Poll: Philosophy in games

[Joeshie]

Actually Bioshock had no philosophy in it.In fact if you calculate it, you were getting more Adam for saving Little Sisters then killing them. Where's the fucking philosophy there?

I'd rather have no reward( or hardly any) for saving a Little Sister.Would I kill that girl, sacrificing my emotions to become more powerful or let her be, sacrificing my power.

Having a little bit of Philosophy in games isn't a bad idea.I love Kreia's teachings in KOTOR2...especially this one time when I gave some spare credits to a beggar.

I think you missed a large part of Bioshock.

Bioshock was heavily influenced by Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged", a very politically and philosophically charged novel that eventually evolved into the basis for the philosophical movement of Objectivism.

"I am Andrew Ryan, and I'm here to ask you a question. Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow? 'No!' says the man in Washington, 'It belongs to the poor.' 'No!' says the man in the Vatican, 'It belongs to God.' 'No!' says the man in Moscow, 'It belongs to everyone.' I rejected those answers; instead, I chose something different. I chose the impossible. I chose...Rapture, a city where the artist would not fear the censor, where the scientist would not be bound by petty morality, where the great would not be constrained by the small! And with the sweat of your brow, Rapture can become your city, as well."

That being said, I think philosophy works sometimes in games (Bioshock) and can fall flat on it's face such that it actually detracts from the overall experience (I'M LOOKING AT YOU METAL GEAR SOLID 2).

 

[tiredinnuendo]

Saying that you want philosophy in games can be a slippery slope. What if a games designer were in this thread right now?

"Holy shit!" they'd say. "We have to add philosophy to our game!"

The problem is that they were making Duke Nukem Forever, which will now be delayed ten more years *and* have some philosophy bullshit tacked on.

I'm not saying philosophy is bad, I'm saying it has to fit. There are lots of really good examples of what happens when people try to tack on "deep" ideas (that are never really all that deep) to a subject matter that doesn't support them. See: pretty much any JRPG, the Matrix sequels, etc....

What we want is a good game with good gameplay. If it takes place in a dystopian future where causing the player to think about the ramifications of the fall of civilization fits into the game appropriately, then by all means, put it in. But games like Crackdown are also plenty of fun, just in a very different way, and stapling on some depth would only kill the experience.

Side note: Moral choice vs. effectiveness (i.e. Do I do the *right* thing or the bad thing that makes me more powerful?) is not philosophy anymore. Every game uses it and it doesn't make you think, you just play the game through twice. People on this site are not so foolish that they've never thought about selfishness before.

- J

 

[Anton P. Nym]

Depends upon the game. Philosophy in "Tetris", no. Philosophy in "Bioshock", sure.

Also, it needs to be genuinely part of the game's story and not tacked-on... and it needs to have some sort of impact upon gameplay to make it worth the inclusion. It's like nudity; include it if it makes sense in the game, but just dumping it in is gratuitous.

-- Steve

 

[Axolotl]

I'm hesitating to say yes. I'd say chances are that you like Planescape if you liked Baldur's Gate. It has the same game engine and plays similarly in a sense but the planescape setting is quite different. The story is vastly better but you have to read most of it on-screen. You have a lot of freedom in your actions. If you don't mind reading through a lot of (well written) dialog and enjoy a good story line then you should try it. It starts a little slowly but gets weirder by the minute.

In that case I'll give it a miss, I absolutly hated Baldurs Gate.

I certainly agree with people saying that not every game needs philosophy. But games like RPGs should have some or at least feel like some mythic story. However if Bioshock is the standard then I don't see a good future for it.

 

[Alphavillain]

Games such as "Oblivion" and the "MGS" series are really lightweight philosophy to the extent that they are little more than A-Level exercises in teenage doodling. Yes, I love MGS, but for the reason of shooing people, not learning about the socio-political make-up of Guatemala in the 1970s.

 

[stompy]

I think more philosophy in games is a great idea, but, as stated before, you have to implement it properly, or it'll drag down the whole experience.

 

[Nordstrom]

I would like to see more philosophy in games.

 

[Soulfein]

I dont mind philosophy in games, but if a game is fine without it why bog it down? Some games are better because they are thought provoking, but sometimes it can screw up the pacing of it.

 

[Finnish(ed)]

I do not necessarily equate thinking with thinking philosophically. Thinking can mean problem-solving, as in most puzzle games, and can be quite abstract. Philosophy however is literally the love for knowledge and wisdom. Knowledge can be acquired by observing and understanding the causality in the world around you, or in your own mind. Merely reading something is not necessarily enough to acquire knowledge. One must also understand it, so that it can be implemented to other situations.

I think this is where games and the interactivity they offer would prove extremely useful. Interactivity is the easiest way of really understanding the cause and effect of different actions. Although games always teach the gamer their own type of causality, it does not usually apply to anything outside the game and does not impart any special knowledge.

This said, I will continue to play games for the simple fun of it, but I will also continue to hope for something more mature, profound and meaningful.

 

[Singing Gremlin]

the mutations caused by the plasmids give an element of 'losing your humanity', you have to lose your humanity (become a big daddy) to do the right thing, or continue eating babies, whatever.

But Bioshock doen't deal with the concepts, you vcan pump yourself full of as many plasmids as you want and your still loved by all the little sisters and accepted back into normal society in the end, even your transformation into a Big Daddy isn't permanent. Whilst the element of losing humanity with plasmids is mentioned or implied a couple of times, it's never related to you is always about the other inhabitents of rapture.

Agreed. You "do the right thing" in terms of story progression. Hardly an ethical choice, in fact no choice at all. And the concept of humanity in the game is of the "King of the jungle" -kind, common to most action games. "He, who kills all, saves humanity."
What remains is the moral choice between harvesting and saving, exploiting or nurturing, the moral dilemma brilliantly personified by the little zombie girls and the decision made better and worse by the fact that both options are almost equally rewarding.

Oh dear. I seem to have lost this one. Ok, so the morality side of the thinky bit is rather poo, but it does deal with the other issues mentioned, even if not quite in the detail one might like. But it is a start. If a console shooter (doesn't conjure images of philosophers stroking their beards and looking pensive does it?) can toss you an idea, say "Here have this and give it a bit of a think", then proceed to ignore both it and you wanting to delve further into the morality, then its a step up from Halo ("wart wart" say the aliens) and we might get very deep games before long. Or I like to hope so.

 

[H0ncho]

Most games that tries to insert a "deeper meaning" or some philosophical issue fails miserably at it. Usually the issue discussed is some pseudo-philosophical popular culture fad aimed at Oprahs core audience, and such issues are not particularly deep.

So in most cases I would say that games should not have philosophical issues in it, if only because the developers are unable to implement them properly.