games  anime  |  toys
Destructoid is gaming news, community, videos, and sometimes love. Take the tour or jump in with Facebook:

 


Weekend Reading: Moral choices in gaming photo

Y'know, sometimes it's just impossible to find a picture that depicts what you're talking about in an article. In an abstract way, I guess this picture fits well. Over Spring break, I had to read My Lai: A History with Documents. If you know anything about the incident, it isn't exactly our proudest moment as a military power. It brought to mind though, thoughts about games like Battlefield Vietnam and the Rainbow Six series. Now, what if a game actually put you in a position where you had to make a moral choice like the soldiers at My Lai did?

This week, I'd like to address the idea of moral choices in games. A while back, RevAnthony did a piece on all this, and in some respects, I'll be building off of his generalities, as I plan to deal with some specific cases. So, I suggest giving his article a read when you get the chance.

Alright, so let's jump back to Vietnam. In a game, say you start off by being put into a new company. As you play through the game, you have to deal with landmines, hit and run attacks, and uncooperative villagers. Essentially, the game is trying to agitate you. Now, one of your missions is to rout out enemies from a traditionally VC-friendly village. Before the mission starts, you commander reminds you of all the poeple in the company that have died. Once your chopper lands, there is no immediate resistance (which is rather odd), and so the landing zone is easily secured. As you go through the village, you hear gunfire coming from other areas, but are only encountering old men, women, and small children. RememberL any of them could be an enemy. The kids could walk up to your jeep and drop grenades in. Would you gun them down just to be safe?

Later on, you're guarding about 80 villagers that have been rounded up. Your commander comes by and orders you to waste them all. What do you do?

This doesn't necessarily have an impact on your gameplay, but it does present you with a moral choice, and puts you in the mindset of the soldiers who experienced this. Now, I realize that these games would probably do poorly with the mass market, since you're putting them through a game where they are actually experiencing what it was like in Vietnam, not just getting to go around, guns ablazing. Of course I could be wrong, and the mass audience would love this sort of game; but for now let's put it under the category of "games as art."

For another example, here's a game whose gameplay revolves around your decisions. Take something like Front Mission 4, where the setting is in international politics. Now, have the player as a leader of a country, where they have to make diplomatic decisions as to what to do in a wartime setting. When I was thinking up this example, the big thing that comes to mind is post-WWII US. Having the player make decisions about containment polcy in Europe and East and South Asia allows for a myraid of possibilities in how the game turns out.

Now, the second option really doesn't sound like a full game, and more like a history simulator. So then imagine combining the two examples, where you get to experience the reprecussions of your actions on the frontline. Providing the player with both an experience of a situation at both the micro and macro level would create an interesting perspective on what their actions do.

What I'm trying to get at here is that there's this really nice avenue where a genre can be completely turned on its head and provide for something that's truly innovative. Normally, FPS games are all about the wanton killing of anything that isn't on your side. Add in what I've described above, and it actually gives the story mode some meaning, as opposed to just acting as a training mode for multiplayer.

Actually seeing this game made, and even finding out the results of how people acted in situations really fascinates me. Would you enjoy seeing these sort of moral choices placed into games? Or am I just rambling on about something that'd utterly kill the gameplay for you?

Also, I really do recommend picking up the My Lai book, as it does a great job of telling the story of what happened, almost completely through the soldiers' own words.


Continue: More Weekend Reading stories





prev next

26 comments | showing # 1 to 26

BlindsideDork's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/18/2007 22:07
BlindsideDork
We are all going to die in probably 30 years, so does it matter?
Joseph Leray's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/18/2007 22:09
Joseph Leray
I've tried to do several write-ups of Fake Game Friday for something very similar to this, but I've always failed miserably. It's a pretty ambitious sounding idea. It also goes back to linearity -- how could developers allow players to make those choices while still maintaining some sort of order?

Interesting write up, DMV.
comradetrotskii's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/18/2007 22:09
comradetrotskii
The main thing I have to say is that the lack of actual consequence renders moral choice irrelevant in games. Given the above example regarding the villagers I would probably refuse the first time, but would then load a game and massacre them in the most humorous way possible. Why? Why not.

