On the ethicality of killing virtual virtual citizens

For the serious discussion of weighty matters and worldly issues. No off-topic posts allowed.

Moderators: Azrael, Moderators General, Prelates

johnie104
Posts: 248
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 6:44 pm UTC
Contact:

On the ethicality of killing virtual virtual citizens

Postby johnie104 » Sun Sep 22, 2013 6:57 pm UTC

This needs a short introduction:

Recently I've been having a blast playing Saints Row IV. If your not really into games: The SR series started as a GTA clone, but became more and more 'goofy' which each installment. In IV, the first mission results in you becoming president of the united states. Shortly after that aliens invade and put you in a virtual reality (think: The Matrix).

This virtual reality looks just like the world in SR3, but then with added aliens and you have superpowers.

Anyway, what I found was that killing civilians in this world felt less wrong then killing people in other open world games, because those citizens live in a virtual reality inside the game. There is a certain disconnect where I can say "It's just a game" more easily (I don't have a problem playing GTA or Prototype or anything, but there I realize that I am acting like a violent psychopath). I'm not sure if this is a logical thought or not and it is kinda confusing me. Are those civilians in the virtual reality in the game even less real then people in other games?

What I'm trying to convey is that this confuses me, and I would like other people's perspectives on it.

PS: If this is not suitable for SB, feel free to move it to the Video Games forum.
Signature removed because of it's blinding awesomeness.

User avatar
learsfool
Posts: 239
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2013 3:29 am UTC
Location: Madison, WI

Re: On the ethicality of killing virtual virtual citizens

Postby learsfool » Sun Sep 22, 2013 7:25 pm UTC

johnie104 wrote:Anyway, what I found was that killing civilians in this world felt less wrong then killing people in other open world games, because those citizens live in a virtual reality inside the game. There is a certain disconnect where I can say "It's just a game" more easily (I don't have a problem playing GTA or Prototype or anything, but there I realize that I am acting like a violent psychopath). I'm not sure if this is a logical thought or not and it is kinda confusing me. Are those civilians in the virtual reality in the game even less real then people in other games?

Looks like you're plenty capable separating fantasy from reality, and you're even getting twinges when fantasy is 'too much' like reality. You clearly still are fully aware those aren't real people (I'm assuming, but that's what I gathered from the context)

Adding the 'virtual' layer is the game's way of saying 'It's not even real in the context of our fake world', it's a psychological thing to make it easier for you to treat the game like fantasy and act like a total lunatic in a harmless, fun way.

The same discussion has come up in the context of game design several times (There were a couple of really fun journal articles, I'll see if I can find any that aren't behind paywalls), I suspect the folks behind the latest Saint's Row game took that into account in the design. It hurts immersion slightly, but it's pretty obvious they know what they're shooting for in their game design. . . gleeful entertaining slaughter without you having to worry about those uncomfy twinges. ;)

User avatar
Cleverbeans
Posts: 1378
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 1:16 pm UTC

Re: On the ethicality of killing virtual virtual citizens

Postby Cleverbeans » Sun Sep 22, 2013 8:13 pm UTC

I have no problem killing other players in a video game, and the extra layer of virtuality wouldn't really change that for me. I'm also the kind of guy who captures spiders and flies to release them rather than killing them and can't bring myself to eat meat. I expect this is a highly subjective experience.
"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration." - Abraham Lincoln

User avatar
learsfool
Posts: 239
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2013 3:29 am UTC
Location: Madison, WI

Re: On the ethicality of killing virtual virtual citizens

Postby learsfool » Sun Sep 22, 2013 8:34 pm UTC

Cleverbeans wrote:I have no problem killing other players in a video game, and the extra layer of virtuality wouldn't really change that for me. I'm also the kind of guy who captures spiders and flies to release them rather than killing them and can't bring myself to eat meat. I expect this is a highly subjective experience.

See Johnnie104? Cleverbeans is amazingly nice, he saves spiders AND gives them extra food!

You're just fine. ;)

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10331
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: On the ethicality of killing virtual virtual citizens

Postby addams » Mon Sep 23, 2013 5:42 am UTC

Hell-o.
I think about it.
I don't play video games. I don't know how.

