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

Don't corral Deus Ex.

[fict0n]

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.

Say what? As a fond lover of Deus Ex and a player on both fences of the spectrum, I have to say that the Deus Ex series is one of the most realistic good-evil games ever. The "good" side is far from being a beautiful one. The people in trouble in Deus Ex aren't damsles, they're disease-ridden and homeless, oppressed, lonely, mentally ill, and very often terribly ugly. The Evil side is usually a corporate or a money-based one, which is much closer to the truth than an "everyone is grey, you're no knight in shining armor" option that games like Knights of the Old Republic use. The evil, corporate side in Deus Ex is usually one of violence, corruption, and injustice (throw a grenade into the opposition's store, hack a computer to bring down an employee)- and although a bit exaggerated for the sake of not boring the player (shred these papers, bull-doze these huts so we can lay down an oil line), it gets the point across with awesome results.

Re:Bias in the player too?

[pete-classic]

How so?

From the Libertarian Party platform page:

Recognizing that abortion is a very sensitive issue and that people, including libertarians, can hold good-faith views on both sides, we believe the government should be kept out of the question. We condemn state-funded and state-mandated abortions. It is particularly harsh to force someone who believes that abortion is murder to pay for another's abortion.

I vary from this view only in that I think states should have the ability to criminalize abortion. Since the Supreme Court has stuck its snout in the issue that's a problem.

For the record, I'm for the criminalization of wife-beating too. I don't think there's anything un-libertarian about supporting criminal penalties for people who victimize others.

From the same page:

We oppose any government restriction or funding of medical or scientific research. [my emphasis]

So I'm lock-step on this issue.

Finally, we can extrapolate from the abortion stance that they take a hands-off attitude to euthanasia. Again, I'm lock-step.

So, if we say I'm 50% at variance with the party on abortion, I'm still 83% in line on these three issues.

There are any number of additional issues (economic policy, the "war on drugs", environmental issues, world government) that I agree with them on 100%.

-Peter

Re:Bias in the player too?

[Anonymous Coward]

"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 is 75% BS.

1. I agree that some liberals are in denial. A small (but magnified by the media) do believe that a world hug would solve all problems, but the vast, _VAST_ majority of liberals believed in invading Afganistan and finding Osama. Even many thought invading Iraq was a good idea (before it was general knowledge the intelligence was fixed).

2. Conservatives are in just as much denial as liberals. I can't tell you the number of times I've heard someone say "but WMDs _were_ found in Iraq" or the number of people who believe that Iraq had something to do with 9/11. The Downing Street Memos were forgeries. etc. There is no legitmate reason other than denial to believe any of these. I'm not sure conservatives believe in defense, but are more interested in offense. Are our ports secured? Chemical facilities? Conservatives do not believe in "defending" these, but do believe in attacking uninvolved third parties.

3. The really "cynical" ones I've encountered want to close all boarders and kick out all foreigners. Most aren't that interested in expansion (hey - why take on new problems of conquered lands?) with the exceptions being interested only in natural resources (oil fields).

Re:Bias in the player too?

[damiam]

When liberals say "Pro-corporate", we mean giving legal benefits to corporations (copyright extensions, etc.) when such benefits aren't for the common good. By "anti-taxes", we mean in favor of cutting taxes even before you've cut spending, thus running up huge deficits (which is not traditionally a conservative trait, but seems to be popular with current Republicans). You seem to have misinterpreted the parent. And I have no idea what you're trying to say about environmental regulations and euthanasia. Those responses are barely coherent.

Re:Was Jesus a liberal?

[GileadGreene]

Hmmmm... upon further research:

Matthew

26:63 But Jesus held his peace, And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God.

26:64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

Mark

14:61 But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?

14:62 And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

...

15:2 And Pilate asked him, Art thou the King of the Jews? And he answering said unto them, Thou sayest it.

Luke

22:70 Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am.

John

18:37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king.

Aside from that one passage in Mark most of his answers seem pretty cryptic, and amount to "that's what you said". Granted, the fact that are so many contradictory accounts makes it hard to discern the truth (assuming of course that these events actually occurred at all).