Blogging the experience of gameplayhttps://www.gamelog.cl/gamers/GamerPage.php?idgamer=1838https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6355 In The Witcher 3, your first quest is to hunt a large Griffen that has been killing villagers. It is seen as a voracious beast, and the first time you encounter the Griffin, it is violently eating the flesh from a caravan’s horse. There was little emotion tied to the creature for me at first. It was simply a beast to hunt, as with so many other quests in games. However, upon encountering a dead mother Griffin, the tone changed. The music, in particular, was very melancholy, and Geralt’s tone portrayed slight mourning. The bloodthirsty animal suddenly became a majestic beast, and the tragedy of its death was apparent. In my game, in particular, it was dark, and raining. It made me realize how atmosphere can affect my emotions and perceptions. It’s a tactic many games use, but I was slightly frightened at how easily I was manipulated by some sound and lighting. Of course, The Witcher continues its gray morality by having you hunt the Griffin later, with little to no emotion attached. It’s difficult for me to dispute the ethics of tone manipulation, however, because it is a key part of our experience as an audience.Thu, 06 Apr 2017 17:51:02 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6355&iddiary=11130https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6355The Witcher 3 is known for its gray areas, its moral quests that have no right or wrong, because every action has consequences. I knew this, to some extent, when I started, but it didn’t fully register with me. I realized this when a dwarf asked me to find a suspected arsonist and bring him to justice. I accepted the quest out of goodwill toward the dwarf, but when I found the perpetrator, drunk and mourning the loss of his mother, I had some doubts. I’m a huge advocate for second chances, and for helping people who turn to crime after difficult times. However, the game made it feel like taking the arsonist’s money in exchange for my silence was a bad option, and there was no “Keep your money” choice. I felt as though the game wanted me to take him in. However, as I hipnotized the man to follow me back to the dwarf, who consequently had him arrested, I felt empty. I had gone against the moral choice I wanted, and the game seemed to not acknowledge that I made a “right” choice-a choice I thought it wanted. Afterwards, my friend informed me that either way, the game doesn’t give you a sense of accomplishment or “rightness,” but rather leaves it gray on purpose. I realized that I had made a decision based on the idea that I didn’t want the game to punish me for doing what I thought was right. While I should have gone with my gut, I think it said more about the games I’m used to playing. Many games do not play with gray area as much as The Witcher. Usually, there is a good, neutral, and bad option that all lead to those subsequent paths. “Bad” options are for roleplaying, for people who are playing a character rather than making moral decisions. But in Witcher there isn’t that. You could morally justify many options in the game, which is an interesting approach that I feel like could improve our ethical experiences in games.Wed, 05 Apr 2017 17:52:15 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6355&iddiary=11109https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6355 (This entry has been edited1 time. It was last edited on Tue, 04 Apr 2017 17:21:14.)Tue, 04 Apr 2017 17:20:30 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6355&iddiary=11091https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6355Starting The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, I realized something I had never really put much thought into before, and that was the presence of “Investigation” options. Basically, options that didn’t continue the conversation, but were just meant for the player to get more information on their situation. To be honest, I had just started this game, and didn’t care much to get my information from an exposition dump. However, there is something more interesting than just learning more about the world, and that’s seeing how the characters interact with each other through this investigation dialogue. You can tell that Geralt and Vesemir are good friends simply because of how easily they interact with each other. I also loved the characterization given to the owner of the pub. When asking her questions, she wanders around the counter a bit, she looks over your shoulder to check on the other barmates, and sometimes even fiddles with her clothes. It was such a small but lively touch that added characterization to characters that seemed simple or unimportant. The investigation options in Witcher aren’t just there so the player can get more information about the world, but the characters as well. I believe this characterization can help amplify both our connection to them, and our desire to help them. For example, in The Witcher’s side quests, I don’t do quests for rewards (despite there usually being an option to ask for money). I do these side quests because it feels like the right thing to do. It’s the right thing to save townspeople from a Griffin, for example. However, if the characters were flat, or lacked any qualities we can relate to or sympathize with, we might simply do side quests for the experience, or money, or we might not do them at all. While I believe the reward aspect to be a small part of why I usually do sidequests, games like The Witcher make me feel like this world could be real, and therefore there are people here who deserve both protecting and my help.Tue, 04 Apr 2017 00:06:02 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6355&iddiary=11088https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6331An interesting mechanic in The Last Guardian is