|
Hugo_Alvarez's Hitman (PS4)
|
| [November 8, 2018 04:04:51 PM]
|
In my last play session of Hitman, I completed a mission in the game and found the result of completing one to be quite interesting. As I’ve discussed, the aim of the game is to assassinate certain people, all while doing so undercover and escaping afterwords. After completing a mission, the game rewards the player for their performance and certain actions that were taken during the mission. These rewards are mostly based on actions taken directly related to the murder that is committed. However, something I also found interesting is that the game deducts points for kills that are not the target of the mission. This suggests a few things, namely that the player is meant to perceive that the targets are negative forces whose deaths will result in a positive outcome for the rest of the world, and that all non-targets are innocent people whose deaths would impact the world negatively or substantially to justify killing. It’s important to note that this is presumably what the organization that Agent 47 is working for wants.
This whole scenario brings up multiple questions. One, will killing the targets actually prove beneficial? If so, then this game would be perfectly ethical from a Utilitarian perspective. Two, does the organization have the right to determine who should and should not be killed, and can they know for sure of the impacts their deaths will have? Three, are assassinations the only method by which this organization can influence the world? These are all questions that important to consider.
Back to the mission complete reward system. Most of the challenges present in the game incentivise killing the targets. While this makes complete sense considering it is the entire point of the gameplay, it’s still questionable from an ethical perspective as killing is generally seen as immoral. A philosopher such as Kant would immediately point to this game is immoral, as the act of killing itself would inherently be considered wrong, but the game chooses to incentivise it, going as far as to reward the player.
Outside of the act of the assassinations I found interesting in my play session was how this game handles it’s suspension of disbelief. During the mission I played I chose a route that involved impersonating a famous runway model. I chose to subdue said model and use his clothing as a disguise. I was seen and his body was found, but I was able to make a retreat without being caught and proceeded the mission as planned. Naturally, I was afraid of actually continuing from this point, as I assumed all the guards would be on the lookout for a man wearing this models clothing, but I was able to complete the mission no problem, which I found particularly unrealistic and broke my suspension of disbelief. From a gameplay perspective, this could potentially create a more fun experience, as it makes the assassinations more manageable for people who presumably aren’t actually assassins, but whether this was the correct choice from a moral perspective from the developers is questionable.
read comments (1)  -
add a comment 
|
| [November 4, 2018 06:47:27 PM]
|
In my previous play session of Hitman, my experience was similar to that of my original play times, but there were a few things here and there that I found to be quite interesting, and a bit on the confusing side. Continuing my job as an assassin, I found myself in a situation where I had to disguise myself as a body guard. I assumed that in order to play up the disguise well, I would also need the gun that the bodyguards were using, a rather large model that would need to be slung on my back. However, I later needed to go into an area that was crowded with people at the event this story sequence was taking place. I was unsure if the gun I had was arouse suspicion, but I knew I could load a save so I went ahead anyway. After entering the crowd of people, I found that there was no problem with having the gun on my back, presumably because I was perceived as body guard. Naturally, I thought that disguise was sufficient in this regard, yet the game would seem to show otherwise. I later proceeded to the area in which the next objective was located, which involved going through a room in which there were also many people. However, unlike the previous area, the game decided that I my character was considered suspicious for reasons I was unsure of. As far as I could tell, it was because I had a large weapon on my back, but that would contradict what the game had shown me earlier in the mission. Granted, different people would likely react differently to this sort of situation realistically, but ethically speaking, I believe that these sorts of situations should be handled the same within the space of this type of video game, being one that is heavily reliant on specific rules and trial and error. Otherwise, a player will be unsure about the rules present, and feel as though they have been unfairly deceived, which may be considered unethical.
As far as the story is concerned, I've learned that my aim is to assassinate those with large amounts of power, which stand to be at opposition of the organization that my player character is working for. However, regardless of their precise motive, they are using Agent 47 as a means to an end, which according to Kant is immoral, so their actions could be considered unethical.
add a comment
|
| [November 3, 2018 12:29:34 AM]
|
Based on my first play session of the game, the ethical morality behind Hitman are already questionable. The game sees the player playing as an Assassin with supposedly no moral compass. This character has supposedly also been involved with assassinations in the past, but may not have memory of any of it. So far, what I've played through are training situations designed for this character, so they presumably not actually assassinations or legitimate life or death situations. Regardless, the implications are questionable. From a Kantian perspective, murder is wrong, therefore the entire premise of this game makes the players actions wrong. However, depending on the characters' motives, of which I am not sure of yet, these assasinations may be very moral from a Utilitarian perspective. As far as I'm aware, my character is also willingly being employed to partake in these assassinations. Social contract theory states that because killing someone is my job, doing so will be completely moral.
add a comment
|
|
|
 |
Hugo_Alvarez's Hitman (PS4)
|
|
Current Status: Playing
GameLog started on: Friday 2 November, 2018
|
|
