Blogging the experience of gameplayhttps://www.gamelog.cl/gamers/GamerPage.php?idgamer=1903https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6501At the end of Chapter Two, there are quite a few events that puts the players’ morality to the test, however, I’d like to take a closer look at Kate’s suicide attempt and the events that led up to that moment in the game. There were many signs that she was mentally unwell, but I think it’s interesting how the game used the aspect of a large event in the game to test the player in what they may think are decisions with less consequence leading up to the event. For example, there are a few small decisions that increase your friendship with Kate before she chooses to jump or not: talking to her when given the chance, taking her phone calls/calling her back on the telephone, stepping in when David is scolding her, and looking through her room to learn more about her. All of these small choices in Max’s daily life added up into a trusting friendship with Kate which assisted in talking her out of jumping off the building. It’s pretty obvious that “Life is Strange” uses the Suspension of Disbelief (willingness to overlook limitations of a medium enable to accept a fictional premise), which is a great tool to use in video games. In the case of Kate, it’s obvious that not one single action of a single person would be able to prevent a suicide because that’s an unrealistic premise; however, with the Suspension of Disbelief the player stays enthralled with the game and gives every decision more weight and attention. I think this is what makes Life is Strange such a popular game; the fact that almost every decision may or may not change your future timeline keeps the player guessing and captivated with the game decisions. Thu, 09 Nov 2017 22:57:48 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6501&iddiary=11407https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6501Moving forward, I’ve noticed that there are many different actions one can make, many with light consequences and a few with heavier consequences. Although, it’s difficult to determine exactly what type of consequence an action has immediately because some may stew and come back to assist or punish you later on. For example, stopping to talk to Kate to ask her about her mental health has already begun to show a positive repertoire, while choosing to make fun of Victoria after her paint accident will lead to continued aggression in our relationship with her. Actions such as knowing the answer to Evan’s question enable to look at his portfolio or talking to Chloe gave us a little more information about the elusive character Rachel Amber. The game does a great job of keeping you guessing at what may or may not be important actions to take for future consequences. It also does a great job of utilizing virtue theory and vices (alcohol, drugs, prostitution(?)). Sometimes, it’s a difficult decision to save Chloe time and time again because she gets into trouble concerning drugs and other illegal substances. There are, however, a few decisions I’m faced with in Chapter Two that I don’t really get a decision in making such as: reversing Chloe from shooting herself, stopping Frank from harming Chloe, and saving Chloe from the train tracks. As we discussed in class, there is definitely a moral motivation that the game makes for us; it’s obvious from my previously listed examples that one of the prominent predicaments “Life Is Strange” uses is “harm to characters”. It’s difficult to make a decision or an action that will cause harm to a character or not rewind time to prevent harm of a character. Thu, 09 Nov 2017 22:31:34 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6501&iddiary=11406https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6501Starting the game as Max Caulfield, an 18-year-old photography student, "Life is Strange" centers around the morality of having the ability to rewind time. As a player, you quickly learn that after an event occurs you have the ability to rewind time; but what you decide to do with that and the consequences you face (butterfly effect) follows those actions. The first time you encounter being able to reverse time is when Max watches a girl named Chloe being shot by a boy named Nathan. Max gains the power to reverse time, and henceforth saves Chloe from being shot by pulling the fire alarm. I quickly learned that there were actions that held greater weight and consequences, while others that weren’t as critical. For example, saving Chloe’s life was a critical action because it involves a human life and those around it. This decision isn’t one to be made lightly because although it may seem like a straightforward action (Save a life? Or watch and do nothing? Obviously save a life, right?), it would be wise to consider all the consequences of a heavy weighted action. Thu, 09 Nov 2017 18:48:13 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6501&iddiary=11403https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6450One thing I’ve noticed that This is the Police does really well is playing around the Principle of Legality