Photorealism in games- a moral dilemma?

[Boon]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1210101344.htm

[Deleted]

I actually recall a fairly comprehensive study that showed a correlation between violent games and aggression - players became more vocally aggressive, more short tempered. But they also became less violent. I'll see if I can dig it up.

I was also told about a study (heresay) where a group of kids played violent video games, and another group did not. In the post-session interview, the interviewer would 'accidently' knock a tin of pens onto the floor, and none of the kids who played the violent games assisted him in picking them up, while most of the kids who played non-violent games did.

Like I said, heresay, I'd need to see that study myself before I quoted it in any debating context.

I've seen those studies.

Apparently playing violent games doesn't make you more violent, but dulls your emotional response to violence and reduces empathy.
I don't know what to make of it. Probably the sample was biased or not ample enough. The conclussions also seem too... elaborate for the data they obtained. They talk about theory when there is not yet a theory for the mind.
I just know it doesn't apply at all to me (individual case means nothing to a trend, but hey). I'm a 33 y.o. dude who has been playing violent games all his life, who worked when young on the fields, who has seen his father and grandfather slaughtering animals and quarter them. I still have to cover my eyes when they show the Theon scenes in GoT S03, and i feel my stomach churning whenever i read about animal mistreatment.

[Fortera]

I saw an article in game informer like 6 years ago claiming next gen was photo realism. Isn't next gen around the corner?

[Adam Jensen]

It's the same thing, though. We've been able to get characters to a point where you care enough to feel empathy for them for a very long time.

I proceeded to violently murder Sephiroth roughly 20 hours later, and he had plenty of depth and realism poured into him as well.

The only reason "random NPC that you stab" is different is because you don't actually get to know him before you kill him, and that's exactly how we treat people in real life. We scream obscenities at people who cut us off on the road and we're disappointed at how such a stupid person shares the same oxygen with us, but if you actually sat down and talked to that person for a few minutes it's likely that you'd no longer find yourself thinking about them that way.

Whether or not someone or something is disposable in our mind has nothing to do with how realistic they appear to be visually.

Oh just because I was affected by Mordin Solus's death in ME3, doesn't mean I felt it was real though. I mean, there's no such thing as Salarians, no such place as Tuchanka or anything like that. Yeah, I was saddened by his "death" but I still knew it was fiction. It's a weird place, having an emotional response to a fictional event, but it doesn't mean we think it's real.

[Magpai]

So people within the gaming industry predict we will achieve games indistinguishable from reality within 10 years time.
That's all great and everything and I am really looking forward to that day, but..will our governments allow it to get that far?

At the moment it's fairly easy to separate game from reality and what violent actions we do in a game doesn't reflect the type of person we are in real life. But could we be affected by those very same actions when visual immersion is absolute? Will our unconscious brain "understand" that it's all just fiction, especially when dealing with violent and lethal scenarios that we face in almost every game? And most importantly; Can and should we be trusted that we can "handle" it both consciously and subconsciously once games reach that level of graphical fidelity?

If not, where should we draw the line at how immersive a game should be allowed to get?

OK, it's one thing to argue about morals and game immersion, if you have an issue with that then I guess that's your right to find morality in that. I personally think it's ridiculous. But you're seriously willing to bring government in to enforce your ideas over this? What the fuck? Do you just call government in to "make it so" every time some idea about morality enters your head? You don't have anything close to a reasonable burden of proof for bringing in government to stamp out people's freedom to develop and play games.

Where is the evidence that further progressed technology prevents people further from being able to differentiate reality from fantasy?

Where is the evidence that difference will prevent any sort of crime?

Where is the numerical quantification for estimates on how many lives this will save?

Seriously, this is alarming to see how low your threshold is for government intervention is. "I can imagine and think that something bad might come from this, so government needs to put a stop to it!" I know you probably think you live in a world where every action ought to be something that we the people beg the government for permission and guidance to do, but the reality is that if you suggested that government criminalize the development of "too realistic" games, people would never stand for that shit.

Come up with some real evidence that this would make a difference before you screw other people out of their choices.

[Rukentuts]

Unless you have a neural implant depicting more facets of reality than just the visual, your brain will know its fake.

[Adam Jensen]

Unless you have a neural implant depicting more facets of reality than just the visual, your brain will know its fake.

And then you still have to overcome knowing cognitively that it's fake, no matter how convincing the sensory input is.

[Rukentuts]

And then you still have to overcome knowing cognitively that it's fake, no matter how convincing the sensory input is.

Depends. You think dreams are real when you're in them.

[Adam Jensen]

Depends. You think dreams are real when you're in them.

True, but most of your conscious mind is shut down.

