Biases in Simulation Video Games

Orsonwarcry writes "Kieron Gillen went to Prague to speak to Bohemia Interactive, known best for Operation Flashpoint. He goes on to discuss the effects of bias on simulation games. 'In other words, a simulation is never just a simulation. Equally, freedom is rarely actually free of designer- imposed desires. Even in games with the most self-expressed mandates of "choice" for the gamer, it doesn't mean that there isn't a message. In Deus Ex, the generally politically liberal Ion Storm Austin created a world where you could choose between violence and pacifistic approaches, but the charismatic characters urged you towards peace while the monsters suggested violence.'" Some interesting stuff in there.

Comments

Re:Bias in the player too?

[Bingo Foo]

When you create a world and the reality within it, your imagination can create one in which nonviolent solutions are preferable for any number of reasons. When you are participating in the Real World, your imagination and preferences don't extend as far anymore, and if the rest of the world is actually violent, you must have some coping mechanism.

A prevalent "liberal" coping mechanism is denial. A "conservative" coping mechanism is pure defense, a "cynical" coping mechanism is attack and expansion, and a truly "Christian" coping mechanism is persuasion through sacrifice.

This taxonomy puts the current administration in the "cynical conservative" category, not the "Christian conservative" one, though I still prefer it to the liberal response.

Re:Bias in the player too?

[letxa2000]

No, I agree, the left generally prefers not to deal in absolutes. They profess (though don't always practice) a general "whatever you think is right is ok" attitude where there are no absolutes, moral or otherwise, and no-one should judge anyone else. It's attractive for the "living for today" crowd since it sort of gives them a license to do pretty much anything they want. But it's a recipe for gradual decay of civilization.

Ben Kenobi's absurd back-assword comment in Episode III not withstanding (*), moral absolutes are generally promoted by the "good guys" while lax, non-absolutes are generally preached by those that tend to be not quite as pure as the wind-driven snow. Because once you start "letting things slide", the person doing the sliding moves further and further away from what it is moral and what is correct. Eventually, that person is so far gone that he or she wouldn't even recognize the person they've become. What started as a "trivial" exception in their moral compass has lead to more and more exceptions.

I know I'll get slammed and moderated for this, but it's the honest truth. There are moral absolutes on this planet and many things are either good or they are bad. One should not be afraid to say so.

(*) That stupid politically-motivated line in Episode III was all the more distracting precisely because it was completely backwards. The "dark side" (or liberalism) is an incremental, slow slide to doom. Only those that walk the straight line of the good side of the force (conservatism) will be able to resist the temptations of the dark side (or liberalism).

Please excuse me while I put my anti-flame-thrower suit on. :)

Piss Christ

[DigiShaman]

Why is it the "Piss Christ" is seen as art (crucifix in urine). But, I can't make art of out other religious items such as the Koran?

Riddle me that Batman ;P

Re:Piss Christ

[DigiShaman]

Well you see, liberals say it's ok to degrade the bible and everything "christian". But, if you even utter a single degrading things about other religions, your not politically correct and thus lack intellect. Point being, art is biased too even by those who claim to have an open mind.

Re:Was Jesus a liberal?

[Locke2005]

he was a social activist that refused to resort to violence. Right. So overturning the tables of the moneychangers in the temple wasn't an act of violence? Can I come over to your house and toss around some furniture, and see how you feel about it then? And by the way, Mary Magdelen was NOT a prostitute. Jesus was a progressive and a populist (as opposed to the elitist church leadership of the time). The terms "liberal" and "conservatives" change enough over time as to be considered meaningless. Also, Jesus rarely if ever professed to be God... unless you beleive that when he said "Father, why hast thou deserted me?" he was talking to himself! I beleive it was the early church that decided "Jesus was God", not Jesus himself. RTFB!

Re:Bias in the player too?

[pete-classic]

So the Jews were herded into ghettos by overwhelming force, despite the fact they fought to the death to avoid it?

Bullshit. They (largely) acquiesced. They met violence with passivity, and it was a colossal failure. Can you not see how non-violence resulted in the slaughter of innocents?

You spectacularly missed the point regarding the Poles. I wasn't talking about the military. I was talking about the citizenry at large. I stated that this was in retrospect.

One of the foundations of Libertariansim [sic] is small government, the very opposite of the sort of large paternal government that would ban abaortion[sic]/stem cell research.

Ah! I see. You have a reading comprehension problem. I never called for a ban. I said it shouldn't be funded by the government, and "one can make a strong argument that [. . .] harvesting stem cells [is a] violent [act]".

Pop quiz: A small government: A. Pays people to do stem cell research. or B. Doesn't pay people to do stem cell research.

Take your time.

I posted this before, but I guess it didn't sink in. The LP position is, "We oppose any government restriction or funding of medical or scientific research." I don't know what "sponsor" means to you, but I meant it in the conventional "pay for" sense, not the extra-double-secret SatanicPuppy "not ban it" sense.

-Peter