The Lack of Moral Complexity in Games

From DAMNLAG.com:

"As much as I hate dragging the real world into my comfortable video game world, there was a piece of reality I couldn't quite ignore this week. A few day ago, I watched the now infamous video of a US Army helicopter firing on a group of people in Iraq which included two Reuters photojournalists. The morality of the act in itself is debatable. There has been much talk about whether this action was allowed under the Army's rules of engagement and whether it was justified. But as the debate raged on, what struck me the most was how much that video display of the Apache helicopter looked like a game. Then I got to thinking, as sick as it may seem, could a videogame ever portray such a complex moral quandary? I'll admit, it's not fun to have to think before you shoot something, but games, like other entertainment mediums, should be able to go beyond thoughtless fun in certain situations. That doesn't mean you can't still have mindless fun, or even have most major releases be mindless fun, but even the great games that border on art are morally simplistic."

[Mastersnake10]

How can anyone honestly expect morals to be implemented into games these days though? All you do is kill kill kill. There is no way for anything else to be implemented.

[Anon1974]

Look at what Haze tried to do. Haze totally tried to blur the line between friend and enemy and try to bring it home that these are people that you're fighting and guess what? I appreciate what the developer was trying to do but it fell on it's face, big time.

The reason is simply. When I play games I want to be entertained. I want it to be fun. When I kill an enemy, I want him to howl...curse my name...yell about how he'll strike at me from the depths of hell. That kind of thing. I don't need him curled up at my feet, crying and talking about his mother as he dies, like what Haze did.

I don't want to be made to feel bad for playing a game and dispatching an enemy.

It's strange, because there are plenty of movies that I'll watch that don't make me feel all sunshine and rainbows, but the difference is I'll watch those movies, it'll be intense, I'll appreciate them and then I usually won't watch that movie again for some time.

With videogames I want to play them again and again. If you make me feel bad constantly, I'm not going to want to play. It's ok to have a point that makes a player feel bad if it advances a story and helps you connect, but I don't want to feel that way with every single enemy I dispatch, or right at the end of the game so the entire game leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth.

[Baka-akaB]

However Haze failed because it was perceived as a bad game , in both solo and multiplayer mode .
Not because of moral complexity .

[Darkstorn]

@1.1-
I'm tired of shooting the same enemies in the face over and over again. I've been killing virtual terrorists since Goldeneye, and frankly, I'd like to see an accurate representation of what a human death would look like in a game. It would at least be something that's never been done before, and there shouldn't be animosity towards it because we enjoy such a (potentially) innovative and progressive medium.

As video games become more and more like actual 'experiences' and less like arcade-style shooterfests, I think we'll see more games play to a mature audience who wants to experience something NEW. Heavy Rain started this trend, and I hope it continues to be popularized.

[Tony P]

Games should definitely keep trying. But, I don't think they should force you to experience it in every aspect.

SP or campaign is where you want it. And I totally support more games than just RPGs taking advantage of it. Who says every FPS has to have nice visuals, mature themes, but the moral complexity of a game of checkers?

Save that black & white logic for MP. Who wants ride an emotional rollercoaster for every deathmatch? It either becomes draining or trite.

[DelbertGrady]

Haze is a crappy example. Mass Effect has done the best job so far imo.

[Redempteur]

moral choices have to be really implemented into your game ..To do that you need a story to tell ..a good story ..because there is no way you'll care about your choices if you don't like the characters or the setting of the story you're playing ...

it's not just about moral choices it's just a matter of game design ...

[Eamon]

I see games as another medium of art that allows the designer to portray what he wants into it.

Like films and literature. I think people should have an extent of creative freedom. But we should not introduce laws that simply stop people from going to the exteme. I believe that should be left to individual moral principles.

People need to be responsible for themselves in their ideas.
Not forced by a higher power to censor themselves.

[HSx9]

I was watching a video on a Nuclear Bomb on YouTube the other day, and if you read at the comments, you will see little 12 year old kids typing down there on something related to MW2, really pisses me off.
Someone should show the little kid the aftermath of what a real nuclear bomb does to people.

[Anon1974]

The single player was fun, the game could be played all the way through with split screen co-op and the multiplayer was also well done (with the ability to play online split screen with a friend).

Where Haze was week wasn't in gameplay, it was the damned crying bad guys that RUINED it for me. Haze was simply a mediocre shooter with too much hype yet still manged to sell almost a million copies. But that script and the creative choices they made ruined it.

[Genki-JAM]

Seriously, this has bugging me too for the longest time now.

[Obnysalt]

Tremendous read, hope someone makes something like you described.

[Darkstorn]

Agreed, excellent article. Very well-written, as well.

[MechaZain]

The choices shouldn't be so obvious either. With games that have moral systems it's always really clear which side is which.

[boogeyman999]

I would disagree with the idea that games are supposed to induce morals on the gamer. Screw that. Games mean a lot to me, but there pure entertainment. I don't know why this games as art movement is catching steam, but I am totally against it.

Just let me shoot stuff.

[giantchicken]

Let me kill stuff for christ's sake!

[Hellsvacancy]

And blow the sh|t outta stuff

[Darkstorn]

You guys have plenty of opportunities to kill stuff in games. It's those of us who enjoy narrative and exposition that get the short end of the stick.

[FragMnTagM]

I still have not beaten the game the "evil" way by harvesting the little girls. I just cannot do it. I always rescue them. I did do it once and I couldn't bring myself to do it again. I am not sure why, maybe because I have a 3 yr. old little girl, but I just cannot do it.

[DARK WITNESS]

you know I was thinking what a load of crap this is... untill you brougt that up. And now you mention it, I too have not and just cannot bring myself to finsih the game that way. I don't have kids or anything, but i just could not.

the bottom line for me though is they are games.. if you don't pull the trigger in the game, you are just going to get laughed at in the lobby and called a noob. If you don't pull the trigger in real life you don't go home, you don't see your friends, you don't see your family ( unless you believe in the after life - but thats a different subject ).

I don't mind a game throwing in some moral code to whats going on, as long as it makes sense with in the game and it's theme...

what I don't want is games forcing this on us to try and prove some point. they should remember they are games.

just like films, some films you want to have some deep moral story and makes you think, and other films you just want to watch mindless action.

[Darkstorn]

Bioshock dealt with this exceptionally, I agree.

But, I don't think games are 'games' anymore. They have the potential to be entirely new ways of experiencing the world, and I'd love to see more heavy-handed games. Metal Gear Solid 4 had clear anti-war themes, and Soldier of Fortune has pretty clear pro-war themes. I want variety, not a bunch of watered-down neutral games that don't deliver on a unique premise.

One of the reasons Bioshock was so convincing was because it really demonized Andrew Ryan's ideology. The Randian libertarianism that he adhered to was made out to be truly terrifying, and I think that made the game what it was. Bioshock 2 tackled religious zealousy and collectivism in ways that made it out to be repulsive, as well.
I simply want something new out of the same old shooting, hack n' slashing, and leveling up.

[Baka-akaB]

I see the author's point , but i'm not convinced entirely by it .
Especially when he goes through far too easy preys .

No one expects moral quandary from a sfx and explosion action blockbuster movie , so why should we for it's gaming equivalents , such as MW ?

Why not tangle instead some rpgs , or hybrid games such as deus ex and bioshock ?

Hell take Mass effect despite its few flaws , it often does a good job of blurrying the lines .
Among many example , when faced with a choice over the survival of a specie deemed hostile by everyone , what do you do ?

Will you do the right thing and help them , righteous till the end , yet against the safety of everyone else ?

Or will you be the pragmatic one , claiming that the danger isnt worth the risk ?

[Darkstorn]

Mass Effect did a terrible job of blurring the lines, man. The good dialogue options were in blue, and the 'renegade' options were in dark red. I think that's pretty black and white as to the corresponding moral quandaries.

Dragon Age: Origins did an amazing job, though. At the end of the game you have to make a decision that changes everything between your character and one of your sidekicks, and it is in no way 'black and white.' It was brilliantly executed to be entirely based on your own feelings toward the people you meet throughout the game.

[Baka-akaB]

i did say it was with flaws , and it was only an example among others .

But no it isnt always as clear cut as you say . There is a reason why we can easily gain so many stealth paragon points even when aimed toward evil .

Some blue and in apparence good choices werent good at all for the galaxy , or not deemed as paragon choices .

To go toward full on renegade quickly , you actually need to behave like a complete ass .

[anonymouse111335]

Games and morals, here we go again.

I have no morals in video games, it's not real and nothing in them affects me, in fallout 3 if I have to kill a few seemingly innocent people to finish a quest and get the reward so be it. People who get worried about morals in video games always come off to me as the people who are the best at everything, and rub it in peoples faces yet always try to go by a code of morals, we don't have morals, we made them up ourselves to tell us what the status quo is of what is acceptable.

[JeepGamer]

"A few day ago, I watched the now infamous video of a US Army helicopter firing on a group of people in Iraq which included two Reuters photojournalists. The morality of the act in itself is debatable."

Did he watch the whole video or just the edited version that was posted on Wikileaks? Surprising exactly nobody the unedited version includes all sorts of people holding AK-47s and RPGs. So it was not the indiscriminate killing of civilians as advertised on the day of its release but reporters in a war zone getting caught up in a firefight between American troops and insurgents.