I had a short intense relationship to Tetris. I liked the music. I had, just, discovered video games.
I took the game home and started playing it. The sunrise was surprising to me that day.

I was tired. I still had a full days work to do. I decided Tetris was not worth it.
I have tried Mario. Children yell at me. "Jump!" they yell. "Why did you do that?" they ask. (shrug)

I am not good at video games. I have noticed that games can have spectators.
I have been a spectator at Mario games. It is very exciting. The player seemed to like having spectators.

Back to you. You play games that have death of imaginary people written into the play.
What do you think? Someone began this thread because of twinges of something.

I have seen movies. Movies that have tasteless violence and cruelty written in. I was very uncomfortable. I have walked out.

I was taken to one film. The person that took me I knew quite well. I did not understand until that night what he did for fun.
That one very real man used the internet to 'find' like minded people.

That SOB graduated from movies and video games to Real Life. I think that he may be a rare case. And; Maybe, not.

It is, just, a thought. What is The Twinge?
Is there a part of the Human Mind that 'knows'? Just knows?

"It's not real." the Left Brain says.
"It could be me." the Right Brain says.

Well? It could be. It's not. But; It could be.
It has been true from the before time began that some humans are Sociopaths.

Most are not. We also know that in The West, that is Europe and all the places Europeans went, Public Executions were common.
Humans have witnessed Death of other Humans over and over, again.
Animals too.

If you did not know, I am going to tell you. There is an Art Form named Snuff. I am not comfortable with it. Are you?
I was so surprised. I should not have been. It is meaningless to many.
Live performances are expensive, but well....If a man has money, it is made to be spent.

What relationship is there between watching something be done on a screen and doing that same thing in Real Life.
If a person does not play video games are they a Loser? What if seeing a person die on a screen moves a person to tears?

Is that Not Normal? In the social world that you live in; Is killing or witnessing death of animals and people on a screen Normalized?
Normalized. Like the weekly Public Executions. Canada stopped doing that and created a wonderful park on the spot.

That park has a square granite archway. Carved into the archway are words.
"The Laws of Nature." On one side.
"The Laws of Man." On the other side.

Well; The genie is out of the bottle. You play games that simulate the deaths of digital persons.
They are not real. As soon as you please, they are reanimated and the game begins again.

What is the ethical answer?
Is it better to allow those with BloodLust to express it through Gaming?
Does Gaming feed the BloodLust making it grow?
Are the men and women that see violence and death on screens different from people that see violence and death in Real Life?
The Same? In what ways?

People that do not watch violence on Games and Screens. Are they stupider? Are they different? Is it better? Worse? Well...?
I think we do need a study. Has anyone done one?

People have always sucked. Always. Not all people have sucked.
I had to know about what people did in Real Life.

Then I had someone that I knew in Real Life, find his way into that world.
That man could have had Anything. What he wanted was icky to me.

Why do you want to play a game that has the death of others as the Fun part?
It is exciting? Like Mario?

Is there a sense of competence? I liked Tetris because I was getting better and better as the night progressed. I was getting tired, too.
After a rest I may have improved more. I liked the sense of competence and the music.

I think we do need some studies. I am willing to venture a guess that somewhere those studies are being done.
We were doing some way back. Not about video games.

Movies and TV News. I was in one study. I was ok with it.
I was incredulous. When I looked at the study I said, "Nah. maybe. Only with low IQ people. Not with smarty pants."
So; I became a subject. I was wrong. My results were nearly identical to all other person's results.

I know. I am boring and a kill joy. Still.

What are you using? Your Mind!
What is at risk? Your Mind!
What are you doing with your mind?

The human mind is a little like a muscle.
If you use your leg muscles, your leg muscles get strong.
If you use your mind, your mind gets strong.

If you use your muscles the same way everyday. That activity will become very easy for you.
If that activity uses only one set of muscles and no other set. Well......

If you have a twinge, Listen to your own mind.
It may be a small voice. You Might have to turn off all the electronic shit and Listen!

What do you think? Your mind is valuable. Like your legs or arms or butt muscles.
If you lose or damage your mind, it is ok. There are other humans that can and will help you.
If you lose or damage any other part of you it is the same thing.

Are violent video games bad for you?
If that man had not had access to Snuff, would he have been able to live his life in contentment without it?
Is it written into you and him and me? You know what you enjoy. He knows what he enjoys. I know what I enjoy.

When you have a twinge during the death of a not real person, is that the Real You asking to not play?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

curtis95112
Posts: 639
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2011 5:23 pm UTC

Re: On the ethicality of killing virtual virtual citizens

Postby curtis95112 » Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:09 am UTC

johnie104 wrote:Are those civilians in the virtual reality in the game even less real then people in other games?


Well, it all depends on what in means to be a 'real' person, doesn't it. Personally, I feel that the more detailed the AI of a simulation is, the closer it is to being a 'real' human. After all, we are nothing but very complex programs running on organic computers.

So, I'd say that the virtual virtual people would be less real if they were simulated in less detail, but since there's no practical limit to how detailed a simulation can be, virtual virtual people could be in principle as 'real' as anything else.

But that might not really be very relevant to your confusion.

johnie104 wrote:Anyway, what I found was that killing civilians in this world felt less wrong then killing people in other open world games, because those citizens live in a virtual reality inside the game.


I think what's happening is, when you simulate doing immoral things, you recognize that you're doing something immoral but also know that it's not really immoral because it's just a game. In your situation, you're simulating simulating doing immoral things. Now, simulating immoral things isn't really immoral. So you're not simulating an immoral thing. So you don't feel as uncomfortable.

I'd liken it to whimsically contemplating murdering that annoying person that always gives you hell in graphic detail, which might not be immoral per se but still might make us feel uncomfortable, and contemplating being in a situation where we would contemplate murdering that annoying person. The latter doesn't feel nearly as uncomfortable to contemplate.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:
Роберт wrote:Sure, but at least they hit the intended target that time.

Well, if you shoot enough people, you're bound to get the right one eventually.

Thats the best description of the USA ever.

Роберт
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 1:56 am UTC

Re: On the ethicality of killing virtual virtual citizens

Postby Роберт » Mon Sep 23, 2013 5:12 pm UTC

Reminds me of "World of World of Warcraft". http://www.theonion.com/video/warcraft- ... ayi,14240/

It's an extra layer of abstraction. It's probably fine.
The Great Hippo wrote:[T]he way we treat suspected terrorists genuinely terrifies me.

Trebla
Posts: 387
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 1:51 pm UTC

Re: On the ethicality of killing virtual virtual citizens

Postby Trebla » Mon Sep 23, 2013 5:48 pm UTC

This is probably only tangential (at best) to the original question... but at what point do you think that killing the virtual citizens in the "first order" (for lack of a better term) world would actually feel morally wrong?

Is it possible in an offline game where you have save points you can restore to?

What about in an offline game that enforces persistence and there's no way to fix a mistake (short of a full reinstall)?

What about in an online game with permadeath where if you kill an NPC they don't respawn (or respawn as a blank template and have to relearn from scratch)?

What about in an online game with permadeath where there's not necessarily a distinction between NPC and PC? Killing a "citizen" may actually be ending the game for another player (I realize this is difficult to imagine in games with communication, I'm thinking something like "Journey" where I would see other players and, if not for the fore-knowledge that they were other people, I probably couldn't tell the difference in most cases).

I bet there are good articles on this subject.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10331
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: On the ethicality of killing virtual virtual citizens

Postby addams » Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:18 am UTC

I was following my nose and found this article.
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/e ... to-be.html

The author seems to know more about Gaming than I ever want to know.

My opinion remains the same.
If you practice being an Asshole it will come easier to you than it would if you did not practice.
If you practice being a whole human engaged with other humans as whole real worthwhile humans you might get better at that, too.

What you do to and with on screen people you will find familiar with off screen people.
How familiar with violent actions and reactions do we want to be?

