[MUD-Dev] Retention without Addiction?

[Matt Mihaly]

On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Acius wrote:
 
> We're running into problems because people are starting to contend
> that habitual MMORPG play is *not* harmless. Trying to lay all the
> blame at the feet of game companies for making addictive games is
> irresponsible -- but then, it is also irresponsible if game
> companies categorically deny all responsibility for the behavior
> of their players. Game companies are very interested in shaping
> the behavior of their players -- they want their money, and that
> requires effective persuasion -- or are you trying to tell me that
> we have no influence over our players at all? That'll really upset
> the marketing folks.

The sun influences everything everybody does. Without it, there
wouldn't even be any humans to do these supposedly awful things. Is
the sun to blame?  "That's ridiculous," you'd correctly reply,
pointing out that blame, as it's being used in this discussion, has
a quasi-moral element to it, and that "blame" isn't case upon the
sun because the sun didn't make a decision to cause the harm. It
just is, and it isn't a moral agent.

Well and good then, only moral agents can have blame (as opposed to
mere causation) heaped upon them. The game designer is guilty
because he chose to create a game which is habit-forming, and he
must share the blame for harm caused by people who use his product,
or so the argument goes. He shares the blame not merely because he
contributed to the problem (so does the sun), but because he CHOSE
to contribute to the problem. It's his fault because he made a
decision.

Well then, why not say exactly the same thing about the habitual
player who does something naughty. He CHOSE to contribute to the
problem and thus he shares blame. "What? Just shares it? Surely if
he made a choice to do naughty thing X, he doesn't share the
blame. It's all his." "No no!", argue those who prefer to let people
abrogate personal responsibility. "It isn't entirely his fault,
because other things, such as the game design, contributed to his
making of that decision." Fair enough. Then I, as a game designer,
make the same claim. I blame everyone but myself for making a game
that encourages habitual play, because I had no choice. My
environment, and those influencing me conditioned me in such a way
that I'd make this game. Not my fault.

That's the problem with allowing people to pass on responsibilty for
decisions made by them: Everyone you pass that responsibility to can
simply pass the buck to whatever influenced them. In other words, it
implies that none of us have free will and that we're merely a
product of our environment. I could argue it either way, and we'll
certainly never know whether we do possess free will or not, but I,
at least, simply find it easier to not pass of responsibility for my
actions to my environment, and to not permit others to either. Your
opinion may be that my position is irresponsible, but I, as a game
designer, will not accept moral blame for actions committed by
people who happen to also be using my product. The law may swing the
other way, but the law is just arbitrary rule enforced by the use of
physical force, not a moral authority.

I just got back from seeing Bowling for Columbine, actually, and one
funny bit in there was when Michael Moore asked, rhetorically, why
blaming Marilyn Manson for Columbine makes any more sense than
blaming the sport of bowling, since bowling is the last things the
two murderous little shits did before going on their rampage. From a
moral-blame point of view, I feel the same about MUDs and, say,
toothpaste. If a person playing my game kills himself, why should I
feel any more responsible than the company that manufactured the
toothpaste he brushed his teeth with that morning?
 
> If game designers don't confront problems of compulsive behavior
> in games, and if it continues to be perceived as a problem, then
> *somebody else* will confront it. That's what's happening in
> Korea, and I would rather *not* see that catching on
> elsewhere. The best solution for game designers is the solution we
> come up with ourselves. It is far better to spend a little time
> thinking about it now than have someone else shove an
> objectionable solution down our throats in a few years' time.

Possibly. Hasn't happened with gambling though, which has only grown
recently, and which contributes to ruining a lot more lives than
games ever will. Also note that regardless of the tobacco lawsuits,
big tobacco is going strong, to say nothing of the alcohol industry
(and good for them too. Those lawsuits are ridiculous.)
 
--matt
The US Government now claims the right to indefinitely hold US citizens
without access to their families, lawyers, or the courts. Bush must be
stopped.


_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev