|
Brad2134's Columbine RPG (PC)
|
| [October 27, 2010 06:07:08 PM]
|
My third time around I traveled to the library where I was confronted by a police voice. In order to end the game I had to end my life. That is a pretty depressing way to win a game. But that is the object of all games, the ability to win. Regardless of what you are playing, your main goal is to advance through the levels and eventually defeat anything that stands in your way. After 15 years of intense gaming, I feel like the behavior has become instinctive to me. It does not matter what game I play, if the object is to advance I am going to do anything and everything in my power to do so.
With that in mind, I tried to play this game as ethically as possible while trying to advance in the game. By avoiding confrontation I was able to escape from murdering many helpless students. However, in order to advance in to the library I needed to kill the janitor. Now is this unethical? If my goal is to advance, I must kill X to get to Z. Every game has an X character that gets in the way of advancing to Y. Just because the content of the game is based off of a very uncomfortable event, does not mean the game itself should be subjected to higher moral standards. After playing this game a few times the shock factor has began to wear off. Without the emotional dissonance felt with this game, you begin to see that it is just like any other game. In order to get Y I must defeat X, unfortunately in this game X happened to be a helpless old janitor.
add a comment 
|
| [October 26, 2010 05:01:22 PM]
|
After roaming around for a while I finally got where I needed to be. I loaded up my guns and started my rampage. Wow, this game is ridiculous. I started killing everyone in sight. They all were different stereotypes and after they died I was rewarded points. Although it began to seem repetitive, there were a few interesting aspects of the game that I noticed. After entering a male bathroom on the second floor, I murdered a group of jocks/preppy kids that was bullying a smaller kid. After the executions, I was rewarded health packs and a thank you from the kid. I was surprised that the game creator would do such a thing. In the real world, someone may want to inflict pain on another who is bullying them, but I doubt they would want them to actually die. Although the game is pretty outspoken, little things like this really push it past my moral compass.
In my past journal entry, I asked if there was a difference in media production. Why does the game get such a worse reputation than the books or media? Although it has the same content as these books or movies, I think this game has an unethical framework based on its reward system. In the books and movies you are simply witnessing third hand what happened; rather in the game you play the character itself. The parameter of what you can and cannot do in this game is the true reason why it is so unethical. For example, if I run into someone on my rampage, I have to shoot them. If there is confrontation the only way out of it is to kill them. Not only are you forced to kill them, but you get rewarded for doing so. After playing the game for a while, the reward system conditions you to feel good about killing. Any game that produces a positive effect of killing a stranger should be at all time immoral.
add a comment
|
| [October 25, 2010 07:55:36 PM]
|
I play 1st person shooter games all the time. I have no issue playing a US soldier shooting whatever enemy stands in my way. In this game however, I felt uneasy the entire time playing. I think it was a combination of playing the enemy as well as listening to his side of the story that made it so controversial. Although it seemed to be a glorified pacman, the issue I had with it was being the character. If I did not know the story before or read through the storyline of the game, I would not be emotionally connected to the scenario. On a rational standpoint however, it justifies unethical behavior. In order to advance in the game, you must plant the bombs in the cafeteria in order to move on. Since people play games to win, they are forced in this unethical behavior.
After playing the game I briefly read a comment involving the difference between the game and other media covering the incident. I thought it was a good point to make by asking the question of what the difference was between a movie and the game. The only answer I could come up would be the ability to play the character. Even though the movie may be more graphic and lifelike, because the game allows you to play the character, it is deemed more unethical. I found this hard to believe and will continue to question it through my other gamelogs.
add a comment
|
|
|
 |
Brad2134's Columbine RPG (PC)
|
|
Current Status: Playing
GameLog started on: Monday 25 October, 2010
|
|
