Week 10: IGDA Ethical Code For Game Designers

For week 10 the task was to read the IGDA Ethical code and answer the following question

Do game designers need an ethical code? Is the IGDA Code a solid ethical code for game designers?

So lets start by answering the first question Do game designers need an ethical code?

The answer is in my opinion is yes they do need an ethical code and here is my reasons for this without a code of ethics game designers would be given free license to design a game without caring about the moral implications of putting a game on the market can bring

found this interesting article on gamasutra that will help answer the first part of the question
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/2181/ethics_of_game_design.php?print=1

"We as an industry do have a moral responsibility," says Peter Molyneux, CEO of Lionhead Studios and creator of hits fromBlack and White to Fable. "Anyone who does something for a mass market has a responsibility. You tread carefully on the lessons that you teach. That line that 'if a game is fun, it is okay'-that sounds trivial. If it is obvious this is an artificial world and you can't do these things in real life, then that is more acceptable. But if it parades itself as a real world, you have to be careful about that."

this can go without saying that as Peter points out when you are creating something for the mass market you have a responsibility that when you create something for that market that you understand any issue's that might happen and can fully justify them why you have put them in a game. 

further along the article it states that:

Executives at Take-Two Interactive Software, publisher of GTA: Vice City, don't comment publicly on the ethics of the game. But privately they grouse that the content in the game is no worse than what you find in an R-rated movie or a rap music CD. It is the same kind of content you can find in an Emmy-winning episode of The Sopranos. They consider it hypocritical for politicians to single out the game industry for criticism. And they note that the game carries a "Mature" rating, meaning kids under 17 aren't supposed to play it and parents should police what their children play.

Which i believe is also true that releasing violent games in a market is a must and designers have made sure they warned that the game contains story's and mechanics that are not suitable for a certain age group they can't do no more its up to the parents to make sure if they don't want their child playing those games, as the example given the sopranos has just as much swearing and death scenes and can't solely criticise the game industry and then hail a show like that with emmy awards when they have gave the same warnings about content as these shows and films do as well. 

But as commented before games are entering this realm of realism with enhancements in technology that has brought certain games that could become reailty as quoted in the same article

It's only a matter of time until a developer produces a serial killer game, a mass genocide game, or the next Postal-esque homicide simulator. But whoever actually makes these games cannot claim ignorance as a defense of their product. The ground work has been laid for the ethics of this industry, and thanks to countless violent and objectionable games that have already been brought to market, the boundaries of good taste and ethical responsibility are now known. While defining the ethics of an individual game can be difficult at the extremities, these decisions become clearer.

The game industry can't just ignore the ethical standards they have been building throughout the years and the boundaries of good taste and ethical responsibility have been set it is just the case if they do something that questions it they can't use the ignorance claim and must have justification and be held accountable what is brought to the market is questionable. 

To answer the second question Is the IGDA Code a solid ethical code for game designers?

This is a difficult question as some of the IGDA ethics are good and solid which i agree too and would find hard not use in any work environment.

to check out the IGDA code here is the link https://www.igda.org/?page=codeofethics

I don't have any problems with section 1 principles they all seem very straight forward and clear.

Section 2 and 3 throws up some things that could be questioned
one in particular is 
From Section 3

Adhere to fair schedules and contracts, never committing to delivering more than we can reasonably achieve while maintaining standards of workplace quality of life;

What if something goes wrong in production that results in over time or a client decides that they need to release the game sooner or things in the game he/she are not happy about then you might have to schedule over time to compensate and if they are not willing as it breaks they're contract whats stopping the manager replace said person with someone who will do the overtime

i know they're are issue's with crunch and not being paid for it that is another discussing entirely but these are issues that can crop up and its not the game industry that has this issue all industry can suffer this same problem. 

From Section 2 

For the integrity of ourselves as professionals and as a professional organization, we will be aware of and adhere to all local laws in the region in which we operate, unless there is an overwhelming ethical conflict in so doing;

The reason i bring this up if there is ethical conflict in adhere to a country or cities law's why start or move your company where this might happen, there are many countries and cities have laws that in other countries would not be accepted and vice versa so why set up your company in a place you know there might be ethical conflict in the first place 

i might not be understanding the question right maybe but find it strange to have that there. 

Overall the code provided by IGDA is a good solid code for any developer to start with especially starting up but i would hope they would continue to add and develop it as i have pointed out there is flaws with the code.  

Week 9: There Are Wrongs and Then There Are Wrongs.

For week 9 reading for Ethics in the Virtual World was to read chapter 7: There are wrongs and then there are wrongs and answer the following question 

If you accept that it is OK to kill random people in a video game (if you do not think it is OK feel free to argue this point), would it be OK to seek out to intentionally kill only individuals identified as homosexual in the game? Why?

This is a tough question as my moral take on this is no it would not be ok to kill random people, but them in a game world can i justify that then maybe i can let me explain. 

