Playing History 2: Slave Trade

Playing History 2: Slave Trade is an educational graphic adventure game that transports players to the 18th century to witness the brutal realities of the trans-Atlantic slave trade firsthand. In this side-view, point-and-select experience, players assume the role of a young slave steward serving a ship’s captain, tasked with being his eyes and ears. The narrative becomes deeply personal when the protagonist discovers their own sister has been captured by slave traders, adding a powerful emotional layer to this historical journey.

Playing History 2: Slave Trade: A Deep Dive into a Controversial Educational Endeavor

1. Introduction

The realm of educational gaming has long grappled with the challenge of transforming complex historical narratives into engaging, interactive experiences. Serious Games Interactive, a developer renowned for its “Playing History” series—a recipient of the “best learning game” category in Europe—embarked on this ambitious journey, aiming to immerse students in pivotal world events. With titles like Playing History: Vikings and Playing History: The Plague preceding it, the series established a reputation for “experiencing engaging and personal stories set in exhilarating points in world history.” However, with the release of Playing History 2: Slave Trade, the studio ventured into arguably its most sensitive and perilous subject matter: the trans-Atlantic slave trade. This review will meticulously dissect Playing History 2: Slave Trade, exploring its developmental aspirations, its narrative and mechanical approach, and its ultimately contentious reception, asserting that while it aimed to enlighten and educate a young audience about a horrific historical period, its execution became a profound lesson in the ethical complexities of representing human suffering through interactive media.

2. Development History & Context

Playing History 2: Slave Trade was primarily developed by Serious Games Interactive, who also acted as a publisher for the title, with My Way Games also listed as a publisher on some platforms. The game saw releases on both Windows and Macintosh platforms. Curiously, release dates vary across databases; MobyGames lists August 27, 2015, while VideoGameGeek and VGtimes cite September 13, 2014. This discrepancy, though minor, hints at the game’s somewhat ambiguous commercial footprint.

The core vision behind the “Playing History” series, and by extension Slave Trade, was to “put the student in the middle of important and interesting points in history.” The developers aimed for a unique learning method where players “gain the opportunity to take part in history, within in a living breathing world,” observing how “historic events altered humanity as a whole.” The learning process was intended to be “autonomously conveyed throughout the story of the game as it progresses, this occurs through decisions and actions taken by the player throughout the course of the game,” thereby encouraging players to “relate to the world and actively seek out knowledge.” This pedagogical philosophy positioned the series as a leader in “serious games” for education, targeting an audience of 11-14 year olds with its historical adventures.

Technologically, the game was built using the Unity engine. Its minimum system requirements—Windows XP, Intel Core 2 Duo, 1 GB RAM, 200 MB free space, 512MB VRAM Intel Graphics—suggest a game designed for broad accessibility, even on older or less powerful machines, typical for educational software aiming for widespread school adoption. This technical modesty implies that the game’s ambition lay more in its narrative and thematic impact rather than cutting-edge graphical fidelity. At the time of its release, the gaming landscape saw a growing interest in “serious games” and “gamification” for educational purposes, yet few dared to tackle subjects as dark and deeply sensitive as the trans-Atlantic slave trade, especially for a middle-school demographic. This context underscores both the developers’ ambition and the inherent risks they undertook.

3. Narrative & Thematic Deep Dive

The narrative of Playing History 2: Slave Trade plunges players into the harrowing realities of the 18th century, tasking them to “witness the horrors of the trans-Atlantic slave trade firsthand.” The player assumes the role of a “young slave steward on a ship crossing the Atlantic.” This character’s initial objective is to “serve the captain and be his eyes and ears – reporting any suspicious activities” on board. This establishes a position of complicity, albeit one potentially forced upon the protagonist, setting up a complex moral framework from the outset.

The central dramatic conflict arises when the player character makes a shocking discovery: “what do you do, when you realize that your own sister has been captured by the slave traders?” This personalizes the systemic brutality of the slave trade, transforming an observer’s role into one of deeply personal stakes and moral dilemma. While no specific characters other than the unnamed young slave steward, the captain, and the sister are detailed, their archetypal roles serve to frame the historical context. The narrative is designed to explore “the horrors of the trans-Atlantic slave trade” and the “inhumane” aspects of slavery, aiming to “enlighten and educate people” about these events.

