Return to buzzcut.com

This page was saved using WebZIP 7.0.3.1030 offline browser (Unregistered) on 04/01/07 5:38:04 PM.
Address: http://www.buzzcut.com/article.php?story=20030219200116591
Title: buzzcut.com - The Theology of Games  •  Size: 56850

   buzzcut logo
Advanced
Welcome to buzzcut.com
Sunday, April 01 2007 @ 10:34 PM UTC
     Sections   
Home
Areas of Interest
Game Theory
Notable Quotes
Newsletter
Games and Society
Critical Writing
Books and Articles
Critical Elements
Bibliography
General News

     Email Alerts   
Alert me to site updates--new articles, posts of notes and anything else making a trip back to buzzcut memorable.
Email:
Privacy policy: we will not share your name and email address with any 3rd party without your consent.

     What's New   
STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 2 wks
No new comments

LINKS last 2 wks
No recent new links

     User Functions   
Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

     Events   
There are no upcoming events

     Older Stories   
Friday 03-Mar
  • EA's "Black" opens like a film. So why doesn't it feel like one? (16)

  • Thursday 02-Mar
  • Considering Gravity (7)

  • Monday 13-Feb
  • The Medium Is Not The Message (21)

  • Thursday 19-Jan
  • All Your Readers Belong To Us (10)

  • Friday 13-Jan
  • Censorless Violence (12)

  • Tuesday 10-Jan
  • Disneyfied (Disney Fried?) (20)

  • Friday 30-Dec
  • The Escape from Xmas (14)
  • Videogames: Closing the Annoying Gap (24)

  • Tuesday 15-Nov
  • Gerbils (19)

  • Thursday 13-Oct
  • Suddenly Serious about Games (12)


  •    The Theology of Games  
     
    Wednesday, February 19 2003 @ 08:01 PM UTC
    Contributed by: David

    For a while now I have been thinking about the connections of video games to theology. Although there are games that purport to give players a "Biblical" experience, mowing down Philistines or exploring ancient cities, that's not nearly as interesting as a central fact of video games:

    Just like the Christian notion of the universe, every game has a creator and that creator has a special plan in mind for you.

    Sound weird? If you follow down this line of reasoning, you come up with some very interesting questions around the moral message of video games. Who cares about violence in video games? The structure of games themselves have, what seems to me, a fundamentally theological message.

    The average video game has a few common features--namely, some sort of objective or goal, the tools necessary to reach that goal, and a system of rewards and consequences that push you along toward that goal.

    At it's heart, this is a pretty good decription of how many religions look at their realtionship to God. There's a grand designer who has crafted the world in his image. We exist in this world with some amount of free will, but no more than provided by the creator. He has some goal in mind for us. Although he will not force us to do his will, he facilitates our progress toward the goal by giving us the tools and, at times, a little divine intervention--can anyone say "power up?"

    The fact is, I think you can take a wide variety of theological models and find that they fit pretty well as a metaphor describing the relationship of the gamer to the creator (the video game creator!).

    So, even if this comparision is valid, what's the point?

    The issue really comes down to an answer to the question--What is the fundamental moral message of a video game? Usually, critics get it exactly wrong.

    A lot of attention has been focused over the years on the issue of whether video games cause violence. Although there is a dearth of evidence linking games to real world violence, and common sense would lead you to the false conclusion that if games caused violence, then real world violence would be on a strong uptick following game sales, people seem to fundamentally want to connect games to morality.

    While I don't see any reason to believe that games cause violence, conversely, I don't see any reason to argue that games don't teach us anything.

    The average game player can sort out the difference between killing something in a game, and killing someone in real life. But do they think about the cosmological implications of pretending to be someone in an interactive world created by someone else?

    When you look at the basic theological model of the benevolent creator who has a set purpose for those who live in his creation--the gamers--then I think you've drilled down to philosphical bedrock. The game may contain violence and people doing bad things. But at the end of the day, players are rewarded for doing the right thing. Sort of like in the Bible. And, of course, the right thing is whatever God, or the game designer, has decided it should be.

    I think this leaves game players with the sense that the world is ordered, that there is a grand design and that there is a right and wrong established by someone outside of themselves.

    Others have argued, rightly I'd say, that part of the fun of playing a video game is that there are rules. Nolan Bushnell quoted in Trigger Happy says, "There is a completely controllable and understandable universe that is predicatable . More controllable than real life." I'd add that the rules are usually a little easier to grasp in a game than in real life, and the consequences for misunderstanding then rules not quite so painful. Accientably throwing a gernade against a wall in Halo is still less damaging that saying the wrong thing at a party. But learning how the rules work, the exploration, is fun in real life and is fun in a game.

    But who makes the rules? The creator. And that's the lynch pin in the notion that games have a fundamental model that I'd describe as theological. If you want to go looking for a deeper meaning in games, one that translates into social impacts, that changes the way people see the world, then I'd look at this theological nature.

    Seems to me if there is a divine creator, then our video games may just be created in his image.






     
             


    The Theology of Games | 16 comments | Create New Account
    The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
    The Theology of Games
    Authored by: worlddan on Tuesday, March 18 2003 @ 08:37 PM UTC
    I agree with where you are headed in your thinking. This is an issue I have previously thought about myself. One area that I am thinking about currently is the way moral and ethical questions are framed within a video game. For example, I am generally opposed to violence of any type. So when I play an RPG, I tend to gravitate towards the "thief" character because playing such a character tends to require less killing. But from a moral point of view, one is hardly that much better than the other. One of the ten commandments is thou shall not steal and another is thou not kill. So either way, God (the game designer) has not left me with a path to goodness but only a choice among sins.

    Or take another example. I just finished playing Arcanum. Here is a quote from the manual: "Regrettably, it must be noted that the Evil Alignment is a slippery slope of sorts: while the slaughter of a Good creature is always viewed as an evil act, the slaying of an Evil creature will not effect your Alignment in any way." This represents a very definite moral decision by God (as the game designer) about the type of behavior that will be encouraged in his or her universe.

    One aspect of the game design not noted in the manual for Arcanum is that your Alignment can only reach to 100 points positive or negative. After that, further good acts for a good character will not change your alignment at all. In fact, if you play the game right, you can do plenty of "evil" acts and still keep your Alignment as good.

    The point is as follows. There is a question as to what the ethical responsibility of a game designer is. But the ethics in many games is implicit. What is the ethical responsibility of a game designer when the game designer is EXPLICTLY shaping a moral universe for a player character; when the designer acts as the omnipotent judge?
    [ Reply to This ]
  • The Theology of Games--cont. - Authored by: David on Wednesday, March 19 2003 @ 07:18 AM UTC
  • The Theology of Games - Authored by: worlddan on Wednesday, March 19 2003 @ 09:04 PM UTC
  • The Theology of Games - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, August 21 2003 @ 10:34 PM UTC
  • The Theology of Games - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, November 06 2003 @ 12:25 PM UTC
  • The Theology of Games - Authored by: Jeff_Fries on Saturday, December 13 2003 @ 09:25 AM UTC
  • The Theology of Games - Authored by: David on Thursday, December 18 2003 @ 04:27 AM UTC
  •      What's Related   
  • More by David
  • More from Game Theory

  •      Story Options   
  • Mail Story to a Friend
  • Printable Story Format


  •  : site-index : Copyright © 2007 buzzcut.com
     All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
    Powered By Geeklog 
    Assimilated by Aeonserv 
    Created this page in 0.35 seconds