[It's time for another Monthly Musing -- the monthly community blog theme that provides readers with a chance to get their articles and discussions printed on the frontpage. -- CTZ]
What if you played a game that tasked you to kill someone, but every time you completed your objective, you were convinced you had done something wrong? I don’t mean something “bad” as in the “good and bad” morality choices we’ve seen over the past two years like BioShock and Mass Effect. Games that ask you to make the choice between being a Paragon of righteousness and a hell spawn that enjoys punching bunnies.
These games ask you to make the morality choice and REWARD you for either decision you make; regardless of the decisions you make over the course of the game, you still “win” the game. Your choices often do little more than affect the ending you see upon the title sequence. Your choices rarely punish you, since designers are “obligated” to sell you a game you can actually complete and win. Ambiguity, thus, is seen as a dodge for game designers, a decision that keeps players from feeling like they are in control of the experience. And, by all notions, how can a player actually interact with a game if they become convinced that every action and decision they make is actually doing something the player doesn’t want to do? How could you make a game where the player does terrible things if it wasn’t their intention?
Shadow of the Colossus is a game where a good character with a noble goal does very bad things.
Wander will do anything to save his Mono, the girl who was killed in his village for unknown reasons. He will climb any mountain to restore his love.
16 innocent Colossi will die for his broken heart.
When I first purchased the game around its release date in 2005, I was shocked by the ways Shadow of the Colossus forces the player into the role of the villain (long before the game’s final twist). Many videogames shy away from the inherently murderous aspects of the gameplay by putting the player in a defensive position; you aren’t just murdering a whole platoon of Nazis, you’re fighting to survive. It’s an excuse that removes the inherent barbarism from the act. Players are often used to being attacked, and the majority of the violence in videogames is either retaliation to an enemy offensive or a protection of one’s own life.
Shadow of the Colossus puts the player in a very different role: the aggressor. Many of the battles in the game force the player to begin the fight by attacking neutral Colossi. Sometimes they’re circling Wander overhead, sometimes they’re minding they’re own business, and sometimes they’re sleeping. In each of the situations, Wander will begin the battle with a wild charge or a flying arrow. The player is the attacker.
The player is a murderer.
Murderer. How many games give the player such a hurtful label? We’ve played games where we’ve taken the role of “killers”(like IO Interactive’s Hitman series) and “soldiers” (too many war games to count). We’ve been given the option to murder (like Bethesda’s Elder Scrolls and Fallout games) that allow players to break the overarching rule structure and take lives. All of these games, however, sidestep any kind of direct “wrongdoing”; the Hitman games have you murdering bad people, while the Bethesda games state, quite clearly, that the option to murder or not murder is a “choice” made by the player. They distance themselves from the grisly realities the player is forced to participate in.
There is never a doubt in my mind that Wander is a murderer. Manipulated or not, Wander (and the player) are forced to kill 16 innocent Colossi. It feels wrong. Every time a Colossus is finally slain from that final strike onto the beast’s glowing runes, it topples to the earth. The Death Knells of the Colossi are some of the most haunting scenes ever created for a videogame. It’s a slow, agonizingly long fall. It manages to completely obliterate all of the excitement of our victory. We see the results of our grim labor and we feel the Earth tremble against the weight of our crime. Shadow of the Colossus allows us to empathize and sympathize for the Colossi. How many times has that happened in a videogame?
When Wander emerges from the swirling clouds of dust and soot in the air, we see our protagonist attacked by a blast of dark energy emerging from the corpse of the monster, and as the game moves forward, Wander’s complexion grows darker and darker. His actions, our actions, are destroying his soul. By the end of the game, when all 16 idols have been toppled, Wander is quite literally, revealed to be the true monster. His noble intent is corrupted by his dark work.
I think about the events of Shadow of the Colossus at least once a day, and I always end up thinking about the majestic Colossi I was forced to take down. Videogames, as a medium, don’t often throw players into a situation with any doubt about the nature or morality of their actions. The player always knows (or, at least, designers think the player should know) exactly why they are engaged in a current gameplay session. If current design standards are any indication, the player must never question the gameplay while it is happening. If the player is forced to actively engage their $60 product, and not just passively play it, many players seem to think that the game has broken its end of the bargain.