Its not that I wouldn't like to see moral choices have an actual effect in gameplay, its just that I don't think its ever going to happen. Choices we do make in games will be determined by the rewards or detriments presented by the game for making that choice.
Antimat3r's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/18/2007 22:22
Antimat3r
This was a great article!

I recently picked up my copy of Star Wars KOTOR and began a new game. You know the deal: light or dark side of the force. I played through it light before, so I wanted to try and be the evil douche. Let me tell you, it was a hard thing to do (well, for me anyway)! Choices like being nice to the apartment manager or giving away your hard earned cash to someone in need did effect your gameplay and did involve a large moral component.

The game sounds like a great idea. I think it would be difficult for some people to swallow a custom ending based on their own in-game choices (moral decisions).

This game also brings to light the bigger picture, something we often miss. After all, killing one civilian may lead to thousands of causalities on the other side!


Ignignokt01's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/18/2007 22:27
Ignignokt01
I agree with Comradetrotskii; I think having consequences, meaningful ones, make those choices more real. I always come back to Fallout 2 (god damn I am a fanboy), and the 'childkiller' rank comes to mind. Sometimes, the children are a pain in the ass, or sometimes you just accidentally kill them. Part of me just doesn't want to kill them because they don't really do any harm, and by killing them you are labeled throughout the rest of the game as a childkiller which affects future interaction with NPC's.

So without consequences, having moral decisions in games is close to pointless.
Teh Ted's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/18/2007 22:37
Teh Ted
I'd throw in that this exists somewhat in God of War (the original)...when you're forced to sacrifice the captive soldier by pushing him into the flame and listening to his screams. It's part of the whole Kartos as an anti-hero motif...but I found myself thinking that it somehow lacked the force that it should have. It might just have been me.

In my pen and paper RPG days, I was infamous for doing this to my players. They'd carefully lay their ambush to kill a group of orcs, spring the trap and begin slaughtering...and in the middle of the action one or two of the players would realize that the orcs weren't fighting back, nor even attempting to. Afterwards they'd find women and children amongst the slain.

The truth of the matter is that armed conflict is a bloddy, nasty, brutal affair. Even using 'pinpoint precise' weapons, lots and lots of innocent people die in horrific ways. Strategically, a war can seem clearly in the moral right. Tactically, it's always a lot more ambiguous.

And My Lai is a pretty important case study for military types. Also look at the Milgram experiments; there's a lot of fodder there to be pulled apart. Would they make for a 'fun' game? No. Would they make for an important game? Maybe.
Anthony Burch's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/18/2007 22:43
Anthony Burch
I'd definitely buy a game with horrendous moral choices like that: I just recently started replaying Fable with the intent of playing as a completely evil character. But I've found that the "evil" choices are too obviously "evil", to the point of being nonsensical and silly (do you fight a bully who is harrassing a small kid, or punch the kid for literally no reason and walk away?).

A My Lai game would be terrifying, and horrible, and not at all fun, which is the exact type of game I want to play.
God Len's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/18/2007 22:59
God Len
Thanks for making me feel sad, since you know... I always pick the evil route.
Morca's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/18/2007 23:33
Morca
KOTOR is pretty heavy handed and clear cut with it's morality system.
I tried to play all DS, and just couldn't do it...
paddymcspud's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/18/2007 23:39
paddymcspud
Great article, been thinking the 'bout the same thing myself, if implemented properley, i.e. with tangible effects on enemy or squad morale,the opening of different paths/weapons/levels this could turn out to be the next step for the oh-so-formulaic FPS Genre.It would also thicken the "games as art" debate, not all books, films etc are fun and warm to experience so why should all games be?

Despite all the corporate crap and their desire to please the masses, a genuinely emotive and well crafted game focused on this idea would be bound to sell. Vietnam would be an excellent setting; why not play a fully-fledged campaign from the NVA's perspective? Personally a shooter set on the Eastern front in WW2 - seen from both sides - would rock, as beaucoup crap went down there that has been largely ignored in gaming (shooters)...Soz for big post...
ElementalBlazer's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/18/2007 23:42
ElementalBlazer
That's a bit like Bio Shock I mean about Moral decisions
Mxyzptlk's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/19/2007 00:10
Mxyzptlk
A My Lai game would be nowhere as cool as a Jai Alai game.