and Law of the Jungle. Playing the game as police chief Boyd, it’s very obvious that the laws are clear and understood, but the gameplay is centered around whether or not you choose wrongdoing or following the letter of the law. As we learned in class: “legality and morality are not the same thing”. Although there are two sides of the argument, I find myself playing more to the tune of the Law of the Jungle: “do whatever is necessary to survive and succeed”. In order to not be killed by the mafia, I continue to act as a corrupt official and do whatever they ask of me in order to survive. Whether it’s neglecting crimes happening in the city, firing officers with the guise of “old age”, or choosing to take the entirety of money left behind by my dead employees, I’ve already gone down a rough road so I’m sticking to my choices of corruption in order to hopefully survive and retire a wealthy man. Thu, 28 Sep 2017 22:26:14 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6450&iddiary=11330https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6450Continuing the game, it wasn’t long before I got the consequences of the previous moral dilemma. The mafia drops off a letter with photos of Kendrick and his family boarding an airplane, subtly letting me know that they are in understanding that I’ve taken over the contract for Kendrick who is fleeing. I receive a phone call from Christopher Sand, the mafia boss of the city; he insists that we formally meet and that my corruption working for him formally begins now. From here on out, I need to decide how I will delegate duties out to the city: do I prioritize the safety of the general citizens? Or do I turn a blind eye to any crimes involving the mafia? Will I send out more officers to respond to incidences the mafia needs covered? Or do I delegate my officers in a Utilitarianism sense and choose the options that bring about the greatest good for the city? The game does a great job of giving the player different options to consider with many different lives at stake. Wed, 27 Sep 2017 00:44:39 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6450&iddiary=11301https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6450Starting the game This is the Police, the game revolves around the struggles of balancing your morality and ethics as you play the role of police chief Jack Boyd. The game begins with an introduction to your roles as Jack Boyd: after an investigation goes wrong, you must work to keep your job and make money for your retirement. Your tasks include keeping the city safe by solving cases, leading your task forces, and making moral decisions involving the mafia. The first great moral dilemma I faced in the game was when an old colleague, Kendrick, comes asking me for a favor. Kendrick has gotten into trouble working with the mafia, and now needs assistance because he made a contract with them but isn’t able to pay them back the money he owes. If he doesn’t get someone to take over the contract for him, the mafia’s going to kill his family. At this point, I’m given the choice of assisting Kendrick or refusing him. I figured that since I’m already knee deep in with the mafia and my future as Jack looked bleak, I would save Kendrick and his family so I chose to assist him. There wasn’t an immediate consequence for my actions, but I’m sure I’ll be hearingWed, 20 Sep 2017 00:22:35 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6450&iddiary=11279https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6442 Something I’ve noticed about the way this game is played is that the individual parts of the game are all segmented and besides learning some background information about individual characters, there is always a moral and ethical situation at the end of each puzzle room. I’ve been playing through C-Team since the beginning of the game, but I decided to mix it up and play a scene from D-Team with members Diana, Sigma, and Phi. The team wakes up inside a trash disposal room, with Phi locked inside the incinerator. After a series of events, Sigma is restrained to a chair with a revolver pointed at Sigma’s head. Playing as Diana, I am given the choice to play Russian roulette and pull the trigger on the revolver (which is loaded with three cartridges and three blanks) and release Phi from the incinerator, or refuse to shoot causing the incineration of Phi. Perhaps it’s the fact that I had only been playing a majority of C-Team cuts since the beginning of the game which is why I didn’t feel a great emotional attachment to any members of D-Team, but it only made sense to me that I should try for the best possible outcome which would be saving both Phi and Sigma. It’s apparent that Phi and Sigma share a background and previous relationship, so both argue for me to make the decision that saves the other respectively. The way I reasoned with myself is that I had a 100% chance of saving Phi if I pulled the trigger, and 0% chance of saving her if I did nothing; there was a 50% chance of killing Sigma by pulling the trigger, 50% chance of shooting a blank which would save Sigma, and 100% chance of saving Sigma if I did