the use of the “Call Trico” button. Essentially, you should be able to call or direct Trico with this button, but it rarely works unless you’re going the right way. This was interesting to me primarily because of the dog/human relationship. Usually, the human would be in control of instructing the dog, but instead, Trico directs you everywhere, in a sense. Trico primarily goes where you are supposed to go next, and the button seems to function more as a “Trico’ll do what you say if it’s what it wants to do, anyway.” I liked how the boy and Trico were essentially partners in this way. Most games have dogs that merely function as a sidekick, yet here you’re equals. I think it therefore must have been a conscious choice to make the Protagonist a small boy, and Trico dog-like. In our society, we consider children and pets to be vulnerable, and dependent. Of course, Trico is a large beast, but his mannerisms are similar to a pet’s (from playing in the water to being enthralled by the smell of treats). It evokes empathy for something we have seen before. Similarly, the young boy, while enduring feats many adults could not, still has mannerisms like a child. When he pets Trico or runs, it is childishly clumsy. By putting these two archetypes together, we feel a need to protect them against danger.Thu, 23 Feb 2017 18:01:58 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6331&iddiary=11029https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6328The more I played, the more I realized the difference between my own and the boy’s wants and desires. While he just wants to get home, and will likely go about the fastest way to do so, I want to help Trico, scouring every corner for a barrel. I wasn’t sure what they symbolized, but it felt like the barrels were important, and my constant fear of keeping Trico alive empowered me to search. I realized I put myself in place of the boy, forgetting my ultimate goal most of the time, and not caring much for the child as much as the dog. In particular, I remember when I had gone through all this effort to scale this wall, only to see a barrel at the bottom. Not wanting to climb again, I simply jumped. I was too scared to throw a small barrel at Trico, but not to jump a height that would certainly kill someone. The boy was immediately in pain, clutching his knees and limping afterward. While I felt bad, the limping went away after a few moments, and I found myself doing it again soon after. It made me think how differently we’ll treat the wellbeing of our player characters, knowing their invincibility (even if they die, they just come back anyway.) When Trico and I approached the birdcage, and I accidentally called him down, I immediately paused the game and began googling whether or not I was supposed to do that. It seemed unavoidable so I continued, anxieties high. When Trico ate me, my friend who had been watching me play said audibly “Well [Trico eating me] was a dick move.” It made me think about animals and morality. From what we know, animals are “True Neutrals.” They do not adhere to a moral code, but rather do what they need to survive. I saw in Trico’s flashback humans stabbing it, and while I understand the need for humans to protect themselves against the beast, I wondered if that was the case. Trico had been overall kind toward me (except the recent devouring me whole incident) so it made me wonder if Trico was that dangerous to humans, or if it was simply trying to survive.Wed, 22 Feb 2017 19:22:47 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6328&iddiary=11007https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6324 (This entry has been edited1 time. It was last edited on Wed, 22 Feb 2017 19:22:12.)Wed, 22 Feb 2017 19:21:07 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6324&iddiary=11006https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6324What I noticed immediately about The Last Guardian was how much I loved Trico’s design. It’s a mixture between a beast and a dog, with glowing eyes that seem somewhat cold and unrelatable, but with an adorable snout that I instantly recognized as similar to my own dog’s. The game begins by calling Trico a man-eating beast, but it’s obviously injured. I like how The Last Guardian was able to play with empathy in that way. We didn’t need to see Trico hurt to empathize with it, and we also didn’t need to be told it was man-eating to see it was dangerous. You want to help it immediately, even if it may mean it’ll eat you later on, and I chalk that up mostly to the friendly but slightly foreign design. When searching for barrels, I made sure to never throw one at Trico directly. I felt like I might accidentally hit it if I did. So, I gently placed the barrels in front of it, despite being hit back every time. When I finally succeeded in getting Trico back on it’s feet, it felt like an accomplishment. I always found it fascinating how great it can feel doing a good deed in a game, especially when you care about the quest. Despite being made of code and polygons, I was invested in my new dog companion. Similarly, I was terrified of accidentally hitting Trico with a barrel, because I was scared of hurting him. This personal investment and feeling of accountability has always been specific more to games than any other medium. Ironically, my devotion to Trico also stemmed from my ideas of safety. While I cared for the little boy’s well-being, his narrator voice sounded like an older man, so I assumed he grows up. Trico, however, has no foreshadowing that it’ll be okay. I was worried the game might take it away, and although I didn’t feel like I could prevent such an end, it made me want to protect the big dog even more.Tue, 21 Feb 2017 23:22:15 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6324&iddiary=10998https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6254It was odd when the game forced me to do