However, the game’s thematic ambitions were dramatically overshadowed by a specific design choice that led to widespread controversy. The original version of the game included a mini-game referred to as “Slave Tetris.” This mechanic, lasting “a small 15 secs part of the game,” was intended by the developers “to underline the point of how inhumane slavery was” by having players arrange enslaved people within the cramped holds of a ship. This attempt at conveying the brutality of the “Middle Passage” through a game mechanic trivialized the suffering it sought to depict. It was “perceived to be extremely insensitive by some people,” leading to a public outcry that “overshadowed the educational goal of the game.” The developers subsequently issued an apology and removed the controversial segment, stating, “The goal was to enlighten and educate people – not to get sidetracked discussing a small 15 secs part of the game.” This incident revealed the immense difficulty, and indeed the ethical minefield, of distilling such profound human tragedy into interactive gameplay, especially for a young audience.

4. Gameplay Mechanics & Systems

Playing History 2: Slave Trade is categorized as an “Adventure” and “Educational” game, specifically a “Graphic adventure” with a “Point and select” interface. The gameplay operates from a “Side view” perspective, utilizing a “Fixed / flip-screen” visual style. This setup suggests a traditional 2D or 2.5D point-and-click adventure format, where players navigate scenes, interact with objects or characters, and make choices to advance the narrative.

The core gameplay loop revolves around the “decisions and actions taken by the player throughout the course of the game,” which are meant to facilitate the “autonomous learning” process. As a slave steward, the player’s initial duties involve observation and reporting “suspicious activities” to the captain. This likely translates into exploration, dialogue options, and perhaps simple puzzles or challenges related to maintaining order or discovering secrets on the ship. The shift in narrative focus upon the sister’s capture would presumably introduce new objectives, potentially involving stealth, information gathering, or difficult moral choices that directly impact the story’s progression.

Specific details regarding combat, character progression systems, or complex UI elements are not provided in the source material. Given its genre and target audience, it is reasonable to infer that the game prioritizes narrative engagement and moral reasoning over intricate mechanical depth or combat simulation. The “point and select” interface implies a user-friendly design, typical for educational games aimed at accessibility.

The most notable, and unfortunately flawed, gameplay system was the “Slave Tetris” mini-game. While removed, its original inclusion was an attempt at an innovative, albeit deeply misguided, mechanic to convey the inhumanity of the slave trade. By tasking players with fitting human ‘blocks’ into a ship’s hold, the developers aimed “to underline the point of how inhumane slavery was.” This system, though mechanically simple, was a profound misjudgment of how gameplay can represent trauma. Instead of fostering empathy or understanding, it dehumanized the victims further through abstraction and gamification, proving that the effectiveness of a mechanic is as much about its ethical implications as its design cleverness. The swift removal of this segment underscores its critical flaw and the game’s ultimate failure in translating a horrific reality into appropriate interactive pedagogy through this particular system.

5. World-Building, Art & Sound

The world of Playing History 2: Slave Trade is set firmly in the “18th century,” during the “Age of Discovery / Enlightenment,” specifically within the brutal context of the “trans-Atlantic slave trade.” The primary setting is a “ship crossing the Atlantic,” with an implied initial context of “Africa” as the point of departure. The atmosphere is intended to convey the “horrors” of this period, aiming for players to “witness” the events “firsthand.” The confined spaces of a slave ship, as implied by the narrative and the ill-fated “Slave Tetris” mechanic, would naturally contribute to a sense of claustrophobia and dread, reinforcing the “inhumane” conditions described.

Visually, the game employs a “Side view” perspective and “Fixed / flip-screen” transitions. This typically suggests a 2D or 2.5D visual style common in graphic adventures, allowing for detailed backdrops and character sprites while keeping technical demands low. While no specific art style (e.g., realistic, stylized, cartoonish) is mentioned, the general aesthetic of the “Playing History” series tends towards a simplified, accessible art direction, which for this particular subject matter, faced the challenge of depicting atrocities without either trivializing them or being overly graphic for its target age group. The choice of a fixed perspective likely guides the player’s gaze, ensuring they focus on specific narrative or interactive elements within each scene.

Regarding sound design and music, the provided source material offers no specific details. Therefore, it is impossible to comment on the aural contributions to the game’s atmosphere or narrative. In educational games, sound often plays a crucial role in immersion and providing feedback for player actions. The absence of information here leaves a gap in understanding how the game might have used audio to enhance or detract from its portrayal of such a grim historical period.