Why? Well, what happens when the player questions the nature of their actions while they are engaging in those actions? You stop focusing on “winning the game” and you start questioning the game you’re actually playing! How can you play the game AND question the message that the gameplay is suggesting? It’s impossible, right? As a result, most games are completely passive experiences, allowing very few hooks for the player to actually engage in the game they play. You don’t question the things you do in a game because, well, because you just don’t. You’re not supposed to ask questions about a game. You’re just supposed to have fun … right?
Shadow of the Colossus forces you, during every moment of their play through, to question your actions, to doubt your supposed righteousness. It wants you to engage the game, to stop having fun and start thinking about the game. It wants you to ask why 16 Colossi have to die. It wants you to feel the weight of murder -- the weight of mountains -- on your soul.
Wander isn’t the only one who is corrupted by his actions; You are corrupted as well.
Contest:
7:20 PM on 04.22.2009
| 
The evil force that erupts from their bodies and corrupts Wander over the course of the game, IMO, was being contained by their physical forms. When Wander killed them -- inherently evil creatures by nature -- that evil had no place to go and was absorbed into the nearest vessel.
What Wander did was wrong, not because he was slaughtering innocents, but because he was concentrating all that power in one place. Ultimately, power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely, and we see what comes of that in the final moments of the game.
If what Wander was doing was truly evil...
SPOILER ALERT
do you really think that he would have gotten his heart's desire at the end of the game? He's transformed into a being of ultimate innocence--a baby--and his love is resurrected.
Okay...so the tl;dr version is this: I love your review, but disagree with you on the mythology of the game.
I really love your interpretation of the game! I never considered from that perspective. My one question about your interpretation; how does it match up with a game that is all about putting you into battles against gigantic monsters? The whole game's scale is designed in such a way to make the player feel like a weakling, a spec of dust to the Colossi. Wander's victory against the Colossi seems not a question of power, but of determination. DO you see Wander as a character who is corrupted by his own ability to kill a Colossus? I see Wander's fall into darkness as a corruption of intention, and not of actual "power".
But every time he takes down a Colossi, his strength, energy and grasping abilities grow a bit. He gains power from the souls/essences of the Colossi. That power is what he requires to bring back Mono.
I have a hard time viewing Wander as a villain, because his motivations are routed in love. But, then again, so is Mr. Freeze...
Villains can have good intentions. Look at Mr Freeze, or any of the shitty Sam Raimi Spiderman villains.
I'm not saying that Wander BECOMES a villain, that his corruption results in him making the switch to a life of crime. Instead, I would argue that he commits a villainous after, that his good intentions were corrupted by the inherent barbarism of his task. He's manipulated into doing terrible things.
It never once occured to me that Wander loved Mono, or even knew who she was for that matter. To that end, I always felt that his actions might have been fueled by some sort of obligatory duty, rather than a noble ideal.
By the end of the game I figured that Wander was probably just some dumb kid sent to fullfil the role of avatar for Dormin by some faceless cult and Mono would be the medium, of sorts, to do so. Like an inverted Zelda game.
In this case, do you think Wander was consciously killing and regretting it afterwards, or do you think he may have just been doing it blindly and the all the fancy death knell scenes were simply just for the player to contemplate?
Also, am I a bad gamer if I didn't actually start thinking about why I had to kill the Colossi until the game was way over? My gamer instinct is what probably carried me through the game and told me that they were all just enemies standing in the way of me winning. I understand that SotC attempts to take you out of that mindset, but what does it mean if it doesn't? Am I just a bad person?
@Droll--your argument only stands if one is willing to concede that the Colossi are inherently good. Which I don't...see my ridiculously long original response for more details.
Part of the beauty of SotC is that there is so little concrete story that you can impart whatever rationale you like upon its framework.
Hence why bloggers like Gregatron are lamenting its transformation into a movie...
You bring up a fair point. It wouldn't be fair to generalize all of the Colossi as being representations of goodness. But enough of the battles against the Colossi are, as I mention in the article, instigated by the player. They take the role of the aggressor in conflict, and that's a design decision that I couldn't help but find potent...and frightening.
I like the ambiguity of it all, really. Wander isn't a teen Prince of Persia. The 'bad guy' isn't some concrete thing that we can look at and say "That's him! Right there!" It becomes fairly clear from early on that Dormin has very little concern for Wander's well-being.
