Think about this unusual video game premise: You are an al-Qaeda member and your goal is to hijack an airplane and fly it into the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. Your reaction in one word? Maybe shocked, disgusted, appalled? Don’t worry, that video game doesn’t exist (yet).
However, I am trying to make a comparison with a game that is currently available online called Super Columbine Massacre RPG. In this game, the player is one of the shooters in the Columbine massacre. You can listen to the creator of the game talk about his motivation here.
Beyond the purpose of the creator, we have to ask if it is ethical to create and play such a game. I will try to answer these questions departing from the Aristotelian perspective, in which actions taken not only affect others but, most importantly, shape who we are as humans. In other words, what we do builds or tears up the virtues we need to be a fulfilled and complete (good) person. So, what virtue is a person reinforcing when s/he plays a game like SCMRPG?
First, I have to say, that to assume that such a video game will be the kick start of a bad virtue would be naïve. If someone is willing to engage in role playing a murderer who is going on a killing spree in a high school, then there are already some questionable characteristics in his person. The video game would be, then, feeding such a vice. So, what is that bad part of his/her character? Primarily, it would be violence towards innocent people. Supporting the idea that whatever level of disturbance gives leeway to shoot at another person is simply wrong. Allowing oneself to entertain such thoughts, even if in a make believe world, perpetuates feelings. I can’t help but link this Aristotelian idea to a self-fulfilling prophecy. The more a person plays such a role and increases the level of comfort with such ideas, the more corrupt his/her view of such action would become.
Building on that, it is easy to conclude that dedicating the time necessary to design the game, would lead to further nurturing the quality of comfort with irrational violence. However, that is not what the designer said. He argues, the more he got into creating the game, the more he realized that type of violence would not be “the right way to go”.
So building on what the creator of the game said – do you agree with him? Can the act of creating a violent game actually build a *distaste* of violence? In other words, can subjecting oneself to simulations of violence actually build habits of tolerance towards others?
Although my natural tendency is to reply “no!”, I know that I should at least entertain the thought and be able to defend my response.
I can imagine circumstances where people have been subject to domestic violence as children and their response is to be permissive parents that never discipline their children. In such cases, stimulation and experience of violence has lead to aversion of it, and therefore increase tolerance. However, in my example, the person has seen and expereince the consequences of violence. In a video game like CRPG, the player is not really being marked nor truly understanding the level of personal and social destruction caused by the massacre. In fact thy are having (at least) two parts of their brain stimulated simultaneously, one that causes entertainment/gratification, and one that is processing violence. Acknowledging that I am not a neurologist, I would still find how such link would be enforced by playing this video game.
So, in short, no, I don’t think stimuli of virtual violence lead to tolerance.
Though the stats say that playing video games do not directly cause more violent behavior, and instead reinforce people’s offline characteristics, I believe ethically it is wrong to create a game based on real life tragedy. Gran Theft Auto and similar games are not based on true national tragedies, but this game is. This seems like a capitalist venture banking off other’s wrongdoing and pulling on heartstrings at the same time. others’wrongdoings.
I agree with you, but just to play devil’s advocate…
How about a mural? Would it be ethical to paint a piece of art about the topic. How about a movie? Either documentary or a normal movie based on the facts of Columbine? And a book? Would it be unethical for a novelist to write a similar story from the perspective of the two shooters? Basically, what the author of the video game is saying is that he wanted to explore what happened through his artistic medium, which is video gaming.