Tobold's Blog
Friday, June 30, 2006
 
The end of evil

When last year Edward Castronova argued on Terra Nova that Horde characters in World of Warcraft are evil, he was widely ridiculed. There is no "evil" in World of Warcraft, players of either faction are constantly on quests that are helping somebody else. Whether you are a holy paladin or a demon-summoning warlock, it doesn't change the way in which you help the farmer get the deed to his farm back from the evil bandits. There is no moral choice, no option to sell the deed to the highest bidder instead of returning it for a lousy reward. Even the undead are "good" undead, fighting the evil scourge undead.

If a game like Black & White, or Knights of the Old Republic, or Fable, gives you the option to play good or evil, that is just a thinly disguised way to enable you to play the game twice. You chose evil or good by what you think is more useful to beat the game, and then if you play it again, you chose the other side, just to see something new. It is not a moral choice, but a tactical one. We don't feel that burning down a virtual village in a game world and killing the inhabitants is an evil act, after all those are just colored pixels that don't feel anything. Advancing in the game is the most important, even that means that in the next mission we have to throw Napalm on that Vietnamese village to continue.

All that ends us in a total inability between gamers and anti-game advocates or politicians to understand each other. The gamer picks up minor points that the criticism got wrong, like "there are no points in GTA for shooting and raping hookers", and fails to see that the criticism otherwise wasn't all that unjustified. Most of what you do in GTA *is* a depiction of very, very evil behavior. By the time you finished the game you have committed more crimes than any known peace-time gangster. The anti-gamer fails to see that all these crimes are virtual, and don't lead to you going out and doing the same in real life.

"Evil" has become a joke. In Dragon Quest 8 one of the heroes has a special combat move with whirling axes, called "Axes of Evil", har, har, nice joke on George Bush. But I wonder if all this making light of evil, all this gaming without true moral choices, is not making the medium of video games poorer. Fact is that in the real world there is real evil, guys like Sadam Hussein, Kim Jong-il, or Robert Mugabe aren't just "misunderstood". And evil isn't limited to crazy dictators, there are people everywhere that like to be cruel to others. And ordinary people have to make hard moral choices sometimes, between good and evil. Previous entertainment media understood that, and made good and evil a major recurring theme in many books and movies. Only video games present the end of evil, a world in which neither good nor evil matters, where "evil" is just a thin plot element to explain why you as the hero have to go out and kill that boss. We end up with players in online games doing evil things that actually hurt real people, if just in a minor way, and not even realizing the difference. GTA won't turn anybody into a mass murderer, but it is hard to believe that hundreds of hours of inconsequential evil and violence should have no effect whatsoever on how you perceive evil and violence in the real world.
Comments:
Yes, there's evil in rl. Yes, movies, books, and other non-pariticipatory mediums portray true evil in all its evilness. But in a participatory medium, you can't (or shouldn't) have actual evil acts - it would be asking 16 year olds to role-play sick, disgusting, twisted acts. That can't be healthy.

Having players rape women or kill babies wouldn't add anything to a video game except a shock factor, at risk or real psychological damage. If virtual reality becomes so good it is indistiguishable from real life, would it be harmful to allow players to murder people?

Sammy
 
Interesting. I'd have said that, certainly on the RP servers, there's very much an understanding of different moral compasses. (I don't like the term "evil" - it's intellectual shorthand, easily abused, and rarely useful in discussion)

Indeed, much of the roleplaying potential and story potential in WoW comes from the tensions between the different views of good and evil. Should we fight the Horde or make peace with them? Are the Forsaken justified in their plague research? Are the Cenarion Circle weak or restrained? Are the activities of warlocks pragmatic or morally dubious?
 
Evil may be represented without consequences in video games but does real life actually attach consequences to evil? Only acts of violence or straight-out theft tend to have punishment in society. Other acts which most people would agree to be "evil" are routinely done by politicians, businessmen, and lawyers without anything illegal having been done. Society only punishes acts which directly harm an individual. A 20% interest rate may be causing mental anquish to a person but the bank is not punished.

Online worlds are the same. You cannot directly harm someone through the game. Thus your actions should only be limited by your own morality. For every griefer I meet in a game who likes to kill people I meet five individuals who are willing to help others.

Video games don't have consequences for evil actions because its realized in a fantasy world the only real definition of evil is defined in a players mind.
 
I'm not touching this thread with a 10'-pole
 
Of course it's only fantasy but I've always been curious about my very religous acquaintances that have consistently chosen the "evil" side, races, factions, etc. in ALL of the games that we've play together, while I, the non church-goer has always chosen good.

I've always wanted to ask them why Freeport, Shadow and Horde?? But I don't want to be nosey or tread on something personal. Yet i'm very curious.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home
Newer›  ‹Older

  Powered by Blogger   Free Page Rank Tool