nothing. When I thought about it, I had two decisions with a 100% chance of saving either Phi or Sigma, but the option of pulling the trigger gave me a 100% chance of saving Phi and 50% of saving Sigma. I concluded that pulling the trigger and taking the 50% chance on Sigma’s life was the best decision since it wasn’t fair for me to make a 100% decision on saving one life, when I would have a 100% chance of saving Phi’s life with an additional 50% chance of saving Sigma’s. The few moments after I shot the revolver were tense, but I was confident in my decision and just had to pray for the best possible outcome. It seems as though luck was on my side when I pulled the trigger because the revolver shot a blank and I was able to save both Phi and Sigma. Sigma was released from the chair and Phi from the incinerator; however, immediately after her release, Phi angrily shouted at me for putting Sigma in danger and made the argument that it wasn’t fair of me to put his life on the line for hers. I don’t think it was reasonable of Phi to yell at me (Diana) because not only was I put on the spot to make a decision involving two lives, but the situation was made even more tense with the shouts of pulling or not pulling the trigger from both parties. If someone were to make this decision in real life, it would definitely be a more difficult task since other variables would be present; for example: personal bias (affinity for one person over the other), mental fortitude, and of course personal morals and ethics. It’s obvious that there is a lot more to this particular decision than just moral and ethics, but looking at that side of things, one could have made the decision to save only one member since it would increase their own likelihood of survival (once again, a death would mean one more X Pass). This decision was probably the easiest decision I’ve made throughout the play-through of this game thus far, since it was made logically and without much extra biases present. I didn’t feel as though there was a better option involved, and I didn’t feel a great moral dilemma when I chose the option that would give the best possible outcome of saving both lives on the line. (This entry has been edited1 time. It was last edited on Thu, 31 Aug 2017 23:16:50.)Thu, 31 Aug 2017 23:15:44 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6442&iddiary=11266https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6442 Continuing the game having not executed any team, I decided to play as C-Team with members Carlos, Junpei, and Akane. Introduced to the next chapter of the game, I find myself as Carlos stuck inside a decontamination room with Junpei and Akane. After revealing a little background information of all three members of C-Team, Zero voices the next game to be played: there is a red button on the wall that if pushed, will douse Q-Team and D-Team in hydrofluoric acid, allowing C-Team to escape since that would free up six X Passes. To heighten the gravity of the situation and decision, it is revealed that both Q-Team and D-Team are also locked in decontamination rooms with the same aforementioned choice, and that only the team who presses the button first will execute the other two teams. Once again, similar to the first moral decision of the game, I am left with the choice to decide whether or not I pressed the button. Playing the role of Carlos, I had Akane pleading with me not to press the button and Junpei forcefully telling me to press the button. Unlike the first decision game, I was more invested and frenzied about this decision because not only had I learned more about all three characters of C-Team, but there was also a ten second countdown timer after I heard the arguments of Akane and Junpei. I realized I needed to quickly decide if I was going to play the game attempting to keep everyone alive, or playing for my individual team to survive (which means killing the other two teams). Without time to think about my decision, the ten second time limit began and ran out without the press of the button on my part. Even though I felt fear that perhaps another one of the two teams had pressed the button which would in turn kill my team (C-Team), I didn’t feel much regret for my decision. I like to think that in real life, my morals and ethics would exceed my want of escaping death; however, I know that it would be a completely different playing field if I were in this scenario with my own (real) life in danger. I struggled to argue within myself that the other two teams would hold the same morals as myself, which would in turn make the premises true that neither D-Team nor Q-Team would press the button. Immediately after the time limit had run out, once again, Junpei condemned my decision not to press the button and free our team, while Akane argued in my favor that my decision was the correct, moral and ethical decision. Although I had Akane’s reassurance that I had indeed made the correct decision and that we needed to trust in D-Team and Q-Team, Junpei’s condemnation of my decision made me more anxious and question my choices. What if the arguments that I made for myself weren’t