His article seems to indicate that he did not see the unedited version, so his whole tirade about "morality" is utterly invalid.

"Then I got to thinking, as sick as it may seem, could a videogame ever portray such a complex moral quandary?"

Do the words 'No Russian' ring a bell? Modern Warfare 1 and 2 are both chock full of things that make you question morality or did we miss the part where the door is closing and the man with the jumper cables is coming towards the guy in the chair?

[Eamon]

It's completely disgusting for you to easily dismiss the crimes that these soldiers have committed here. These journalists are there in a warzone, started by your nation, doing what most people would be too weak or scared to do (including yourself), that is to record and document the reality and truth of the situation and reveal it to the masses.

You naive fool. The video is not edited. As you can see it shows almost the entire situation from beginning to end with almost no cuts. And anyway, Reuters requested an investigation on the deaths of their journalists. They are not questioning any crimes against insurgents or whatever because that is entirely besides the point.

As you can see from the video (have you even watched it since I cannot believe you can simply watch innocent civilans getting slaughters and still support the culprits), the soldier who was initiating the air strike was flipping hungover from all that american hollywood adrenaline that he was pushing his superiors for the execution order, his fingertips were just savouring to push the trigger. Quote, "Come on, let me shoot them!" I cannot understand how you can mistake a camera for an RPG. RPGs are much longer and bigger. Also, he had so much time before he received his order so I am pretty sure he knew these were civilians.

You say they were caught up in a firefight. Are you blind? What firefight? That whole part of the district was calm. There were no ongoing fighting.

You also failed to see how when the car came afterwards to collect any remaining survivors, they shot them who were completely unarmed AND they shot at the vehicle that contained children.

I would shake hands with the soldier who saw the injured child and picked her up to take her to a hospital. But I would spit in your face over how you simply want to support your nation and their army regardless of any crimes committed by specific soldiers in your army.

And we all know this war started for a couple of clear reasons. Oil profiting. Gaining an ally from yet another puppet within the middle east. And to stop any middle eastern nation near Isreal from even thinking of gaining nuclear weapons.

It's ironic you have an avatar of Big Boss (a fictional character that rebelled against your establishment.)

[Enigma_2099]

He's just pointing out that they didn't bother to show EVERYTHING. Just footage that makes it look like they just started shooting innocent people for the hell of it.

... and it looks like you're just fine with ignoring that part too...

... the naive fools here are the ones that intentionally "blind" themselves to the truth. But if you have absolute proof that he's wrong, I'm willing to bet he's more than willing to accept it...

... but I bet it will involve actually "looking" at the unedited footage... you know, the parts they apparently didn't want you to see...

And the avatar... the bum just can't play a MGS game without going for a Big Boss ranking... he got screwed in MGS4, though... he had to settle for a "The Boss" rank. You're reaching.

[JeepGamer]

1)The unedited video clearly shows people holding weapons including AK-47s and RPGs. Do you acknowledge this or not? You do not know what you are talking about and more to the point you do not know what I'm talking about.
2)The video was edited as has now been proven for anyone who has been following the story. If you have not seen the portion of the video showing a significant number of armed individuals, then you haven't seen the whole video.
3)You clearly have preconceived ideas that predate the video about the war and the purpose of the war and America or American soldiers as 'the bad guy' fall in line with said ideas. The fact that you would honestly think that an American soldier would be all hopped up on adrenaline and could hardly wait to murder people demonstrates this.
4)I cannot stress it enough, you haven't seen the whole video if you did not see a group of armed individuals with assault rifles and rocket launchers. The truth of the matter is, as usual, there were civilian casualties in a hostile war zone.
5)Regardless of what did happen, I can tell you what did NOT happen: Innocent people were not targeted and killed by American troops deliberately as was the impression initially given by the reports surrounding the video.

[ian72]

@350zrunner
I was thinking about "NO RUSSIAN" level also. Do you fire, don't you fire?

[FragMnTagM]

I did fire because there were was no consequence for doing so. It did not bother me at all to fire in that level for some reason. Yet when I was given the choice in Bioshock to harvest the little girls, I just couldn't do it. Not sure what the difference was for me, but it didn't bother me at all to do it in MW2.

[Baka-akaB]

imo the "no russian" was just done to provide a cheap thrill an shock , rather than trying to further a plot .

[JeepGamer]

In the context of a game? Sure why not.

In the context of if it were a real situation? There's no way to know.

What the 'No Russian' level was attempting to portray that was seemingly lost on so many people is a horrible concept: Would you do something as horrific as mass murder? If presented with a choice of killing dozens of innocent people yourself or refusing to do so resulting in the deaths of thousands of people at some unknown point and time in the future? What do you choose?