Seriously, David Jaffe's cancelled PSP "crying" game could have been very much what you're describing. It dealt with the invasion of American by the Chinese, and as an solider you would have to deal with moral choices such as deciding whether or not to obey your orders to kill a Chinese-American family suspected of collaborating with the enemy, and so forth. After hearing about the concept, I was really bummed that Sony didn't go forward with. That kinda thing might have convinced me to pick up a PSP.
grrza's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/19/2007 00:33
grrza
I once played a round of Civilization (III, i think), in which I had a huge scientific/technological lead over the NPC nations. I got to a point where I really needed oil to advance any further, but there was none within my borders, and I couldn't import any, because none of the other nations were advanced enough to even detect it yet. I didn't want to lose my edge by waiting for them to advance (or selling my scientific knowledge), so what did I do? I invaded a small Native American nation and colonized a city that had some oil resources nearby. This went off without a hitch, but I lost the goodwill of every other NPC nation for the rest of the game in the process.

It also had the effect of making me realize that I just did in a virtual world the kind of thing that I would rail against governments doing in the real world. I also thought it was really cool that a situation like this could develop in a game like Civ, where I think things like resources are decided randomly at the beginning of game.
Lezbro's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/19/2007 00:55
Lezbro
There's this sweet game out called "Let's Fuck Up the Planet."

It's 100% lag-free multiplayer and features 6 billion active users.

First place: the biosphere ends.

Second place: this set of steak knives.
Hipple's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/19/2007 00:58
Hipple
I think the most interesting aspect of moral choices in gaming today is the brand of morality that game developers build around. Rev was talking about how the choices in Fable 2 were overly simplistic, but I can recall being perplexed as to why certain choices were either good or bad. Even in the case of beating up the bully vs. punching the little kid, it seems that punching the little kid is clearly wrong, but it's not the case that beating up the bully is clearly "right" or "good". If anything, you're simply creating an atmosphere of violence, and you're certainly not bringing about any positive change in the bully. One of the obstacles of creating games that have serious consequences for your moral choices is determining what choices will correspond to what consequences.

Should the player be punished for massacring the villagers, or is that a morally neutral action? Different moral theories would have different things to say about that (for example, ethical egoism is going to advocate the massacre as an action that directly preserves or benefits the player), which means that different players will have different expectations for certain choices. There are obviously actions that most or all moral theories agree on, but the really interesting gameplay comes from those fringe cases where the line is a little more blurry.
Lord_Satorious's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/19/2007 01:08
Lord_Satorious
I always thought a good litmus test for this would be a game like <i>Hitman: Blood Money</i>. In the tutorial level, you're actually instructed to poison the drink of the secretary before moving on to your primary target. This always disturbed me, because although she's a dumb blonde, there's no justifiable reason to kill her. I preferred to knock her out from behind with the butt of my gun, and the end result was the same: no witnesses. In a game like <i>Hitman</i>, how many innocents are you willing to kill to complete your objective? This sort of moral relativism is to become, I'm sure, a very important topic in the future of video games.

Then again, I'm a complete maniac in games like <i>Grand Theft Auto</i>, perhaps because the consequences are hardly consequences at all, whereas in <i>Hitman</i> you're ranked by your performance in the mission. Or perhaps because I feel far removed, even detached from the character I'm playing. Indeed, the camera is fairly distant, and everyone looks very small. It almost adds to the 'God complex', where the game world is your sandbox and even dying won't set you back very far.
Victor Stillwater's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/19/2007 02:04
Victor Stillwater
For once, I'd like to see that mechanic in something other than a rolep[laying game.

