Thursday 8 November, 2018

Now that I finally figured out the way the game is meant to be played, I found the gameplay to be much more ethically interesting. This realization came when walking through the hallways of the mansion I heard a girl talking about how she needed help filming an interview. When I heard her on the phone an alert popped up telling me an opportunity was reveling. Then I opened up my menu and I saw a plethora of ways of manipulating my targets. When going through these options the only thing I could think of was how blatantly these methods use other people as means to an end, and how Kant would be very against the options given to the player. Of course, the player doesn’t have to use those options as their execution plan, in an attempt to see other ways of beating the level I watched some gameplay from youtube of different endings of the game. I saw some people find some combination of every path in an almost Rube Goldberg machine-like murder methods, while others just hid in a corner and sniped the target with a suppressed pistol from the other side of the building. So, when evaluating this game from an ethical standpoint is in a gray area where you can cause mass amounts of sadness and pain for civilians and your target, who more often than not is targeted for a reason, or you could take out your target and not impact any other people present. The game may offer the different decisions but it all boils down to what decision the player decides to make.

Great job! Your thoughts about Kantianism in regards to using other people are interesting. If using innocent civilians as a means of assassination, what does that make your target? Is the person you’re killing a means, an end, or something else? Whether or not you choose to talk about Kant in your OPA it sounds like you’ve got some good ideas.