PC Morality

Many games focus on violence, which has a negative impact in the real world. Someone close to me asked: is it possible for a game to focus on something that makes a positive impact in the real world?

That got me thinking about:
- why are games violent?
- what separates a game that encourages violence from one that contains it?
- for a game to encourage players to make a positive impact, does it have to be realistic?
- if a game has a goal, is it always implying that the goal is good?

These thoughts inspired me to describe some categories for moral and immoral goals in games.  I'm putting them here as a prompt for anyone else who wants to think about this.

One question I'm not trying to answer is: 'how many players apply messages from games to the real world?' That's a question for a study, and not my brain, haha.
Also, my knowledge is not perfect: I haven't played several of my example games, and there's probably an interesting point about tabletop RPGs here that I can't make.

If you have any thoughts of your own, examples, or mistakes you think I've made, please tell me in a comment!

The contents of the text file is below in case you don't want to download it:

Evil Games

- The player performs realistic violence.

- The game may portray violence as heroic or use exaggerated gore for shock value.

- By having realistic violence lead to progress through the game, the game makes it seem justified.

- A fast pace when playing could prevent the player from considering their character's actions while directing them.

- The player MAY invent justifications for immoral behaviour which they MAY carry into real life.

- The game could be based around other immoral behaviour, but violence is often used as an obvious way to create a goal for the player.

- Examples: Doom, Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, Assassin's Creed

- Borderline example: Dishonored. The game is gory, but violence results in a worse end for the characters and non-violence is an equally valid way to play. The player can choose how to engage with the game, which heightens the distinction between the game and reality.

Neutral Violent Games

- The player or characters in the game perform violence as a central mechanic, but their METHODS are divorced from real violent actions.

- It is easier for the player to enjoy the game without inventing justifications for violence.

- The tone may reward violent acts, but the player didn't perform/direct these in a realistic way: there is no reward for 'real' violence.

- Potentially, it is left ambiguous whether anyone is hurt: consequences of violence are left unclear rather than glorified.

- Potentially, the reward for violence isn't clearly derived from the violence: the action is a challenge rather than a means to an end.

- Examples: Dicey Dungeons, Super Mario Bros., Wonder Boy, Fortune-499

- Borderline Evil example: Fire Emblem. The player actively directs unambiguous killing, but the methods of violence are exaggerated duelling and magic and there is no gore. The characters often dislike violence but are forced into it by villains who behave worse than they do.

Neutral Non-Violent Games

- Instead of being centered around violence, the game creates challenge and conflict by other mechanics, e.g. sports or running a business.

- The game may provide escapism from violence, have it be referenced but never performed, or make it exclusively a method of villains.

- If the game is realistic, the player's goal isn't particularly moral. Otherwise it would be a Moral Game.

- Examples: Wii Sports, Escape Simulator, Snake, Cities: Skylines, Astrologaster, Detective Grimoire

- Borderline Neutral Violent example: Disco Elysium. The player can act violently but this is not the central mechanic. The main gameplay is based around solving a mystery and learning about the world and characters. The game also has elements of Ironic Evil as the player character can emotionally damage himself and others.

Moral Games

- The game uses its tone to encourage realistic moral action using realistic methods.

- The game shows that such action has a point both in-game and in reality.

- The player character may perform these moral actions, be a victim of the problem that the actions help solve, or both.

- The game world may not be the real world, in which case it represents the real world.

- The player character's action may not be what the player should do in the real world, with the game indirectly conveying the positive impact of realistic action. This could mean that the player character struggles with a problem the player could help solve, but doesn't solve the problem in the game. It could mean that such a problem is a part of the game's narrative, but doesn't form the basis of the player character's actions in gameplay.

- Examples: Terra Nil, Homeless Simulator, Celeste

Ironic Evil Games

- The player performs realistic violence or other obviously immoral action, but the tone discourages this.

- Potentially, the game makes use of dramatic irony: the characters don't realise they are doing evil, but it is made clear to the player.

- The player may be rewarded for their evil to create dark comedy, or the game may be un-fun on purpose to send a moral message.

- In the first case, the game risks being interpreted as an Evil Game.

- Examples: This War Of Mine, Despot 32K, Spec Ops: The Line, Not For Broadcast, Yoghurt Commercial 3

- Borderline Neutral Violent example: Undertale. The game is centred around avoiding conflict when fantasy creatures attack you. The player will miss plot elements by not engaging with this system, but killing them will make future encounters easier to survive. If the player avoids progressing to kill as many as possible, the game will skip over its plot and mechanics and purposely ruin its pacing. The game's message is seemingly more about engaging with media than real-life violence.