Can a videogame teach ethical principles
Videogames seem to be one of the most growing, pervasive and intriguing factors of our 21st century world. They often provide an enjoyable escape from reality and have a strong effect on everyday lives. However, despite the growing popularity of videogames due to the fun stimulus they evoke, game design is ultimately structured around moral decision making. Many videogames are crafted with a range of decisions and this chain of events often creates the gameplay experience. Players are occasionally faced with dilemma, that present a good or bad route in order to reach a final goal. The moral choice systems presented in videogames tend to differ and a grey area could appear between what seems to be right or wrong. What we deem as right or wrong in reality can influence the paths we take in an interactive fantasy world, alternatively, videogames can also affect an individual’s ethical position in real life. To decide whether videogames teach ethical principles, it is necessary to assess to what extent these principles are applicable to everyday life and our secular views on right and wrong. In assessing whether videogames can teach ethical principles, section one will evaluate ‘What would you do scenarios’, section two will measure the persuasive nature of videogames and finally section three will measure whether videogames inherently present a warped sense of morality – The measure of what is ethical.
Section One
Videogames serve as a great way to pose scenarios that offer moral dilemmas because unlike other leisurely mediums, the player gets to interactively choose their fate. Moral questions within videogames offer open ended possibilities and challenge our own perceptions of morality and ethics. They open up a certain type of tactical thinking, in which players are not afraid to experiment or investigate an on-going dilemma but face it head on. Games are unique because the most thrilling aspect is not creating a chain of events but seeing how the decisions made unfold. This creates a platform for players to encounter a range of events, ultimately leading to an exploration of one’s personal moral compass. Fable is a core example that illustrates this notion. Based on your good or bad treatment, of the NPCs (Non- playable characters) progression is granted or limited within the game. Videogames can exemplify ethical notions which are explored in reality such as good overcoming evil, or the ‘light at the end of the tunnel’ ideology. A good example is Tarsier Studios’, Little Nightmares in which a girl named Six trapped in a place steered by mystical creatures eventually gains freedom, despite many adversities in the path towards her escape. As game design has progressed, and more videogames feature moral paths, one would assume this would increase a support for good morality, however this is not the case.
Conventional gameplay design consists of elements such as role-playing, aesthetic, combat systems and tactical thinking, which integrate to create the ultimate gameplay experience. In Rockstar Games, Grand Theft Auto Franchise(GTA), these different parts work as one to ensure a great experience. Although, these elements guarantee player satisfaction, the unique selling point (USP) of a GTA game is actually immorality.
In addition, the systems essentially make sure that gameplay advantages and rewards are tied to immoral. GTA’s morality system is measured purely by immoral activities, e.g. being the ultimate mob boss or gangster. This would suggest that any attempt made to sway from this ultimate goal using ethical reasoning, creates a difficult play-by-play which is not a choice most players are willing to take. What is considered as good in terms of the game is therefore morally questionable.
Videogames operate on the notion of suspended reality that once an individual engaged with this interactive device, there is a division between the guidelines of everyday life and the status quo in society. Players are rewarded or punished based off the decisions they make. It is inevitable that players enjoy rewards over punishment. This psychological method used by videogame creators and producers, is known as ‘operant conditioning’. B. F Skinner’s theory claims that the amount of times an action is carried out is solely dependent on rewards and punishments. Therefore, if a bad or wrong decision is constantly rewarded, e.g. shooting or running over people in GTA V game playlist mode ensures additionally points for the gangsters and an increased level, then this action/decision will be continuously carried out. Positive or right decisions are ruled out and bad decisions are ultimately made to ensure a win. Players are unaware because when playing certain videogames this method occurs indirectly. Overall, scenarios that could potentially teach, morality and ethics are diminished through processes like operant conditioning, and actions such as killing, stealing, etc are encouraged within game culture.
These ‘What would you do’ scenarios are effectively not open to choose, but rather ensure a certain chain of events are followed through. Often these events are wrong according to societal norms of morality and ethics. Although in some videogames such scenarios open the floor for the player to explore their moral compass, it could be argued that factors portrayed within the scenario unethical means, which ultimately deviates from societal views.
Section Two
Morality and ethical systems are not specific to particular games, but ethical ideas are used better in some videogames than others. A player can try and work on a moral basis in a game like Forza- (aim is to work your way up to become the best driver) or PAC MAN, but the goal does not decipher any sort of ethical objective. Role playing games (RPG) like Fallout and Elder Scrolls, provide an imaginary role chosen by the player, ensuring the experience is as immersive as possible. Eventually players impart this fictional role with a personality of some sort. There are often warring sides which the player, can identify with at any given time. This broadens the ethics of the videogame and could potentially create a grey area. For example, in the Fallout Franchise killing a person could be seen as bad or wrong to one faction, while another may embrace this decision with open arms.
This grey area is eventually tarnished, in the case of Fallout choice is tied to a Karma meter. Decisions cease to be free, but rather conditioned and persuaded by the method used to ensure success in the game. Every moral choice therefore lies within the same moral plane where every decision made is either good overall or bad as a whole. Unfortunately, this is the persuasive system used for a range of videogames that try to incorporate ethical dilemmas and moral choice. Players, in order to satisfy requirements like a Karma meter, are persuaded to indulge in acts they would not necessarily opt to take if this system was not visible. In reality there is no intrinsic answer to a dilemma or a meter to measure progression. Therefore, freewill is compromised in games and decisions are persuaded by systems within the game to warrant that the player takes a particular path. In order for videogames to teach ethical principles, dilemmas must be presented in games as they feature in life.