something I considered immoral. For example, when Juliet locked Dana in her room for sexting with her boyfriend, the game was telling me to find evidence in Victoria’s room. I assumed the truth would come out regardless, and didn’t understand why Max should go snooping through other people’s stuff to find evidence for something rather trivial (in my opinion). Not only that, but the game had seemed like it was rewarding me for investigating. I received more information, and if I chose correctly in certain situations, it felt good. Morally, I would not think it okay to snoop through everything in Victoria’s room. I would have gone directly to what I believed would hold evidence. However, since it had felt like the game was rewarding exploration, I checked every corner of Victoria’s room, and it felt like a serious invasion of privacy. I can’t entirely blame the game, but like Sicart’s analysis of World of Warcraft, if the game is encouraging unethical behavior, then it should be partly the game’s responsibility for that behavior as well. I also felt guilty leaving Warren. He defended Max, yet I left him there with Nathan. Of course, the security officer had shown up soon after, but Max didn’t know that when she jumped in the car. It was almost frustrating. Here was a game that focused so heavily on my choices, yet there were some I was unable to make or forced into, not because of other’s actions, but my player character. I had to learn that Max and I were different people, which means we would make ethical decisions differently. I could do what I could to make the choices I wanted, but I couldn’t control her completely. This is further exampled by some of her thoughts, such as talking poorly of other characters like Victoria, even though I believe you can’t fight hatred with hatred. It almost felt like Max and I were sometimes fighting, and it reminded me of Freud’s Id, Superego, and Ego. Perhaps I wasn’t supposed to be Max, but just an inner part of her, hopefully helping her make the most ethical choice. In addition, Chloe’s anger toward Max felt almost unfair, but not because Max didn’t deserve it, but almost that it felt like my own fault. I think despite being different from Max, the player character is supposed to feel at least a little responsible for her. This, for me, included what she had done in the past. I knew I would have contacted Chloe, but since Max didn’t, it felt like she was yelling at me. I found myself being defensive with Max, but after analyzing, realized this was again because I felt blamed for an action I could not control. Life is Strange is different in that way. You’re not supposed to feel entirely in control of Max’s choices. You’re more along for the ride, guiding where necessary, yet, when she hurts someone you feel personally responsible. It’s a “Why am I doing this?” as opposed to a “What the hell, Max, you shouldn’t be doing this!” and the inability to separate sometimes is interesting and new. Sat, 21 Jan 2017 11:05:39 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6254&iddiary=10895https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6252When confronted with the choice to report Nathan or Hide the Truth, my ethical reasoning went like this “Using a gun to kill innocent people is wrong”, and “Lying to an authority figure is wrong”, but at the same time I wondered if I would be safe to report him. Who was to say whether I would be believed? Not to mention, if information had gotten to Nathan that I tattled on him, would I be safe? I started to worry over Max’s safety, and the morality of it all. Max could die simply for telling the truth if the truth wasn’t believed. However, I was more concerned for the fate of my classmates, and Chloe. It was likely he could kill her if he saw her again, so I ended up reporting Nathan. I also found myself spending way too much time talking to everyone, rewinding where I could so everyone would like me. However, while I was happy that no one was calling me dumb or a poser, it all felt incredibly fake. I wasn’t gaining their approval because I knew about art, skateboarding, or drones, but because I cheated so that people would like me. The more I thought on this, the more I realized that it was more than just regurgitating information. Max was listening to them. She was listening to their interests and remembering them, and while no research was done beforehand, I felt like this was a better alternative. It made me wonder about my position as an ethical player compared to Max. These people on campus had no emotional ties to me, so being nice might have come from a desire to get their assistance in the future. I doubt I would have been cruel, but I don’t think I would have spent my time if I didn’t think these interactions would help me later. I then thought about Max’s perspective. Was she rewinding time and gaining their approval for personal gains, or because she genuinely wanted to be kind? To see her classmates happy? I’m still not sure. Lastly, I had the choice to comfort or make fun of Victoria. This is where I felt like the mechanics had a chance to mess up the narrative. I chose to be nice to Victoria, since I felt like it was wrong to continuously abuse her, especially when I was the one who caused paint to fall on her. Yet, that seemed so off to me. I dropped paint on her, then pretended to be concerned for her well-being, ignoring that it was myself who did that to her. The game forced me to ruin her outfit, yet allowed me to be kind afterwards, which felt oddly conniving. Overall, I felt like it was important to recognize the player and player character differences in this segment. My reasons for doing something was likely different than Max’s, which makes me wonder if the same two choices can both be ethical if made for the wrong reasons.Fri, 20 Jan 2017 17:32:50 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6252&iddiary=10885