View Single Post

Default 

April 19th, 2013, 03:51
So essentially his only argument against moral choices is, that they can be implemented badly? But isn't that the risk with EVERY game system?

I find this one of THE most absurd (and dangerous) ideas I have read in 30 years being a gamer now. Ever since I played Ultima (the RPG series) I knew that moral choices and moral dilemmas the THE most important element, at least in RPGs, but in every game where the gamer is player a character of sorts and through and sort of story.

The man simply mistakes computer games with books. A computer game is per se an internactive medium, so interaction is implied and not passive consumption. If I am supposed to interact, isn't it logical, that I want consequences from my doings? That means, choices? If whatever I do makes no difference, why even play a computer game and not watch a movie or read a book?

Sorry, but this article is by far the biggest nonsense I had read in a long time. Let's hope it quickly passes where it belongs: into oblivion.
elikal is offline

elikal

elikal's Avatar
Sentinel

#35

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 512