There are a few things that add to the morally grey setting. Some of the colossi are aggressive, some are not. The first tries to kill you on sight. He's wondering around, sees you, wants you dead. Others are asleep (or just inactive) and can be written off as defending their turf like anyone would. The last category are the ones that don't do anything until you attack them first.
It's that last category that I find myself saying "I feel terrible about this!" when I land the final blow.
Another thing that muddies the water even further is the question as to whether or not the colossi are even alive. There is a clear similarity between them an the Jewish golem. The magical mark is clearly what animates them (I don't know of anyone who's killed one via stabbing non-marked parts of the body alone). That and they bleed greenish-black. Then again, the colossi are so dang life-like. They scream in pain, even with the slightest prick. They can FEEL you on their body when you grab their hair.
The worst part for me is not the killing--in and of itself--or the marks you gain, or the shadows gripping you. The worst part is looking at the unconscious Wander, as he is surrounded by all those he has slain. They stand there, looking at him. They pity him for what he must do.
I understand that people are afraid of a movie forcing a concrete plot onto SotC, but I believe that its completely possible for a film adaptation to retain the same spirit to an extent.
As long we can stay OUTSIDE of Wander's head and the general mythology of the SotC world can retain some it's feminine mystique, a movie might not be so bad.
@Video Cognito and Phantom Gamer
The Colossi were in fact protectors. When the Demon God was defeated, his essence was shattered and trapped inside of 16 Colossi. Therefor, by attacking the Colossi, even setting foot on the forbidden land, is a willful act of provocation that threatens the design of the Colossi, giving them no choice but to stop you from restoring the evil they defend.
As a somewhat unrelated side note, did anyone else feel a similar emotion in World of Goo, around the stage in Chapter 3, "You Have To Explode The Head"? It seems like that level was designed to make the player feel like a jackass; the Sign Painter's notes and the music made me consider the fact that as I was progressing through the game, I was causing more destruction than good and I truly felt guilty about sending the goo balls to their probable doom. It was almost like the game's addictiveness working against me. I actually reconsidered the game's supposedly industrial-themed slogan, "You can't stop progress" and thought that it was actually referencing YOUR progress.
No, you're not. Although it was a fantastic article/perception I feel like the viewpoint isn't correct.
I completely agree with The Phantom Gamer's first post. Wander saw them as evil demons that sucked the life/spirit out of the realm, and he simply bit off more than he could chew at the end. I honestly think he had no idea what would actually happen when he consumed all that power.
also the collosi are NOT evil. they are the guardians that keep the evil spirit locked away. which is why you are tricked into killing them
*Spoiler*
I always saw the girl at the end as the girl's body inhabited by an element of Dormin. Which made the sacrifice Wander pays even more bitter since I figured the girl would eventually be the Queen figure in the cycle shown ICO. In a way it made the ending for ICO even more powerful for me since the "bad guy" from SotC met their end finally.
So yeah, sorry for the long explanation that delved into ICO, I just interpret them as being so strongly connected. So yeah, I never considered Wander a villain and at the same time I didn't think he really considered the colossi evil (much less thought about what the colossi were at all). I kinda thought he was so hellbent and determined to resurrect the girl that he did not apply any thought or consideration to what he was doing. Dormin being the true "bad guy" who manipulated the all-too-eager Wander. As a player I felt troubled taking the reigns of an ill-fated character that didn't understand his actions, yet understanding of his motivations.
@Grahopper7 yeah, after thinking about this it makes me wanna play the game but it's not down here with me at school =(.
WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! I did it!
And if a crappy writer like me can get a front page plug, then anyone can!
I've always wanted to create a game who you REALLY played the villain... but I wanted to make sure that all the reasons why the villain IS the villain can be sorted out and known to the player... I also wanted to show the world that sometimes the people who we label as the BAD and EVIL guys might not be so evil after all... and that it isn't "Black and White".
The idea after I played this game was a kingdom in a distant world... and the prince who is asked to attack some monsters and this army. Though he doesn't care about his kingdom, he does it because he needs to become king... His heartless and he destroys his opposition with grace, he even kills a couple of his own citizens cause he just doesn't care....
I was just so interested about this "Emotion" while I was killing the colossis... it was just amusing.
