Do you care about what happens in the games you play?

[troutman]

This comes up in board games too.

Would you be uncomfortable playing the Nazis in a WWII game?

Are you okay managing "colonists" (slaves) in Puerto Rico?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by troutman

This comes up in board games too.

Would you be uncomfortable playing the Nazis in a WWII game?

Are you okay managing "colonists" (slaves) in Puerto Rico?

I remember playing the video game Master's or Orion and when you took a planet you had to make the choice on whether you wanted to assimilate the civilian population into your society or exterminate them.

I always exterminated them, it was just easy to control the pet population then.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by Itse

I mean, do you, personally, care who you kill in games and why (as an example)? Do you think about stuff like right and wrong while playing? Do you ever take notice of the reasons you are given to justify the killing, and does it matter at all what the reasons are?

In a way you could say ,do you ever think about the stories in games? Do you like games better if you feel approve of what the main character does?

I am replaying Oblivion right now, and decided to go through the Dark Brotherhood (the Assassin's guild) since I had never done it. I was amazed that I was actually bothered by some of the quests and justifications they had for the killing.

I was actually bad enough I had to revert to an earlier save and go a different path.

[BlackArcher101]

In the end, it's just a damn game.

How come we weren't up in arms about Cowboys and Indians?

[CaptainCrunch]

Because the cowboys always won, so we learned a little bit about history

[wookster]

Originally Posted by troutman

This comes up in board games too.

Would you be uncomfortable playing the Nazis in a WWII game?

Are you okay managing "colonists" (slaves) in Puerto Rico?

I am, because I know its a game

I have noticed the gaming industry trend more towards things like taking the "nazi" out of Germany in ww2 based games lately though. I mostly play stategy games on my PC - like Civilization and the Total War series and also the hard core strategy games like Gary Grigsby's World at War. I've noticed that most games that come out now don't ever use the word "nazi" anymore when you have the option to pick Germany as your side. They also for the most part now do not use the swastika as the flag or symbol either but use the traditional black, white and red national flag instead.

Its still Germany in WW2 that you are playing with all their equipment, generals etc. but its not "nazi" Germany....just Germany. I wonder if they are doing this because of public pressure against the gaming industry about portraying violence etc.

I also thing that commercial for MW3 is great...(sorry, can't link the video at work) To me shows the fun side of being "in the game" instead of just showing game footage and trying to make it "realistic"...

[Regorium]

In a way you could say ,do you ever think about the stories in games? Do you like games better if you feel approve of what the main character does?

For RPG's or story-based campaigns, absolutely. But it's really up to the game developer to make a world that is so immersive that I do think about the moral questions. I can also play the evil character as well just to see the consequences and reactions and enjoy it immensely if it is consistent with the world that I'm being placed in (so really, I enjoy games where the character is consistent with the world he's placed in regardless of my approval for what he does).

For example, in WoW, there's a set of quests where you help a red dragon called Rhea over the entire zone, who's going through an ethical crisis herself, but in the end sacrifices herself and her eggs in order to advance the goals of her race. The quest reward at the end is a useless trinket, but it's called "Rhea's Last Egg" with flavor text "Please take care of him for me." Useless item, but I still have it in my inventory because the game developers made such a compelling storyline that I really cared.

On the other hand, like CaptainCrunch, I played Galactic Civ, where it's a similar thing for colonizing new planets. You get to choose whether the indigenous people live or die, and I always did the "evil" thing since it gives you the most benefit. I didn't really care (since it's just a radio button selection), since the game developers didn't put in the effort to make me want to care.

Obviously, none of this has any effect on real life, but just as in any sort of media, I always found it very interesting that the quality of the presentation can really change how a person feels about it. I really enjoy the way that games can make you really care about the characters being presented, much like movies or books.

In a more competitive environment, like starcraft or multiplayer FPS'es, the violence is really just a medium for competition, and as such, there's no caring about morality or characters there. It's the competition that drives the game and sometimes the over-the-top reactions, much like how people can completely lose their mind when playing in a beer league or co-ed sports.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by troutman

This comes up in board games too.

Would you be uncomfortable playing the Nazis in a WWII game?

I don't have a problem playing on the German side in multiplayer WWII games like BF1942 or Company of Heroes. I even enjoy playing as a Luftwaffe pilot in WWII flight simulators, flying an FW-190 or ME-262 against formations of B-17s escorted by Mustangs.

