This paper contrasts the importance of procedural rhetoric for the use of games in university and college level historical education with the use of history themed digital simulations. This paper starts by examining how history functions as a form of disciplinary knowledge and how this disciplinary way of knowing things is taught in the post secondary history course. The manner in which history is taught is contrasted with its evaluation to better define what students are actually expected to learn. The simulation is then examined in light of learning goals and evaluation. This demonstrates that simulations are a poor fit for most post secondary history courses. The more appropriate and effective choice is to construct the past via procedural rhetoric as a way to use digital video games to make the historical argument.