Shooters could ostensibly do it with so much more dramatic impact as well, since everything is done from first-person.
Deus's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/19/2007 03:41
Deus
The game in question wouldn't be comparable to KOTOR or Fable. Personally, KOTOR is one of my favourite games of all time and I have beaten both 1&2 3 times or so each. Choices involving morality do affect your character quite a bit, but later on you can just turn the tables and be good when you used to be bad. This is even more true in Fable. I watched my brother beat the hell out of Fable-he literally had every single attribute and ability you could get and all the items and equipment too- and he oscillated between bad and good more than a dozen times. He always had horns by the end, even even he was fully good. He had so much money he could just buy his way back to being good or evil at the altars in the game. My point is, in a game involving something like the Vietnam War, if you do something wrong you should probably just be court marshaled and sent to Leavenworth-GAME OVER. There's no turning back once you've committed a crime. If you're caught the game should just end. Kind of lame really. When it's on an international level though, it's you against the world with no one to tell you what's right or wrong and most importantly no all powerful authority figure that can just swoop in and end the game at any moment for you.
crazywes's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/19/2007 05:24
crazywes
It can be done as long as it makes sense. Using your rounded up villagers example there could be 2 outcomes. 1 would be you don't follow the order, and thus get assigned to suicidal missions with no hope of ever making it back. The other would be you follow said orders, but now you are having a harder time aiming your weapon due to the nightmares keeping you up as you relive the villagers being slaughtered over and over. You come back from war a shell of a man. Unable to maintain relationships, a job, and turn to boozes/drugs to quiet your inner demons. The game ends with you dieing in a pool of your vomit in some back alley. How's that for moral choices?
Bluefusion's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/19/2007 06:32
Bluefusion
I think that for many people the concept of moral gaming may go over their heads. I can just imagine some 14-year-old Xbox Live player shooting his way through the victims of My Lai without learning any history nor feeling any remorse.

Unless the moral system was implemented perfectly, I can imagine a huge backlash among the public against such types of games. If there was a game where you could kill little children, and a news outlet got a hold of a video of some kid who enjoyed doing it, it would be hell on earth for the company that made it. It's too much of a risk, and it would put the entire gaming industry under scrutiny.
bhive01's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/19/2007 09:50
bhive01
I agree that the moral choices in Fable and KOTOR are black and white without much of the gray that most people decide on day to day. A true moral "choices" game would definitely be interesting.
KilgoreTrout XL's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/19/2007 10:37
KilgoreTrout XL
I'd recommend "Four Hours in My Lai" (Bilton/Sim) for those interested in this event as well.

I had to reasrch this event in a "law of war" class. Just horrible.

But moral choices have been around since Ultima IV. Stuff like My Lai isn't marketable, so we're not going to see a to-massacre-or-not-to-massacre game anytime soon. But moral choice is there nonetheless.
Lezbro's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/19/2007 15:13
Lezbro
>> I can just imagine some 14-year-old Xbox Live player shooting his way through the victims of My Lai without learning any history nor feeling any remorse.

Except a lot of gamers now (most?) are over 20 and are ready (desperate really) for some content that goes beyond talking foxes and zombies. A lot of younger players are also sophisticated in their movie viewing (yes, even some 14 year-olds) and it's not a stretch to imagine they would like to see similar themes applied to their video games.
Lezbro's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/19/2007 15:23
Lezbro
>> If there was a game where you could kill little children, and a news outlet got a hold of a video of some kid who enjoyed doing it, it would be hell on earth for the company that made it. It's too much of a risk, and it would put the entire gaming industry under scrutiny.

This is true.

But it's a battle that is going to have to be fought sooner or later. The industry and its users are going to have to decide that they are going to act on behalf of content that is controversial. Everyone talks about gaming "growing up," but gaming is not some monolith that exists in some golden abstract realm. It's gamers telling the game companies what to produce. Period.

Sex and violence are easy. Easy to attack and easy to defend really. The real challenge will come when game developers try to sell games that deal with controversial IDEAS. Gamers will demonstrate their maturity or lack in their decision to defend or abandon freedom of expression in video games.

I'm not talking about Kratos grabbing titties or low-rez Hot Coffee humping. I'm talking about Do The Right Thing or Glengarry GlenRoss. Something with real teeth. Racial, social, political.

My Lai was not a shoot-em-up. To deal with that subject in a game would require a level of sophistication not yet exhibited in any video game I have seen or heard of.
paddymcspud's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/19/2007 20:30
paddymcspud
Your exactly right Lezbro, blowing children away would have the media falling over themselves with outrage - nothing new there. Such a game would be the perfect oppertunity for the industry to get mainstream approval i.e. to be taken seriously. As long as generic crowd-pleasers are crapped out how else can we expect the industry to be viewed?

If all we saw were B-movies, who the hell would take film seriously?

