I enjoyed playing World of Warcraft and EverQuest. It is the first time I ever played an MMOG. However, I was a little concerned with how easily I slipped into the culture of these games. As I posted to the discussion board:
While playing with the group I heard one of our group members say that they did not like bashing wolves. I found that I didn't like doing it either but I had rationalised it because they were 'diseased' wolves and as such should be culled. However, in a later quest I had to collect the bandanas of some renegades and when I accepted the quest I realised that meant that I had to kill them. I was a bit uneasy about that but I had accepted the quest. I was killed at my first and second attempts but after being resurrected and figuring out (a la Gee) which weapon I should use, I was successful and forgot that I was 'killing' these renegades but just focussed on being successful in completing my task. However, when I went to get my reward and next quest, the quest-giver made a comment about how I didn't mind doing dirty work (or words to that effect). This jolted me out of my complacency and I realised that my character was a murderer. I had deliberately chosen the persona of a priest rather than a warrior to avoid being a 'bad' character. I was surprised at how easily I slipped into a murderer. I had an objective and became focussed on that objective - ignoring the means of achieving it.
I should add that I just came back from giving a paper at a conference in Berlin and spent the weekend exploring Berlin - which included visiting the Jewish museum and part of the Wall which is still standing. I was appalled at the stories of informers but my husband suggested that we did not know what pressures were put on informers. I mention this only because this experience is fresh in my memory and what I find interesting about WoW is how easy it is to be absorbed into a particular culture and a particular way of being. It made me wonder whether I could act more ethically in the WoW culture rather than passively just accepting quests.
Gee talks about three identities when playing a game – the virtual, the real and the projective. A player has some control in constructing their virtual identity in a game but the player’s choice is constrained because she has no control over the game world in which she has to play. So I chose Anavli to be a Priest in WoW so she could be a ‘good’ character. However, the initial quests in WoW involve killing beasts, killing renegades etc. My choice of my virtual identity was constrained by the game world in which my character has to live. Gee also talks about a projective identity using the term projective in two senses:
· Players project their own values and desires onto their virtual identity (in my case Anavli)
· Players see their virtual identity as a project in making – they need to take ownership of their creation (I have aspirations for the kind of character I want Anavli to become)
After creating my virtual identity, when I entered the game I was a passive player – accepting the quests and not questioning what I was doing. It was when the quest-giver made his remark that my real identity reawakened and questioned how my virtual identity was behaving. At that point, I think that I began to be aware of my projective identity. I wanted to take ownership of the kind of character I wanted Anavli to become but I was not sure of the constraints in the game world of WoW.

Miguel Sicart has written on the ethics of computer games. His view on ethics of computer games is linked to his definition of a game – ‘A game is not only it rules, its material aspect, but also its experience – the act of playing the game.’ (Sicart 2005:15) He takes the view that games players ‘are moral beings that evaluate their actions and the choices they make’ (Sicart 2005:15). However, he also argues that:
The way games are designed and how that design encourages players to make certain choices, is relevant for the understanding of the ethics of computer games. (Sicart 2009:17)
In his 2005 paper he uses an example from WoW. WoW designers allowed player vs. player combat (pvp) in certain servers. Because of the popularity of that feature, the designers decided to implement an honour system – where players got a considerable number of points for killing other players. (Sicart points out that they did not at the same time implement a dishonour system.) This design feature led to what the WoW community considered unethical behaviour such as corpse camping (i.e. waiting for other players to resurrect to kill them again when they were weak) and ganking (attacking players who cannot defend themselves). The WoW community became divided – some liked the honour system, others disliked it so much that they stopped playing in the pvp servers. The designers resolved this polarization by having certain areas that are designated in the map as battlegrounds. (Sicart was writing in 2005. I have been challenged to a few duels in WoW but I had the option to decline – so this is probably a further design feature refinement of the ethical issue the honour system raised.)
Sicart’s point is that both the player and the rules/fictional worlds are ethical entities which are both responsible for ‘the well being of the whole experience of playing a game’. My concern was how passively I started to play the game – not reflecting on the experience. That may have been a feature of being totally unfamiliar with this kind of game and concentrating on learning about it. I also wonder whether the quest-giver’s comment was a deliberate design feature to make me reflect on the nature of my virtual self. It seems in Sicart’s WoW example, the game designers are responding to community issues. If that is the case, then perhaps one could argue that WoW is an ethical game. But I need to play more in it to discover whether that is the case.
Educators designing games need to think carefully of the culture they want to foster. They need to take care that design features they create do not have negative ethical consequences. At the same time they need to see players as active moral individuals. As I work with mature adults that is not a problem for me – those working with young children may need to think carefully of their level of maturity. For both groups, individual and group reflection will help them resolve ethical issues.
References
Gee, James Paul (2003) What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy
Sicart, Miguel (2005) Game, Player, Ethics: A virtue ethics approach to computer games, International Review of Information Ethics, vol. 4 (12/2005) 13-18
Sicart, Miguel (2009) Ch1 Introduction in The Ethics of Computer Games. Cambridge, MA.: The MIT Press.