Spoiler:
How comfortable are we knowing our Men in Blue play first person shooter games at home for fun before strapping on a real gun to play in the real world with us?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
tms
Posts: 267
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2012 12:53 am UTC
Location: The Way of the Hedgehog

Re: On the ethicality of killing virtual virtual citizens

Postby tms » Wed Oct 16, 2013 9:42 pm UTC

Are sentients on another continent, that you haven't met, less real? Of course not, at least if objectivity is desired, but it's safe to say they have less impact on you than many others. Virtual detached n times is more a semantic thing, it doesn't really change the nature of the interaction.
- No, son. I said 'duck'.
- Duck duck duck duck! Duck duck duck duck!

User avatar
Forest Goose
Posts: 377
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 9:27 am UTC

Re: On the ethicality of killing virtual virtual citizens

Postby Forest Goose » Sat Nov 02, 2013 12:12 pm UTC

Personally, if I'm playing an open world game, I refuse to kill innocents (and feel guilty if I do), this is true even when it would benefit my character. If it's a story driven game that doesn't give you the choice, I can go with it- I wouldnt feel guilty, but probably wouldnt want to play a sociopath, so I still expect justification.

I dont know where the divide is between "being" and program, but I don't think senseless violence is ever justified, even if the action is against something that is not a being- I wouldn't be okay with destroying random material objects either. At first, this sounds kooky, but I think a major component of an act is the intent and function it has in relation to the actor. Destroying a human is wrong because it's human, but also because it's destruction without sufficient purpose. Destroying a rock just to destroy it is wrong, but only because it is destruction without point. So, in either case, I would say it's problematic.

Asides:

1.) In the case of something being story driven, it's not just tbe target of the act that is abstracted, but the actor; playing a murderer in a play is different from role playing your murder fantasy.

2.) I've had people object to this on the grounds that if smashing a stone is an outlet for anger, and the only result of it, then there is no ill. However, I would say that the ill is being of such a character that you need to smash anything- there is a flaw in how you see things if you require it.

3.) This purely based in my personal beliefs and religious sentiments, I do not expect anyone to agree; I certainly have no argument that demonstrates it. If it is flawed, however, feel free to tear it apart.

4.) I wrote this on my phone, ignore typos, it's hard to edit
Forest Goose: A rare, but wily, form of goose; best known for dropping on unsuspecting hikers, from trees, to steal sweets.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10331
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: On the ethicality of killing virtual virtual citizens

Postby addams » Sat Nov 02, 2013 1:45 pm UTC

ok. I'll bite.
I agree with you on the danger to and damage done to the player that kills living things.
It is a bad idea to spend time killing pretend living things. What we do in practice we can do.

Why can't we blow up rocks? Smash them, crush them, blow them up! Why?
It is fun. I don't know about computer games, but in Real Life it is fun.

It is fun to smash other things against rocks, too. Dishes and glasses and other disposable stuff.
Blow it up! Smash it! Wear eye protection! Wear ear protection! Smash it! Blow it up! yea.

Well? It is Not ok to blow up nor to smash things that belong to other people. If it is yours, why not?
In Real Life it is fun and it allows the players to enter act with one another in an active way.

In our Human past people have destroyed buildings and statues that belonged to other people.
That is a bad idea. I think it is less wrong than killing the people and their animals. Still.

In my mind to destroy the Artwork of others is horrible. Even if the Artwork is offensive.
It does get complicated. International committees are good for that sort of thing.

But; A rock? If it is your rock, Blow it up. Hard work to blow up a rock. I like to watch.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwlNPhn64TA How is that not the coolest bomb, ever?

Going with a friend, if I can find one, to the Jetty and smashing random stuff against the rocks is oddly satisfying.
Why not? Then the pieces become a part of the beach; Made smaller and smoother by the water and waves.

If you do not have an Ocean, then you may have to use that great big brain of yours and find another place to do it.
I saw a small city with loads of people in it decide to smash glass. There was glass everywhere. It took days to clean up the mess.

But; A computer game is different. A computer is a powerful tool. The music, the timing, the cries for help, the Zero risk factor of the player.
I have both low skill and low interest in computer games. I would wish that for you, too.