Hopefully all the fuss generated would lead to a proper debate. Any of the writers here could dismantle the - "OMFG! kids killing virtual kids then telling other kids how much fun killing kids is..." - debate that's sure to arise, anyway I digress...
Gasekura's Avatar - Comment posted on 03/23/2007 02:11
Gasekura
Moral choices exist in games. And I know two games that perfectly illustrate the way morality is implemented in the majority of today's games and the way I think it can be done well.

In Fable, even the smallest actions add to your good or bad factor. There's a good choice and a bad choice and every 'decision' is a obvious as to it's moral value, providing you remove all context of the situation (I'm pretty sure I got evil points for putting a permanent end to a man responsible for the slaughter and torture of countless innocents). No one in real life watches over you every second saying "Naughty naughty, you killed an innocent little birdie. You're gettin' horns for that." This is the kind of stuff we see in most games. Good guys aren't as powerful but they have the love and adoration of everyone around them while bad guys are lonely (or misunderstoond) beings of ultimate destruction. NPCs are generic and cannot act, but only react.

I'm recently replaying Morrowind and I've noticed the game includes a lot of moral and ethical issues that the world has seen at some point in time. Slavery, drug trafficing, use, and addiction, culture clashes (ie: empire expansion), religious clashes. Do you run about freeing as many slaves as possible, or do you respect the time-honored tradition of a culture? Is the man who killed a corrupt politician a stain on justice that needs to be removed, or did he do the right thing?

It's the first game I've personally played (extensively) that really portrayed a REAL world. With cultures and issues that coexist. I want to see more games that involve REAL issues, regardless of whether these issues exist in is real or fabricated worlds.
Holy crap that was long-winded. I swear I didn't intend it to be.
prev next

Comment with Facebook





Click connect and comment instantly!

Comment with Dtoid





New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds

Comments policy

Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?

Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!

 
New on Destructoid.TV play all videos

Loading
Loading Destructoid Videos


    Win this!
    Dive in! meetup+play for a chance to win a PC

    Dtoid Twitter    Got news?   tips@destructoid.com

    Reviews & Previews
    Assassin's Creed 2 review
    Crossfire Remote Pistol review
    Resident Evil: The Darkside Chronicles review
    Left 4 Dead 2 review
    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare Reflex review
    more reviews
    Driver
    Avatar
    GT Racing Motor Academy
    Bad Company 2 beta dishes out meaningful experiences
    Legend of Zelda Spirit Tracks
    more previews


    - The Dtoid Army is 51015 strong -

    Showing Cblogs with 3+ faps   show all

    Call for entries: do the wrong thing

    New to Dtoid? Read the survival guide




     Originals
    Chad Concelmo: The tragic history of the videogame turkey





















    More Destructoid Originals




     Popular now more






















    Team Destructoid   tips@destructoid.com
    Nick Chester
    Editor-in-Chief
    Niero
    Founder, publisher
    Jim Sterling
    Reviews Editor
    Hamza Aziz
    Community Manager
    Dale North
    News Editor
    Rey Gutierrez
    Video editor & director
    Anthony Burch
    Features Editor
    Colette Bennett
    Tom Fronczak Brad Nicholson
    Ashley Davis Ben Perlee
    Conrad
    Zimmerman
    Chad Concelmo
    Jonathan Holmes Jonathan Ross
    Brad Rice Jordan Devore
    Will Maddock Matthew Razak
    Dyson Joseph Leray
    Topher Cantler Samit Sarkar
         
      Dexter
    Adam Dork
    Daniel Lingen
    Hollie Bennett
    Joe Burling
    Mikey
    Stella Wong

    Josh Tolentino




     

     
      get involved

    register or login
    post a blog
    post a forum
    enter a contest
    contribute a news tip
    suggest a feature
    be a guest editor
    support

    new member's guide
    login assistance
    tech support
    report abuse
    email our editors
    read our dev blog
    nuclear crisis?
    keep in touch

    RSS feed
    Twitter
    Facebook
    Myspace
    Flickr
    Game nights
    Meetup+play online
    seriously

    about Destructoid
    advertising
    terms of use
    privacy policy
    jobs at MM
    buy our crap
    our network

    Tomopop
    Japanator
    Despingation?




    Destructoid is an independently-run publication forged by our love of video games and the gaming community's need of accountable enthusiast press
    living the dream since March 16, 2006