Videogames tend to have a distinctive persuasive influence that goes beyond other media. As well as supporting different ethical ideals and positions held in society, videogames can potentially affect and disturb these views, changing an individual’s opinions and having long-term damaging effects. This occurs when a player constantly observes a causal relationship between two things, and since behaviour is the outcome of a range of factors that influence an individual, it is bound to change. For example, in Call of Duty Modern Warfare III, the first level instructs the player in blow up a submarine containing people in it in order to progress. If this is not followed through then the player repeatedly goes back to the segment prior until, it occurs. In this regard, not only is the player persuaded by unethical means to ensure a level up and a win, but there is no other option. Players become desensitised to such atrocities as there is a burning desire to win and the line between good and bad become blurred. Players are therefore persuaded to perform acts that would not be carried out in society to ensure victory within a game. However, the persuasive nature of games could lead an individual to intertwine that of reality and fantasy.
A clear example is mass school shootings. Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold were subject to this assumption when they murdered 12 students at Columbine High school on April 20, 1999. Both enjoyed the videogame Doom, which illustrated violent situations. Continual exposure thus normalised, shootings and the teens’ moral compasses ultimately deteriorated. In RPG games, there seems to be a disconnect from reality. Players tend to adopt ideologies and actions, they would not display in real life. Identity becomes clouded and the individual becomes desensitised. Accountability happens to reside in the character, but the player is making the decisions. Mass school shootings, however, do not inherently show correlation between mass school shootings and violent videogames. It can be due to many reasons, not solely that of videogames.
Ian Bogost presents the idea that games like TV, radio and other forms of media can also be rhetorically effective. Bogost claims that games adopted a ‘procedural rhetoric’ by enacting models of society and culture on a simplified basis, where you often perform actions that are not necessarily performed upon in reality. Games therefore encourage us to delve into a fictional world where identity is blurred and different ideologies are adopted. However, Bogost rejected the notion that media has the means to truly change perceptions.
The persuasive nature of games means that often players carry out actions and decisions rejected by societal views of morality. This is evident in the ability of games to cloud identity and dismantle free choice through determination of a particular goal. However, some videogames do not reflect this opinion, but focus on that of teamwork, free choice and concentration. This approach can be seen through Dishonoured, where in order to survive a coup and claim your rightful place on the throne, good or bad paths can be taken. However, the state of the government throughout the game as you work to be on the throne, is reliant on collaboration and how you use your free choice. To measure whether a videogame teaches ethical reasoning is questionable because of the variation in decisions given, and whether these ‘persuading’ decisions are morally acceptable in reality.
Section Three
Videogame creators and developers believe videogames can be a valuable source to teach life skills, determination and ethics. Videogames have been applauded over the years for their ability to increase motor skills, i.e. Nintendo WII, brain function through decision-making processes, i.e. Sims, attention and focus, i.e. Minecraft. However, the extend to at which games can be measured as emblems of ethical means is debateable.
Different videogames adopt different ethical codes that either do or do not correlate with our societal views of morality. For example, Fallout adopts that of a Kantian morality, it is about the player singularly doing the ‘right thing’ than concentrating on consequences. However, we question to what extent this deontological approach teaches ethical means. The Kantian categorical imperative approach (within the game i.e. Fallout- Telling enemies where good people reside) could be seen as ethically challenging as the result of the decisions made, produces a slippery slope outcome therefore, morally ethical ideals in society are not evident in gameplay. This approach clashes with many ethical decisions, (such as virtue and situation ethics that emphasises making the most loving and moral choice) and a dispute is created on whether this is approach is moral.
Whether games teach ethical principles is also dependent on the perspective presented. The majority of videogames are played by males. This is not a problem until depictions of women become tarnished by game designers. This may be to entice their target audience, but the means used in order to achieve this is immoral. In a range of videogames i.e. GTA, The Witcher, World of Warcraft, women are scantily clad and seen as commodities. GTA promotes a depiction of women that feminists have been fighting against for many years. It could be argued that shape perceptions of women and stereotype the female sex in regressive ways. Racial groups and LGBT member are also subject to this. In this regard such games do not teach ethical standards embraced by society but seek to diminish moral thought and embed immoral ideas. However, where some view videogames as an addictive, time-wasting entity others view them as fun, stimulating factor that potential help in moral development.
Conclusion
Overall, videogames are an evolving feature of the modern world which indirectly contribute to perceptions of right and wrong. Videogames can essentially teach ethical principles, and although this is an uncommon view (particularly seen through the media), videogames offer a range of decisions and options that encourage the development and expansion of an individual’s moral belief system. Although videogames can display ethical principles, they also can emphasise constrained behaviours because of the range of open possibilities and risks presented. On the flip side, if videogames are thought as solely part of the entertainment industry, thought is put more into the unique selling point and target audience, not whether we want to choose to be the next Mother Theresa or Joseph Stalin. They are less built on what we can learn but rather on the enticing features and gameplay to lure people in. As a whole, videogames are not the best place to expect a lesson on ethics or morals but a platform to criticise or support ethical principles and behaviour and how that translates from a digital world to everyday life. In conclusion, whether videogames are ethical is specific to each videogame because in order to determine this one must measure whether the ethics of the videogame can be performed in real life.