Throughout the history of games one of the main aspects of these virtual worlds is defeating your enemy in order to complete levels or the game on the whole from Pac-Man devouring his enemies once he has eaten a power dot to now where we have skyrim, fallout 4, grand theft auto the list goes on where roaming these lands and worlds and killing npc or enemies are a regular occurrence especially if you gain new weapons/ loot that will help you further along in the game. so in that aspect of killing random there seems to be no issue with players and developers killing random's in games if its part of a quest or there is something to gain

so lets see about the second half of the would it be ok to seek out to intentionally kill only individuals identified as homosexual in the game? why? 

This is where the line is drawn for me personally my moral's would not allow myself to go hunting and intentionally kill someone for what is in effect who they are lets see the examples in two fictitious games talked about in the book S.H (Shit Happens) where you kill random people from all walks of live without knowing who they are or what you do then yes your brain or morals would not see a problem as it you can't associate with those characters and so the only association you can build is the fact they are just pixels or are just seen as targets and so no emotional ties are there to stop you from killing them. 

but the other fictitious game mentioned is called R.A.C.I.S.T (Rage Against Community: Intercept, Segregate and Terminate). In the book it uses Jews and that the object is to seek out discriminate so this game is all about killing identities either being gay or following a religion, this makes the game about killing generic people rather than nobody's. so if you do play this game your moral code is very accepting about discrimination or in fact you gain some pleasure from it. 

So lets put in a game that does exist what if in skyrim lets say you were ask by your Jarl to go out and hunt down every single khajiit because the Jarl did not like the smell of them, i personally would not be able to go along with that and would either quit the game and not go back or would end up fighting against the jarl for his view.

So i believe there is a difference to killing randoms to killing characters that have an identity as soon as that character has a identity or an close association that has been built it will put more meaning towards that character and killing them will mean more. 

But if i have such a problem with killing people with identities in games then how can i justify just killing a random in a game it would be like if i walked up to random and killed them on the street i don't know them so it should be no problem for me as i don't have a emotional connection to that person but i know myself and  my moral's that is wrong and would not do that but i have no problem in the game space world 

which also leads to virtual rape and pedophilla in games which are big social no's but why is murder more easily accepted i understand killing can happen either in self defence or in war but is still seen as an unacceptable act just like rape and pedophilla which has no place in a game worlds but there can be argument that if television and films can portray these social issue's why do games avoid it is it the fact as a player controlling these actions would be like doing it yourself and in that case why is their no problems murdering in games? 
It might be a time that what if these are put in games for educational purposes or to help recognize these issue's could take place.

For me and morally i hope these issue's are never brought into a game world as in my eye's games are for entertainment but ethically i can see you have to ask these questions and realise that these questions are there 

In games with morality systems, I've never seen the evil path handled well.

Interesting post i discovered about how games have not handle the evil path well here is the link at the bottom:
http://forum.bioware.com/topic/515630-in-games-with-morality-systems-ive-never-seen-the-evil-path-handled-well/

It discuss the fact that games should not give you an option of being goods and evil and takes the fun away for going through that yourself

he also makes the example that all evil guys hide their true beliefs and intentions like for example in Star wars Palaptine is seen as a good guy at the beginning and did good stuff to make people believe in him then he revealed his true intentions when he was positioned correctly to make his move.

i thought it was quite interesting and a very true statement you don't normal have a choice of being good or being bad, it could be the case that it has developed and changes over time and certain situations or you hide your true intentions to get what you want in the long haul

Moral Decision making in Games

While researching the last chapter found this interesting article in Game Studies the link is below if you want to check it out:

http://gamestudies.org/0902/articles/schulzke

It talks about that now games are giving players in these open worlds moral choices but sometimes the moral choices in these games are only slight and in order for the moral choice in games to become more meaningful they must become more calculated and have far reaching consequences. the article highlights the Fallout series as giving the player thoughtful moral problems and multiple paths to resolve them

It claims that video games are the latest art to be accused of corrupting morality. with Plato and Aristotle argued over the merits of tragedy, contemporary social theorists argue and debate the effects of video games. while the difference with games to earlier art forms is that games are interactive. and this engagement in fantasy worlds allows Aristotle vision of cathartic purpose that he had in mind but the educational function he probably did not anticipate.

Moral choices in games could be seen as misguided too as how are these moral choices decided through the developer so you are in a sense giving trust to the developer that he understands the moral implications of each decision and while Fallout deals with moral issues effectively, grand theft auto deals with that when you kill innocent people you can drive around a few minutes and avoid capture by respraying your car or hiding and then it is forgotten about. 

Week 8: Are Meanings Virtually The Same

After Reading week we were set the task to read chapter 6: Are meanings virtually the same in ethics in the virtual world and answer the following question for class:

What is Power's argument for moral policing in computer games?

What is meant by the term 'morally corrupt'?

Is it fun to 'break taboos'? Use arguments from the chapter to support your position.

So lets start with the first question: What is Power's argument for moral policing in computer games?

Power declares that to engage in these STA's is morally wrong and its not because they are an equivalent to POTA's but a representation of them in other words when engaging in taboo subjects as symbolic they represent taboo subject matter on the outside world. With that you look at GTA where in its game play you can shoot, murder and run over people does that mean it is promoting that it's ok to do that in reality no it is not as even in GTA they have put consequences for those actions like police arresting/ killing you if you get caught 

Or in Skyrim if you attack and kill someone you are then attacked by the guards of the city if you killed someone innocent in the game or if you steal things from an inn or an shop and get caught you are arrested and either pay a fine or get thrown in jail all though games have violence and even taboo subjects they are consequences to those actions and it gives you choices as well.

What is meant by the term morally corrupt?

To understand what is meant by this first i wanted to breakdown the definitions of Morally and Corrupt

Morally is to have a sense of what is right, good and truthful based on an implied common standard or from within yourself

Corrupt is dishonest, erroneous and untrustworthy conduct, usually by way of bribery or alteration of original intentions that ultimately leads to a bastardized view of original goals.

When these two words combine, several definitions of moral corruption arise. First is that one's view of what is right and good is simply upside-down or not in-line with the agreed standard. Second, one can be moral but achieve the goals of those morals in dishonest ways (Plato described this concept as the "honest lie"). The third scenario is one that needs a follow-up:  can a person who does not have any morals be morally corrupt?

Is it fun to 'break taboos'? 

The answer of that question would be yes it's human nature to try and break rules or taboo's that they live by or the majority stand by and finding a medium that they can do that is even better in the book Thomas Nys states "Knowing that it is wrong is part of the fun and games. The thrill of such actions is precisely that they transgress ethical boundaries. That in some cases there is allure that some STA's have and being able to do it in a virtual space where characters and worlds don't really exist gives the player a feeling of immersion that once they are done they have not really harmed anyone, and being able to live out a fantasy that they would not normally do in the outside world its the same when someone is immersed in a book or a film and the can imagine that world and doing those activities without harming or disrespecting anyone in the real world.

with that there is an attraction especially now of people role playing in bad characters or anti hero's being able to do morally questionable things but still look like you are the good guy in it all its that immersion that they can engage with different emotions and identities in relative safety in the virtual world. this is backed up by Jeroen Jansz 2005. 

but in games now they are recognize this fact and giving people the option to play the bad guy in skyrim you can join two factions that could be seen as questionable the thieves guild where you have to steal and rob from people some are justified but others might not be but they have morals and do  not rob from their own and also the Dark Brotherhood where they are assassins and purposely take jobs that involve killing people no matter if they are innocent or not if they have been paid then the job is done

But you have the option of not joining these factions just don't complete any of the quests or refuse to join them.

Also Fable gives you the option of your character being good or being evil and also infamous gives you the choice of good karma or bad karma and have the choice to save the city in the end or watch fall into ruin

So i believe that games have begun to recognize that players like challenging there morals and breaking taboos in virtual worlds and are developing its game play to enhance that. 

HOW VIDEO GAMES CAN HELP WITH DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY

So maybe another random post that does not  relate to the reading material but i found interesting is that how games are helping anxiety and depression

Please read the article below for more information about the topic as i'm not going in depth with my analysis but for a serious games point of perspective its great that games can immerse you in problems and worlds you have no clue about as you don't suffer these problems in a sense showing the positive aspect of games is that immersion and being able gain a perspective on something you would normal won't.

http://geekandsundry.com/how-video-games-can-help-with-depression-and-anxiety/

Or even helps someone recognize they might have a disorder they thought they did not have its great that science is now developing and seeing games as a tool rather than just an entertainment device for kids

i stop the game in skyrim cause i personally did not like what i did

Just something i wanted to post as i talk about in class the other day and i thought there is some relevance to it.

Recently i was back playing skyrim and in between traveling to a quest i was attacked by a drunk nord so i in turn engaged him during the fight i thought it was strange that he was using his fist while i had  my battleaxe and before i finished question this i killed him after a few hits with my axe upon then searching his body i discovered he did not have a weapon on him at all

as i walked away i felt really guilty as i fought him with a weapon while he was drunk and did not know his actions and if i just fought him off with my fists then he would still be alive and so i felt a bit of my moral code flowing into my character in the game and i actual stop the game and return to an early version before i killed the drunken Nord

Hoping i could rectify what i just did but when i traveled the same route i was attacked again but this time a thief attacked me with a weapon trying to steal my gold which i fought off  and killed but i felt justified in that killing than i did when killing the drunken nord

the reason for posting it for some they might of not cared about there actions cause it is a virtual world for me thou as playing this character in this world  in my head have gave some of the same morals that i have and although it is a virtual world i believe that my character would not react in that manor against an unarmed man.

i thought it was interesting giving the previous discussing in class that it's just pixels and the virtual space why have those feeling for a character that does not exist but what if you make this attachment and in your own mind is a representation of yourself in this virtual space?