I don't think Wander was getting manipulated... because he knew what he was doing and he still want it to do it... Dormin warned him but he didn't care... I don't think his villainous perse, I just think its not a "Black and white" matter as alot of things in the world... We go through life labeling and judging everything but in truth it's not really about good or bad because theres so many different sides of it... Like the terrorists...
You see even when Wander killed those Colossis and the black stuff got into him, he should've known what was happening to him... I mean HE CHANGED DRAMTICALLY and I am pretty sure he isn't stupid enough to what is happening to him... he just did it anyway...
I don't really care about the Colossis cause they were freaking scary when they were trying to attack me and they freaking lived for a LONGGGGGGG time. Lol.
This is just a great game who did different things then all the other games in the world... there needs to be more games like this...
Cause the rpgs and stories they have out nowadays are just too kiddy and immature.
WARNING: SPOILERS.
The game is very ambiguous, to the point that I don't think there's any room for ANY good/evil talk. Most of the ambiguity revolves around the true nature of the Colossi, which is revealed in the ending.
Is Dormin evil? Then Wander is unwittingly helping an evil entity without asking questions, just so he can get his wish. Are the priests that sealed his body in the Colossi evil? Then Wander is working against an evil entity, again without intention to do so.
Are the Colossi evil? Some of them DO attack bystanders, after all. I dunno, it all seems a big war between two equally corrupt parties, and Wander gets caught up in the middle of it. His only real fault is that he doesn't care what's really going on.
Sure, Dormin looks like a pretty vicious god, but I wouldn't go as far as to call the Colossi "innocent". Actually, I never thought of the Colossi as actual living, sentient creatures.
And by the way, I've been trying to think if there are any other games that put you in the shoes of a "real" murderer...Legacy of Kain comes to mind.
I think the game is making a point about "destiny." Mono is supposedly sacrificed because she has a "cursed destiny."
Inevitably, it was this sacrifice that triggers young Wander into killing the 16 collosi, setting free Dormin and begetting the (supposedly evil) horned children.
Now was Mono really "cursed"? Or was it the people, who killed an innocent girl to protect their own interests, who triggered a chain of actions to curse themselves?
If we believe in predestination, then Mono's "cursed destiny" was actually a result the people's evil actions. She was merely an unwitting agent, just as Wander is. Wander HAD little choice but kill the collosi, because he wanted to save Mono. If Mono was never killed in the first place he would have never done it. However, this could not happen as well, as everything is written out and everyone is merely playing their role.
I don't believe that Dormin or the essence which infects Wander throughout the game is inherently evil.
Angry, yes - it has been trapped for a long time, but there are several clues which make me think that actually, no, it's not an evil being.
1) he is fairly honest with Wander. He lives up to his part of the bargain and arguably plays a part in giving him a new life at the end, if the horns are anything to go by. From Ico, we already know that horns in this mythology are not necessarily equal to evil. He warns Wander from the start that the price may be very heavy for doing what he does.
2) He says that he 'borrows' Wanders body at the end. That's interesting wording. If he was fully evil, why not just take it?
3) It seems to me that the humans have a history with this God. Perhaps he's the god they used to worship, but have since abandoned, trapping him in the process? That would make sense of a lot of things that are said in the game.
4) If the colossi are somehow linked to Dormin as they seem to be, then for an evil guy it would be surprising how many of them are docile or just indifferent. Only one or two go out of their way to be vicious, and it seems more like anger than evil.
5) There's just nothing about the other people who arrive that make me think they're the 'good' guys in this story. The girl died because she had a 'cursed fate'. These lands are 'forbidden' and wander performed the 'forbidden spell'. These are all terms which are both vague and have religious overtones, it's never spelled out exactly what is so bad about Dormin, or why he was trapped, or why the land is forbidden, or why this girl got killed. Seems fishy to me.
5)
What I do have to say is that this game, while it had its share of glitches and graphical issues, is amazing and should be played by every gamer. This is coming from someone who first played it and thought the idea was stupid. All you do is run around fighting in boss battles? No real side-quests? No lead up to the bosses? What the hell?
But then I began to realize how innovative this idea was. I mean, what other game did this? Even to go so far as turning some of the bosses into what amounts to a level in other games(I mean, look at the final boss). So I took another go at it and was hooked. Now when friends ask me for a game recommendation, this one is always first on my list.