[Magpai]

Something else to consider is the uncanny valley. It'll likely get to the point where it's so realistic that it freaks out the players and it will be more obvious than ever that it's fake. Or something like that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_valley

[Deleted]

Snip

Take a deep breath, calm down and read my post one more time

I'm NOT against making or having games that look realistic. I approve of it and can't wait until that happens myself.
What my question was will the government allow it? They don't allow Postal because of it's graphical and violent nature, so why would they allow having a photo realistic simulation where you can practically do whatever sinister action you wish in absolute realistic gory detail?

[Magpai]

Take a deep breath, calm down and read my post one more time

I'm NOT against making or having games that look realistic. I approve of it and can't wait until that happens myself.
What my question was will the government allow it? They don't allow Postal because of it's graphical and violent nature, so why would they allow having a photo realistic simulation where you can practically do whatever sinister action you wish in absolute realistic gory detail?

I can tell by your "clarification" that you only skimmed my post, if that. I'm well aware you're talking about government "allowing" it or not. Reread my original post. It addresses that quite directly. In summary: the government can nowhere near meet it's "burden of proof" for criminalizing overly realistic games. You need more than your random whims and musings to ban something, as frustrating as that may be for you.

[DEATHETERNAL]

Unless you have a neural implant depicting more facets of reality than just the visual, your brain will know its fake.

Exactly.

Until the video games are being played in your mind through direct nueral interface and are made well enough that you cannot tell the difference between real life and a video game (say if you wake up in real life and then the next day wake up already neutrally linked to a video game, and you don't immediately notice a difference between that video game you woke up in that is programmed to have your house for you to “wake up” in and reality), there is no issue. Once video games reach that point, then we will run into some problems, but direct neural interface to that level is essentially still science fiction at this point. We probably have a few decades until the technology is actually on the horizon before we have to start worrying.

[Powerogue]

We watch violent live-action movies all the time...and have done so for decades.

I was a bit uneasy, but that's a solid point.

I'd say graphics-wise, we have nothing to worry about. Maybe immersion-wise, if we ever get virtual reality so impossibly good that we fully experience shooting that hooker, that might negatively impact people.

Still, rather than try to hold back the inevitable growth and improvement of that immersion, we just need to keep people firmly knowing the difference between the fantasy and reality from a young age.

Whatever that means. I can't think of how a class would address that.

[Deleted]

I can tell by your "clarification" that you only skimmed my post, if that. I'm well aware you're talking about government "allowing" it or not. Reread my original post. It addresses that quite directly. In summary: the government can nowhere near meet it's "burden of proof" for criminalizing overly realistic games. You need more than your random whims and musings to ban something, as frustrating as that may be for you.

I just felt you had a very negative and hostile vibe in your post directed towards me as if I had personally filed a complaint or suggestion to the government about legislation of realistically looking games. Marijuana is illegal in most parts of the world, yet there is no proof that it affects people negatively in any way. Doesn't hinder the government from keeping it illegal though.

You need more than your random whims and musings to ban something, as frustrating as that may be for you.

This is directly aimed at me, right? Because I have no idea where you got the notion that I want to ban overly realistic games.

[Collegeguy]

It's not the government's job to protect you from violent movies or video games. At least not if you are an adult. You can watch as much crap as you want.

Some governments do, so I guess it's a question of whether you want you're own government doing this.

[Mormolyce]

You could make games gorier right now with current generation graphics. Blood and guts are an aesthetic choice, nothing to do with how advanced the graphics are. WoW for example has a semi-cartoonish aesthetic.

[DownButStillOut]

This is an opinion.
Violence through video games I believe is brought on the fact that the person playing the video games hasn't been told to not dissociate Between the two of reality and virtual realm and seemingly meld the two into one coherent figure in which they can shoot people because they did in video games. The irrationality of thought is brought about when no heuristic is placed into a person's brain on which they can base their decisions upon, creating their own.

This is rambling.
I think, now would be a good time for some sleep! Anyone else agree?

[Magpai]

This is directly aimed at me, right? Because I have no idea where you got the notion that I want to ban overly realistic games.

You are talking about government "allowing" it or not. The implication is that if they didn't "allow" it, they woudl enforce it with a ban? Or are oyu thinking they'd just run PSAs about why realistic video games might make you slaughter your family?

If you personally would be against such a ban - which I doubt by your posts, but that's your call, not mine - then fine. The arguments I presented against such a ban still apply even if they're not directed right at you personally.

[the1seth]

TBH if we had gaming technology that could rival the Holodeck from Star Trek I would be in there all the time doing battle simulations of all kinds. For me the only real moral problem would be that I would probably forsake the virtues of real life for the pleasures of a digital life thus rendering my existence to less than that of a vegetable.