Real people are more fun. If they don't want to smash you.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Forest Goose
Posts: 377
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 9:27 am UTC

Re: On the ethicality of killing virtual virtual citizens

Postby Forest Goose » Sat Nov 02, 2013 3:09 pm UTC

I don't morality comes only from the act and it's effects, but also from the character of the actor as well (and intent). The issue at hand with the rocks is not if the rocks are owned, not even if they serve a purpose, but that you are destroying something without any reason to do so. Breaking a thing simply to break it is something I find objectionable*.

My belief comes from 4 different places, I give 2. The first two make sense to me and I don't believe that they are impossible beliefs to hold, but, again, there is nothing that can be done with them except to state them and say a bit, they are compelling (or they aren't)- the latter two are more religious/spiritual in nature, I don't believe in proselytizing (the opposite, actually), so they are omitted (if for some reason they matter, then they can be discussed further, but I'm not going to pretend I can justify them).

1.) (ignorance) I have no idea how/why most things end up as they are, nor do I know if they have any importance to someone else- what may be a simple pile of stones to me may be something of value to someone else (people put value in all sorts of strange places). Even if it would be perfectly fine to smash up all the stones that no one cares about, I have no way to know which ones are cared about, so if I have no purpose, then why do it? This point sounds foolish with stones, perhaps, but it is part of the general case of which stone smashing is an example.

Suppose that I find a ball in the woods, 100 feet off the nearest path. It is improbable that anyone will return to claim that ball, but, then again, someone might- it could turn out to be of sentimental value to someone who lost it, will return to search for it, and locate it. If I were to claim and give it to my cousin to play with, given the likelihood it was abandoned and that I had a good intention to make another happy, it's a fairly reasonable action. On the other hand, if I claimed the ball with the sole intent of puncturing it- because why not?- then I may (however unlikely) have removed something of value from another and, yet, satisfied no decent end.

2.) (character) I don't think senselessly destroying something makes someone evil (I don't think "evil" makes much sense applied to humans...that's another story), but I also don't believe that it improves upon them. Moreover, and more importantly, I think it says something about the person. Given two people, A and B, equal in every regard except that A likes to smash inanimate objects up for fun, on occasion, and B does not, I would find B the better of the two (caveat: if A and B differed elsewise, I do not believe the same could necessarily be said unless you had more to go along with it- I'm not trying to argue that smashing stones for fun is on par with being sociopathic, only that it is not ideal). To be honest, I can't clearly and rationally define "character", what this word means probably differs person to person; however, I don't believe it's irrational to use an intuitive understanding of the notion as long as you are only applying it to yourself (and others who accept the same ideas).

In the case of virtual people, the former doesn't apply (or, if you have odd beliefs, may), but the latter is the relevant one. Still, I would say that both factor in for the general case.

*I wouldn't find you objectionable if you smashed rocks for the hell of it- I cannot prove my standard, but I do put faith in it, as such it wouldn't be right to judge others by it, but I ought judge myself by it.

-----
A weird note: I'm rather on the very very autistic side of things- oddly, I've been able to get down the rudiments of irl communication, but internet stuff is a bit new to me. Please feel free to say whatever you want about my ideas, but I apologize in advance for any strangeness in wording/grammar- I find it difficult to explain things without writing a small book and am not sure what to elaborate, or cut short- my initial instinct is to write a 20 page response that spells every little detail out so i don't goof it up and leave anything important out. Sorry if that's a weird/inappropriate thing to point out.
Forest Goose: A rare, but wily, form of goose; best known for dropping on unsuspecting hikers, from trees, to steal sweets.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10331
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: On the ethicality of killing virtual virtual citizens

Postby addams » Sat Nov 02, 2013 3:21 pm UTC

ok. I did not read a clear responds to computer game killings.
Are computer game murders ok with you?

Random acts of violence against inanimate objects in real life seem to be Not ok with you.
In Real Life I would bow to your sensitivities.

What about throwing rocks into water. I like that.
Do you do that? I have hurt my arm doing that.

Like all violence, it comes with risks.
The computer games seem to have Zero risks to the players.

