008.009
32.
RawlinsJ. D.WilsonG. D. (2014). Agency and interactive data displays: Internet graphics as co-created rhetorical spaces. Technical Communication Quarterly, 23(4), 303–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2014.942468
33.
RedishJ. (2012). Letting go of the words: Writing web content that works. Elsevier.
34.
SalenK.ZimmermanE. (2003). Rules of play: Game design fundamentals. The MIT Press.
SchellJ. (2020). The art of game design: A book of lenses (3rd ed.). CRC Press/Taylor & Francis Group.
37.
SheppardJ. (2009). The rhetorical work of multimedia production practices: It’s more than just technical skill. Computers and Composition, 26(2), 122–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2009.02.004
VygotskyL. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
42.
WangZ. B.OngS. K.NeeA. Y. C. (2013). Augmented reality aided interactive manual assembly design. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 69(5), 1311–1321.
43.
WeberW. (2017). Interactive information graphics. A framework for classifying a visual genre. In BlackA.LunaP.LundO.WalkerS. (Eds.), Information design: Research and practice (pp. 243–256). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
44.
WilsonG. D.RawlinsJ. D.CraneK. (2018). Agency in action: Exploring user responses and rhetorical choices in interactive data displays. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 48(4), 471–499. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047281617732046
