|
Kat's Grand Theft Auto San Andreas (Arcade)
|
| [July 26, 2010 10:14:46 AM]
|
One my third time playing Grand Theft Auto, I decided to look at health in the game. I was trying to get myself killed to see what would happen with the hospital bill once I ran out of money. A quick way to do this was to attack someone with a gun and have them shoot me. As I was walking down the street, I was looking at the characters and deciding whether or not they had a gun. Essentially, I was using stereotypes to determine whether or not someone had a gun.
The issue here is that the San Andreas game is based off of real cities. Los Santos is based on Los Angeles; San Fierro is based on San Francisco, and Las Venturas is based on Las Vegas. By basing the games on real cities, and presumably their inhabitants, the game perpetuates stereotypes grounded in real racial and political issues.
One of these stereotypes is gang members. As far as I’ve seen in the game, every gang member is an African American male. At one point in the game, I ran into a man whose accent sounded Middle Easter who said, “I’m allowed to be here”. At another point, some sort of news announcement was made saying that all immigrant green cards are banned in the state. In the game, there are stereotypes that African American men are gang members and that immigrants are foreigners. If a game is based on a real case, is it ethical to represent that case, and its negative components, in its entirety? Is fictional entertainment exempt from being politically conscious? I don’t think it is exempt because societal ideas go into the making of the game and get released back out into society. It is a reflection of our societal ideas in a simplistic form. More importantly, it strips the political aspects of these ideas. It is then seen as entertainment rather than as an ethical issue.
read comments (1)  -
add a comment 
|
| [July 26, 2010 12:30:30 AM]
|
(Played 7/25)
This time when I was playing Grand Theft Auto, I was paying attention to the female characters in the game. The strength of women depended on their role. Strength is usually associated with men. There was a very different response if I attacked a prostitute versus a non-prostitute. If I attacked a prostitute, she attacked me back with a gun and used more aggressive language. If I attacked a non-prostitute, she ran away and used defensive language. The role of the prostitute is obviously a sexualized role. This sexualized role would appeal more to males than to females. Prostitutes are stronger than non-prostitutes. They have a more masculine role as it is being constructed into a male realm as they simultaneously take on a sexualized role.
After thinking about the representation of women, particularly prostitutes, I began thinking about the creation of this game within the male realm. Games made for men are often violent and may have sexualized female characters. The moral issue is if it’s wrong to perpetuate violence and sexualized women in video games made for men. Also, what is the responsibility of a company in the product they produce?
Looking at it from a utilitarian perspective, happiness is the only thing that matters. The consumers would be happy because the game supports the violence and sexuality they want from a game. The company would be happy because they are making the most profit by giving their consumers what they want. There is a limited amount of unhappy people because consuming the product is a choice. So with this perspective, it is not unethical to make a product that perpetuates something that is otherwise considered unethical in society.
add a comment
|
| [July 25, 2010 08:08:41 PM]
|
(Played on 7/21)
When I was playing Grand Theft Auto, I did not like stealing vehicles to make traveling more convenient. I did not want to steal them because making the choice to steal them made me feel like, through the character, I was a bad person. I also did not want to steal them because that created other characters to exhibit violence toward me. However, I did not feel bad about stealing vehicles while I was being attacked, either shoot at or hit. I felt like it was less of a choice and was done out of necessity.
This brought up a moral dilemma of whether or not stealing was okay if it was out of necessity. From a relativist perspective, the game takes place in a culture of violence. I think stealing a car would be morally acceptable because safety would supersede property rights. If the value of the culture is safety, it is necessary to steal in order to uphold that value over others, and choice is minimized. Thus it is not ethically wrong to steal because stealing supports the cultural value.
Representation is also important to the ethical aspects of stealing. In a perspective broader than relativism, stealing is considered unethical in our society, supported by our laws. Police officers are a part of law. The police officers are represented as being unethical in the game, as they threaten to frame the main character for a crime he did not commit. As the representation of the law (police officers) is unethical, their role in the law is negated. As there is no ethical overseeing body of law enforcement, the responsibility of justice falls on individuals. The main character is represented as being a good person. At the introduction of the game, he is shown to be an upstanding citizen who does not participate in unethical criminal activity. Because he is represented as ethical, the activities he partakes in order to protect himself or enact justice are also ethical. When he steals vehicles, police officers chase him. But because of the way in which characters are represented, stealing vehicles out of necessity is not unethical.
add a comment
|
|
|
 |
Kat's Grand Theft Auto San Andreas (Arcade)
|
|
Current Status: Playing
GameLog started on: Wednesday 21 July, 2010
|
 |
|
Kat's opinion and rating for this game |
|
No comment, yet.
Rating (out of 5): |
|