I would argue that the risks to the players of computer games are real risks, yet difficult for the players to see.
When I hurt my arm throwing rocks, I did not know I was at risk. It did not hurt until later.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Forest Goose
Posts: 377
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 9:27 am UTC

Re: On the ethicality of killing virtual virtual citizens

Postby Forest Goose » Sat Nov 02, 2013 3:36 pm UTC

I think it is wrong for me to kill in a computer game- I cannot justify that it is wrong for you.

I would not throw rocks in water, the fish might not enjoy it, I see no reason to disturb them because I like splashes.

I have no sensibilities- guilt and sensibilities don't amount to much- if it's wrong, it's wrong regardless, thus I abstain. There's all sorts of things that people enjoy doing, some bad, some good- but it's just as easy to do things I don't find problematic yet enjoy as it is to do the enjoyable and problematic. More importantly, my goal is to enjoy the abstaining from what I consider problematic: rather than throw the rock, I think of the happy fishies swimming in the water, that makes me smile and makes the rock throwing seem much less fun.

I suppose it's not so much about if something is wrong, but if there is a course of action that is more right.

But, again, while I doubt I'd be wrong on "murder is wrong", I may be wrong on "smashing rocks" is not the best- so, smash away, if you so want.

*edit (addressing the last part of your post)
Risks are a factor, but my point is, perhaps, more along the lines of "If I enjoyed killing computer people, then I would be better if I didn't, so I'll strive for that", and less "It may make you more likely to murder/rape/etc. in real life" or "You can injure yourself or others". This is not to say that the last two aren't important, I'm just emphasizing that I think the former is also important; the point being not about the moral content of the action, but about what the action says about your moral content. (sorry, that reads really cheesy, it's accidental).

**Edit
I misread what you wrote! hence my mention of sensibilities. It still makes part of the point, it just is not in response to you at that point.
Forest Goose: A rare, but wily, form of goose; best known for dropping on unsuspecting hikers, from trees, to steal sweets.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10331
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: On the ethicality of killing virtual virtual citizens

Postby addams » Sat Nov 02, 2013 4:04 pm UTC

Don't worry about the fish.
They don't mind, much.

The way water works, it is darned hard to hit a fish with a rock.
It could happen. Then we might have to eat it... ick...

Throwing rocks in water is a lot like fishing.
Only, no harm to the fish is intended. Nor is it possible, most of the time.

Have you ever looked down through water in a deep pool at fish lazing about?
I have. I rarely throw anything in. I have thrown myself in. Some of those pools are Deep.

It is nice to know you don't kill for fun. To think about what the Other likes and dislikes is a fun activity.
Fish do not like being caught and thrown back in. I bet they like that better than being caught and eaten for dinner.

Away from fish and back in to the pool of computer games.
Does it change the way you feel about hanging out with people when you know those people kill other people for fun?

Is there a significant difference between the ones that do it in Real Life and those that do it on a computer screen?

I have known very few people that kill in Real Life. You?
The ones that I have known were nicer than the ones that kill on computer screens.

The people that kill on computer screens seem too, too sure of themselves.
And; Just, too happy about the whole fucking thing.

That is, just, my observation.

Am I a kill joy? Kill this and kill that. Kill joy?
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Forest Goose
Posts: 377
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 9:27 am UTC

Re: On the ethicality of killing virtual virtual citizens

Postby Forest Goose » Sat Nov 02, 2013 4:19 pm UTC

The stone might not hurt the fish, but I wouldn't like stones raining in from nowhere. But, yes, I imagine it doesn't much matter to them.

I've been around people who have killed- more than a few soldiers, some that had served time for it in prison. By and large, most of them were not monsters, just people- all of them (save 1) regretted that it came to that and wished it hadn't.

I had to kill someone once- not violently- it was a desperate situation in freezing water, we were both going to drown or just him, a close friend. Since then, I've looked at how things can affect other things differently.

