Is It the Avatar or the Game?
Gordon Luk at GetLuky.net has a brilliant discussion about military games and how the ability to choose your avatar affects the gameplay and enjoyment.
“Now there was an interesting concept! I’d never considered before that players might be switching to the US side in a video game due to ethical problems with playing “the enemy.†I began to wonder if he was alone, or if these moral problems with playing as enemy avatars could explain why there was such a built-in preference for the home teams.”
From my perspective, I don’t like first-person shooters at all (or 3rd person, etc.). I was appalled at America’s Army. I look at the myriad of games out there that are just not made for me. They have no appeal.
For me, it’s not about my avatar, although, most times in those games, I don’t get to be female unless she is hypersexualized. It’s not about being able to choose which side I’m on. It’s about not really wanting to kill people.
The gaming industry spends so much time and money making games that only appeal to a very small market. They think it’s a big market because it’s all they have, but really, how many people out there really want to shoot and kill people? Are there that many warriors in our genes? Is shooting the only way to satiate them? I doubt it.
I’m waiting for the next wave of gaming to wash over this world. It will be inclusive for gender, age and nationality. Someday, we will have our choice of games that spend less time trying to make realistic graphics and more time trying to be purely entertaining. I’m waiting for them, when are they coming?