I would be very uncomfortable playing as a Nazi guard at Auschwitz, if such a game even exists.

In CoD:MW, I sort of enjoyed the "Death From Above" (AC-130) mission, even though it wasn't really a challenge and the soldiers on the ground were no threat to my gunship. I did find the way one of the other crewman laughed and said, "Haha, I see lots of little pieces down there" after you fired a shell into a group of enemies to be a bit disturbing, though.

In CoD:MW2, I was very uncomfortable playing the "No Russian" mission. I found absolutely no entertainment value in murdering innocent civilians, despite the game telling me I was playing as a covert CIA agent working deep undercover in a terrorist organization. For most of the mission, I held my fire and let the other terrorists do the killing, but I wasn't sure if this would blow my cover and fail the mission, so I eventually started shooting. I tried to limit who I shot to people who were already bleeding profusely and trying to crawl to safety, justifying my actions by saying these people were going to die anyway, but I still felt bad about it. Whenever I play the game again, I skip that level.

[Itse]

I'm not really up in arms about anything. I just thought it was interesting to see so many people who are essentially professional gamers write about similar themes. I think for many it seems to be related to a general feeling of unease over the simplification of modern conflicts.

I certainly have no trouble over killing in people for little reason in general in games. Right now I'm playing the first Witcher -game ,where I'm constantly mowing down essentially harmless petty criminals for personal gain and because that's how the game goes. It's a fantasy game for one thing, and also it's a game with some meaningful moral choices. As long as the game either let's me choose or is at least aware of the basic moral issues, I don't mind. GTA games don't interest me because they don't seem to have much of a story, but otherwise I'd be fine playing a really bad guy.

But I wouldn't buy a game about killing terrorists, unless I knew that the game would be dealing with the subject with some sensibility (or abandoning realism). Which something I only realized recently, after reading those articles.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by Itse

I've recently ran into several articles, mostly in game media but in other places too, where people talk about their discomfort towards some of the things that goes on in video games.

Since I know there are gamers on this forum (I consider myself one), I'm curious as to other people feel about this. Personally I don't play these modern warfare games, although I haven't really thought much about why. I have picked up quite a few games where I'm a lone supersoldier destroying hordes of hideous monsters. I've started to think that maybe this is not a coincidence, that for me it matters what the enemy is.

How about you? Violence or otherwise, does it matter to you what happens in games, or are they just games for you?

Here's some of the stuff I've read on this. Note that all of the people talking here are gamers, most of them you could propably call hard-core gamers.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/arti...eld-3-Is-Scary
http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/propaganda-games


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...dern-warfare-3 http://kotaku.com/5857878/the-proble...ar-video-games

I actually found these articles really interesting (at least 3 of them, as I didn't watch the episode). They aren't really as anti-video game or as anti-violence as the pulled quotes make them seem, and it seems like some posters in this thread are simply responding to some 'violent video games are inherently bad' argument that they assume the authors are making.

I haven't played a lot of modern-warfare style games, so I really can't comment on those, but agree with at least some arguments in the three articles: that underdog heroes are the most fun to play and that set-piece-heavy gameplay sucks; that NPC-heavy games need to have well-written and complex characters; and that video-games are overall an art-form that deserve to be looked at with the same sorts of critical questions that we ask when looking at movies or books.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

I would be very uncomfortable playing as a Nazi guard at Auschwitz, if such a game even exists.

We used to play a game like that in High School. We didn't think much about the ethical issues.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_from_Colditz

Escape from Colditz is a game devised by successful escaper Pat Reid, based on the former POW camp at Colditz Castle in Germany during World War II.

We even composed songs about the game based on popular 80's tunes:

Shot in the back
And you're to blame
You give Nazis
A bad name

We're going to rock on down to the interview room
And then we'll get wire-cutters

All you need is rope . . .

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by troutman

We used to play a game like that in High School. We didn't think much about the ethical issues.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_from_Colditz]

That's a little bit different than the situation I was describing. Colditz Castle was a POW camp where Allied officers who had previously tried to escape from other camps were imprisoned. For the most part, the German guards abided by the Geneva Convention and treated the POWs relatively well*. Playing on the German side in that scenario is not the same as playing a guard at a Nazi death camp like Auschwitz.

To put it in movie terms, it's the difference between "The Great Escape" and "Schindler's List". I could play a game as a German soldier in the former, but not the latter.

*Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oflag_IV-C

In Colditz, the Wehrmacht followed the Geneva Convention. Would-be escapees were punished with solitary confinement, instead of being summarily executed. In principle, the security officers recognized that it was the duty of the POWs to try to escape and that their own job was to stop them. Prisoners could even form gentlemen's agreements with the guards, such as not using borrowed tools for escape attempts.

Most of the guard company was composed of WWI veterans and young soldiers not fit for the front. Because Colditz was a high security camp, the Germans organized three and then later four Appells (roll calls) a day to count the prisoners. If they discovered someone had escaped, they alerted every police and train station within a 40 km (25 mi) radius, and many local members of the Hitler Youth would help to recapture any escapees.

Because of the number of Red Cross food parcels, prisoners sometimes ate better than their guards, who had to rely on Wehrmacht rations.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

That's a little bit different than the situation I was describing. Colditz Castle was a POW camp where Allied officers who had previously tried to escape from other camps were imprisoned. For the most part, the German guards abided by the Geneva Convention and treated the POWs relatively well*. Playing on the German side in that scenario is not the same as playing a guard at a Nazi death camp like Auschwitz.

I understand the difference. Still, one player had to be the German Guards, and shoot to kill the escaping prisoners. I hope there are no games that have the death camp setting.

[mykalberta]

No.

[Hack&Lube]

Crime rates are more closely tied to the economy than to videogames/media.

A violent game/movie is no different than reading about Polyphemus the Cyclops dismembering and eating Odysseus' men in the Iliad. They are both just forms of storytelling. Just one is considered "a classic" and one is considered junk entertainment. When I read a story, I participate in it vicariously. To me, this is no different than me pressing buttons on a gamepad to participate in a game vicariously despite the presence or illusion of choice or interactivity.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by troutman

I understand the difference. Still, one player had to be the German Guards, and shoot to kill the escaping prisoners. I hope there are no games that have the death camp setting.

There is one but you play a prisoner going through Auschwitz.

I actually think there is a serious deficit of movies/games/literature that takes place from controversial perspectives aka the bad guys. Sometimes you need to be placed in the shoes of those kinds of characters and those situations to get an understanding of how human beings can be so cruel to other human beings.

[Russic]

Remember all the people that said Grand Theft Auto was going to turn kids into hooker-killing monsters? The 10 year anniversary of GTA just passed... how'd that turn out? Still seems to be a lot of hookers out there.

[CaptainCrunch]

They really need to invent a left handed controller, rampant killing gets me hot

[Ashartus]

Personally I have at least some moral compass when I play video games (not that I have time to play many these days). I find it a bit disturbing to kill innocents or commit other acts that are very wrong, even if they are just pixels on a screen, so always end up playing as a "good guy" when I have the option. I have no issues with how other people choose to play games, and don't think video games cause all the worlds problems - I just don't feel comfortable doing things that are strongly against my moral code even virtually.

[Kipperriffic]

Originally Posted by Itse

Hmm, I think maybe people didn't really understand my question, or read/watch the links.

I really wish people would at least watch the extra credits bit about propaganda games, it's short and they're always sensibly light in the way they present things.

I didn't mean "do you think games can affect our behavior" (to which the obvious answer is: of course it does, just like every other media, but no it just doesn't work that way that you start copying what you do in games).

I mean, do you, personally, care who you kill in games and why (as an example)? Do you think about stuff like right and wrong while playing? Do you ever take notice of the reasons you are given to justify the killing, and does it matter at all what the reasons are?

In a way you could say ,do you ever think about the stories in games? Do you like games better if you feel approve of what the main character does?

No. But I care a lot about the story quality and the in-game dialogue. But not if the main char. is doing the "right" or "wrong" thing according to my real life values.

The story has to be really well written and actions/dialogue need to be subtle. Maybe I am expecting too much out of video game storylines but I feel disappointed when we are the ultimate good guys just for the sake of it and especially if the dialogue is cheesy and not in depth.

I will enjoy doing "immoral" things in a video game if there is a great story behind it.

For example: Starcraft II story was a huge dissappoinment to me - especially the dialogue. I think blizzard had a chance to really do something refreshing with their storyline but they didn't. It was also too linear, which is a step backwards. (I don't want to go into detail but I can if you want)

Anyways, the point is that I personally do not care if games go along with my values, my morals. I do think however that storyline (and dialogue) are absolutely integral to the gaming experience and that many gaming companies need to improve on that.