The elements of world-building, art, and sound, in conjunction with the controversial gameplay, were intended to collectively immerse the player in a “living breathing world” to facilitate learning. However, the immense sensitivity of the subject matter meant that any misstep in these elements could profoundly undermine the educational goal. The “Slave Tetris” controversy directly implicated the visual and interactive representation of enslaved people, demonstrating how an attempt to convey the “inhumane” nature of the trade through a visual-mechanical system could backfire spectacularly, overshadowing any positive contributions these elements might have otherwise made.

6. Reception & Legacy

The critical and commercial reception of Playing History 2: Slave Trade upon its release was, according to the available data, remarkably sparse and overwhelmingly negative where it did exist. MobyGames reports an “n/a” Moby Score and indicates that there were no critic reviews, inviting users to “Be the first to add a critic review.” Similarly, VideoGameGeek lists an “Average Rating: 0.00 / 10” with “0 Ratings” and “0 Comments,” indicating a complete lack of recorded user or critic engagement on that platform. VGtimes provides an average rating of 5.5 across multiple criteria (Gameplay, Graphics, Story, Controls, Sound and Music, Multiplayer, Localization, Optimization), but it’s unclear if this is a critic or user average, and the “final score” is unstated, suggesting a very limited sample size or internal assessment rather than broad consensus. The game’s reach was also minimal, with MobyGames noting it was “Collected By 17 players” and VideoGameGeek stating “Users Owning: 1” and “Total Plays: 0.” These figures underscore a lack of widespread commercial success or player engagement documented on these platforms.

The defining moment of Playing History 2: Slave Trade‘s reception, and indeed its enduring legacy, was the “Slave Tetris” controversy. The mini-game, meant “to underline the point of how inhumane slavery was,” was instead “perceived to be extremely insensitive by some people.” This public outcry was so significant that the developers, Serious Games Interactive, issued an apology and removed the 15-second segment, admitting it “overshadowed the educational goal of the game.” This incident generated intense discussion in gaming and educational circles, far exceeding any positive attention the game might have otherwise received.

The game’s influence on subsequent games and the industry is primarily cautionary. Playing History 2: Slave Trade became an infamous case study in the perils of designing “serious games” that attempt to represent profound historical trauma, particularly for a younger audience. It highlighted the critical importance of empathetic and ethically sound game design when dealing with sensitive subjects, demonstrating how a poorly conceived mechanic can not only fail to educate but actively cause offense and undermine a project’s entire purpose. Its legacy is not one of a successful educational title, despite its series having won “best learning game” awards. Instead, it serves as a stark reminder of the immense responsibility developers bear when transforming real-world suffering into interactive entertainment, and the fine line between educational intent and harmful trivialization.

7. Conclusion

Playing History 2: Slave Trade stands as a complex, and ultimately troubled, artifact in the history of educational video games. Born from the “Playing History” series, a well-regarded endeavor committed to immersing 11-14 year olds in pivotal historical moments, this installment tackled the uniquely grim narrative of the 18th-century trans-Atlantic slave trade through the eyes of a young slave steward. Its ambition to “witness the horrors” and convey how these “historic events altered humanity as a whole” was laudable, particularly its central narrative hook involving the capture of the protagonist’s sister, which personalized the systemic brutality.

However, the game’s execution was critically undermined by a profound misjudgment in its gameplay design. The inclusion of the “Slave Tetris” mini-game, intended by the developers “to underline the point of how inhumane slavery was,” instead became a symbol of insensitivity and trivialization. This single, brief mechanic generated a controversy that “overshadowed the educational goal of the game” and led to its eventual removal and a public apology. The limited critical and commercial engagement outside this controversy further cements its status as a game more discussed for its misstep than for its artistic or pedagogical merits.

Playing History 2: Slave Trade is not remembered for its “graphic adventure” gameplay, its “point and select” interface, or its side-view visual presentation, but rather as a crucial, albeit painful, case study in the ethical challenges of serious game design. Its definitive verdict in video game history is not as a successful educational tool, but as a cautionary tale—a stark reminder of the immense responsibility developers hold when translating human suffering into interactive experiences, and the critical importance of empathy, thorough research, and careful consultation in ensuring that the pursuit of education does not inadvertently lead to the perpetuation of harm or offense. It’s a game whose legacy teaches the industry more about what not to do, than what to emulate.