Ethics of War based Video Games
Manas Mehta
Ever since the invention of a computer that plays the classic game Nim by Edward U. Condon in 1940, video games have become a big part of our lives. Video games make up a $100 billion global industry, and nearly two-thirds of American homes have household members who play video games regularly (History.com Editors, 2017). Today a child is introduced to Candy Crush on an iPad before a swing at a park. Video games traverse a plethora of genres including mystery, horror, strategy, first-person shooter, and adventure, all played on diverse electronic devices like phones, computers, and gaming consoles; consequently, video games have become an important part of our lives by creating a whole different life in a completely different world. With the increased involvement of these games in people’s lives, developers have come up with ways to use these games as educational tools, for instance solving puzzles in the middle of a first-person shooter game like Resident Evil 7: Biohazard or learning how to hack a network in an action-adventure game like Watch Dogs. Among these games, some of the most famous ones are those with a narrative that follows actual historical events, particularly wars. With extremely realistic graphics and historical accuracy, such games can be brought to life but is it ethically and socially sound to have such a product in the market?
Let’s look at a hypothetical example where a small gaming company that mostly creates video game versions of traditional board games come up with a new first person shooter game based around a recently-concluded civil war in Africa. The aim of the company is to use the release of the game to generate huge amounts of publicity and revenue, which would be shared by the employees. Given the recentness of the civil war and the goal of the company to profit off of it, the ethics of their actions can be called into question. The company is producing a product that will be used for the entertainment of people and in the process also help spread awareness about the civil war and educate people about the effects of wars in general. Even if the company’s main goal is publicity and revenue generation, the effects of their actions will act in public interest and also client and employer interests, which satisfies the first two principles of the Software Engineering Code of Ethics. Since the goal of the company is to make money, they will be spending a lot of resources and time on product development and product testing to ensure that the product delivered to the public will meet good standards and they will take responsibilities for their actions to ensure customer satisfaction which complies with principles 3, 4 and 6 of the Code. Equal sharing of profits among the employees and equal and just treatment by the management comply with principles 5 and 7 of the Code. Since a majority of the main principles of the Code are followed, the actions of the company can be deemed ethical.
Some people believe that given the recentness of the war, seeing a game in the market portraying it will be too sensitive and emotional for people who were affected by the war or related to the people being affected by it. This could be construed as an action against public interest and thus a violation of the clauses 1.03, 1.04 of the Code. People also believe that since the game is a first person shooter played by people who are behind a screen or a controller, they will have a certain level of disconnection from the reality of the war and thus will only use it as a source of entertainment, which could be offensive to the people who are affected by the war. According to Kantianism, the main goal of the company to make money and generate publicity can be thought of as using people as a means to an end and thus is unethical.
While some of the aforementioned arguments are fair, there are steps that a typical game development company takes to get around them. The argument that the war could be too emotional for people who were affected by it can be voided by the presence of a disclaimer at the beginning of the game that warns people of the explicit nature of the content and how people might get emotional and be affected psychologically. This disclaimer will be a sign that the company is acting responsibly by informing the players of the nature of the game thus abiding by the clause 1.04 of the Software Engineering Code of Ethics. Additionally, the belief that the game is insensitive due to the recentness of the war is baseless, since for someone affected by such a tragic event, no amount of time will help them get over it and seeing content that reminds them of that event will always trigger negative emotions.
Another argument notes that the first-person shooter depiction of war can be insensitive to people affected by the actual event since the game simply becomes a form of entertainment; however, this position can be voided by the presence of immersive technologies and historical accuracy. With the advent of technology and the increasing popularity of video games, an unprecedented level of realism and immersion has been achieved within them. With the invention of technologies like Augmented Reality (AR) and Virtual Reality (VR), this immersion has become even more extensive. This immersion actually does the opposite of what the argument claims; instead of desensitizing people to the issue, by feeling what the characters in the game felt and participating in the decisions they made, it lets people truly experience what war is actually like and the physical, but more importantly, the psychological effect it has on people. Historical accuracy makes the game all the more realistic and analogous to a documentary about the war. A game that retells exactly what happened during a war, is more of an educational tool than a mode of entertainment, and when something is historically accurate, people become more invested and aware of the real impact the events depicted had on the world.
Finally the argument about the company only using users and the topic of the civil war as a way to generate publicity and revenue can also be voided by using a different framework like Act Utilitarianism. Since the company is generating public interest in the product and also spreading awareness about the war by making a historically accurate product, it is benefiting a majority of people versus a small fringe group of people who might be offended by the depiction of war, for whom there is a disclaimer. Regardless of the motives of the company, since their actions benefit the majority over any potential loss to the minority, Act Utilitarianism would deem the decision of the company to release the product ethical. As always the ethics of an action depends on the framework being used to evaluate it.
Since the actions of the company are ethical by the Software Engineering Code of Ethics and other frameworks like Act Utilitarianism, the company should release the product with the aforementioned conditions that will make it a more inclusive product. There will always be someone who will be offended by the release of such a controversial product, but as long as the company is respectful of its critics and makes necessary changes to accommodate everyone, it should do just fine socially and ethically; besides, there is precedent for such a product doing very well in the market as seen in the case of Battlefield 1: a first-person shooter that involves you playing as a soldier during World War 1. Online reviews of Battlefield 1 deemed its global success to its historical accuracy, immersive gameplay and complementary soundtrack, and referred to it as “A Glorious Representation Of A Horrifying War” (Cathie, 2016).
References
Quinn, Michael J. (2017). Introduction to Ethics. In Marcia Horton (Eds.), Ethics of the Information Age (pp. 49-108). Hoboken, NJ: Pearson
IEEE Computer Society. (n.d.). Software Engineering Code of Ethics. Retrieved 10/03/2018 from https://www.computer.org/web/education/code-of-ethics
The Strong. (n.d.). Video Game History Timeline. Retrieved 10/02/2018 from http://www.museumofplay.org/about/icheg/video-game-history/timeline
History.com Editors. (September 1, 2017). Video Game History. Retrieved from https://www.history.com/topics/inventions/history-of-video-games
Reilly, Luke. (November 20, 2016). Opinion: Battlefield 1’s Single Player Is The Right Way To Tell War Stories. Retrieved from
https://www.ign.com/articles/2016/11/21/opinion-battlefield-1s-single-player-is-the-right-way-to-tell-war-stories
Cathie, Andrew. (November 2, 2016). Battlefield 1 Review – A Glorious Representation Of A Horrifying War. Retrieved from
Battlefield 1 Review – A Glorious Representation Of A Horrifying War