I think if someone is playing a game just to kill innocent things just because they enjoy it, then I probably wouldn't like them very much- not because they would be reprehensible to me, but because I doubt we would be very compatible.* But, if someone were doing it to experience a different perspective in a simulated way, I could understand that. Personally, I feel a little sad hurting innocent things in games, sometimes if enemies seem like they are just confused, I run around them (it's more of a challenge anyways)- the trolls in Skyrim seem like they mean well enough, just aren't very bright.

*But, again, if I were doing it, I would not be happy with myself in the moral sense. It sounds weirdly disconnected to separate that out, but I think it is actually important in some cases where morality comes into play- not everything is global.
Forest Goose: A rare, but wily, form of goose; best known for dropping on unsuspecting hikers, from trees, to steal sweets.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10331
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: On the ethicality of killing virtual virtual citizens

Postby addams » Sun Nov 03, 2013 5:12 am UTC

I don't know much about computer games.
I do know about water and fish.

The way water works, the fish are not at risk of being hit.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

johnie104
Posts: 248
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 6:44 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: On the ethicality of killing virtual virtual citizens

Postby johnie104 » Mon Nov 04, 2013 8:50 pm UTC

@Forest Goose:
That's a very strict moral code you hold yourself too. Does that mean that some games are off-limits for you? I mean, obviously stuff like Manhunt won't be your type of game, but less extreme examples. For instance Mario 'kills' a lot of Goomba's. Is that reprehensible to you?

To come back to the original game: Saints Row IV. The story is that you're trapped inside the simulation and you have to break the rules of the simulation to destabilize it, so that you can escape and you can save the remainder of the human race (I know it is very far-fetched, but that is just what the story is). Destabilizing the simulation means killing it's citizens and destroying a lot of stuff.
In this case it is both in-character for you to kill citizens and necessary to further the plot. Furthermore, it ultimately has an ulterior goal: saving the human race.
How would you feel about this?
The game does not specify how intelligent the simulated simulation is, so you don't know if the simulated NPC's are aware of themselves in the game. Would your opinion change if the story told that these NPCs were aware, or if it specified that they aren't aware?

This is also the reason killing in SR4 feels differently for me then in GTA. In GTA it is a bit out-of-character to kill citizens and is very gamey. In SR4 it is explained in the story.
Signature removed because of it's blinding awesomeness.

User avatar
Forest Goose
Posts: 377
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 9:27 am UTC

Re: On the ethicality of killing virtual virtual citizens

Postby Forest Goose » Tue Nov 05, 2013 4:59 am UTC

johnie104 wrote:@Forest Goose:
That's a very strict moral code you hold yourself too. Does that mean that some games are off-limits for you? I mean, obviously stuff like Manhunt won't be your type of game, but less extreme examples. For instance Mario 'kills' a lot of Goomba's. Is that reprehensible to you?


I made an exception for story based games or, at least, games without a choice. But, more to the point, aren't Goomba's, essentially, enemy soldiers in that game? Not murdering innocents for the hell of it doesn't imply no killing ever- nor does it entail that the character needs to be as upright as possible. A better example is that if I were to play Fallout, I wouldn't do anything with my character that I wouldn't do in real life- I wouldn't stab people just because I could get away with it, I wouldn't pick pockets if I could find resources elsewhere. In the same vein, I would be willing to play a character that is driven to do "evil" things by what is happening, circumstances can compel us to do things that break our code, that's worth exploring*- but I wouldn't play something where the point is just to be "evil" because that's fun and you can't do it in real life. The early GTA games had this feature, I didn't care for it- I have nothing against those who do, I'm just saying I don't.

*By the same token, if I can avoid doing things that I don't like, then I do that too. As mentioned with Skyrim, I think the various bears/wolves don't really deserve to die so I can loot their dens, so I just run if I stray into one- I do the same for trolls, they seem sort of sweet in their own goofy way. For me, I like fantasizing that I'm the character I play, I think we all do- for me, my fantasy is being able to avoid hurting those that are innocent and having the power to ensure that they stay innocent. Real life is more complicated, but being ultramoral in games is the fun part for me.
Forest Goose: A rare, but wily, form of goose; best known for dropping on unsuspecting hikers, from trees, to steal sweets.


Return to “Serious Business”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests