Monday 6 October, 2008

The last time I played throught the game I saw that family seemed to be the one main values of the game. Not only for the fact that the main character came back to town for his mother but for the fact that he is sucked back into the brotherhood of the community as well.
From a Kantian stand point the main character has a moral duty to protect his family no matter what. Wheither its killing other gangsters, drug dealers, or anyone that gets in his way the main character believes he is doing the right thing.... his moral duty to keep his family and his brothers in arms safe from others who wish to do them harm.
The funny part is that it is still a wrong action because he is causing harm to others and putting himself in harms way. Even though he believes he is doing the right thing by doing so.
The main character so far from what I played never was conflicted in that fact either although it was mostly the beginning of the game I had played. But I'm pretty sure that maybe toward the middle or the end of the game the main character would start having a conflict of intrest in what his moral duty actually is and how to go about it in a different sort of way

So far you are making some valid ethical arguments towards the characters perspective of violence and how the use of violence to complete game goals is presented to the player. If the player’s character seems conflicted with the choices of using violence it would add moral value to the game, because this will convey to the player that the use of violence to solve real life problems should be avoided.