true and my team was going to suffer the ultimate consequence of death all because I didn’t take into consideration the weight of the lives of my team members? I wanted to know as soon as possible the outcome of my choice; whether or not another team pressed the button and sentenced us to death. This knowledge would either validate my moral decision, or invalidate it and showcase my naivety in pressured life or death situations. Unfortunately, the game wasn’t black and white and didn’t give me an immediate response as to whether or not I made the “right or wrong” choice. Although there was no immediate death, Zero announced that we were going to be put to sleep and the consequence of my decision would take (or not take) route after the fact. Although this outcome was irritating, neither an immediate validation or invalidation of my actions, in perspective this is more similar to real life decisions than if I had been given a quick answer as to whether or not I made the right decision. In life, when we are faced with moral and ethical dilemmas, the decision may also be a quick one with little room to stop and ponder options; however, the outcome of those decisions usually isn’t immediate. I feel as the discussion of morality and ethics throughout life is important because when the situation presents itself, you most likely won’t be given a great amount of time to ponder or pick apart your decisions. Life experiences and education are two pertinent influential factors in curbing the morals and ethics of an individual; I believe everyone has innate behavior when given a difficult choice, but it’s at the moment that the individual will show where their moral compass lies when given a moral dilemma because saying where their values lies is one conjecture, but putting their values into practice is evidence. Wed, 30 Aug 2017 20:18:47 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6442&iddiary=11248https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6442In the past two class periods, we discussed morality, ethics, and arguments, all of which are very prevalent in the scope of Zero Time Dilemma. A quick introduction to the game: there are three separate teams locked inside a facility which must all work within their groups to escape being killed by an entity called Zero. The teams are C-Team, D-Team, and Q-Team: the members of C-Team are leader Carlos, Junpei, and Akane; the members of D-Team are leader Diana, Phi, and Sigma; the members of Q-Team are leader Q, Mira, and Eric. Zero reveals that an “X Pass” (escape pass) will be revealed whenever someone dies, with a total of six X Passes needed to open the final door to escape. Discussing the first great moral dilemma, each of the three separate teams are presented with a chance to vote for the death of all members in another team; the only contingency is that there must be a majority vote to sentence a team to death. The teams aren’t able to speak to each other during the vote, however, through the use of a dog named Gab, the teams communicate with each other to spread out the votes to avoid the casualty of a team. The moral dilemma is given to the player when teams begin to discuss the possibility of not following a vote for the team they are assigned to vote for; in doing so, teams would gain a great advantage since three players would die from the vote, freeing three X Passes. In relation to our discussed topics in class, the teams bring up moral arguments and argue for a moral principle. While some members of a team use deductive reasoning to reason that another team will stick to their assigned vote, other members use inductive reasoning to conclude that sticking to the assigned vote isn’t a guarantee which makes changing their vote a greater advantage and benefit to their particular group. I quickly learned that each team members had one member arguing for the more ethical decision to stick to the pre-planned vote, and one member arguing for the decision that would increase the likelihood of escape for the team; however, in the end, the decision is made by the team leader which is played by the player. Ultimately, with arguments for both decisions, I as the player was given the decision of the vote. I played through each route: one where C-Team was executed, one where D-Team was executed, one where Q-Team was executed, and one where I followed the assigned votes. It was very easy to follow the assigned votes because I felt good about my decision and was immediately validated by my team member who argued in favor of the ethical decision; however, when I chose a different team than the team I was assigned, I was met with anger and disappointment from my team member. I thought this opening of the game was a really great way to showcase the moral and ethical decisions that would play into the routes of the entire game. Even though it’s just a game and the decisions I made wouldn’t necessarily be permanent, the empathy and conviction of the story were enough to rattle my own morals when it was my turn to make a decision.Wed, 30 Aug 2017 01:20:33 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=6442&iddiary=11240