This Weeks Ethical Issue…

Blizzard Removing Overwatch Butt Pose After Fan Complaint

 

lbauzuan3j5lasf9rwcy.png

Comments on the issue – An seemingly utterly pointless arguments which seems to have raised a lots of comments from people on the issue of sexulization in games. This characters pose was removed, yet the pose was available on all of the other characters and still is to this day. Something seems a little silly there….

Grayson, Nathan. Kotaku.com. N.p., 2016. Web. 29 Mar. 2016.

Looking at the Ethics of Lockheed Martin

lm_logo.jpg

We will accomplish our vision by conducting business according to our values:

  • Do What’s Right
  • Respect Others
  • Perform With Excellence

“Ethics and integrity have always been core principles at Lockheed Martin, and that’s reflected in our value statements,” says Leo Mackay, vice president of Ethics and Sustainability. “Even if you didn’t know anything about our Code of Ethics and Business Conduct, if you followed the value statements – Do What’s Right, Respect Others, and Perform with Excellence – you could come pretty close to how we would want you to act in any situation that involved an ethical judgemen.”

– :Taken from the lockheed martin website.

Thoughts on their ethics… 

Overall I would say the 3 core values by which Lockheed conducts themselves are excellent and convey a great sense of respect for such a large company. Employees are also encouraged to use the “Voicing Our Values techniques

“Ethics · Lockheed Martin”. Lockheedmartin.co.uk. Web. 14 Mar. 2016.

Week Ten

This weeks reading –

IGDA Ethical Code For Game Designers

Do game designers need an ethical code?

There most definitely is a need for game designers to have an ethical code. However, too strict ethical codes may lead to a stifling of creation and growth within the industry. In terms of how a games company treats its staff, there is definitely a need for a code of ethics so that fairness and professionalism strive.

Is the IGDA Code a solid ethical code for game designers?

I feel like the IGDA code is fairly solid when it comes to managing different disciplinary relationships within a games studio or presenting content as an individual. The code outlines, that as individual developers they will “Continually strive to increase the recognition and respect of the profession; uphold the integrity of our work and credit contributions where they are due, never representing another’s work as our own, or vice versa”. This is great, and it’s a principle that most aspiring game developers would respect. Perhaps the addition of “increase the recognition and respect of the profession” may not full into the realm of ethics, but other than that this outlines one of the main ethical concerns within the industry – plagiarism.

The code still needs to provide more information in regards to the actually video game design process, instead of focusing on the relationship between employees relationships and copywriter issues.

“Code Of Ethics – International Game Developers Association (IGDA)”. Igda.org. Web. 8 Mar. 2016.

 

Week Nine

This Weeks Reading –

Ethics in the Virtual World:
Chapter 7: There Are Wrongs and Then There Are Wrongs.

If you accept that it is OK to kill random people in a video game (if you do not think it is OK feel free to argue this point), would it be OK to seek out to intentionally kill only individuals identified as homosexual in the game? Why? Please site the reading to support your response.

I would say that it would firstly depend upon the thoughts of the developers before any such idea was placed within a game, but if a player was presented with a game that allowed them to intentionally kill only individuals identified as homosexual in the game then I would see it as perfectly OK to do so. My decision is based upon one of Gary Young’s thoughts on Stephanie Patridge words. Partridges states: “Consider, for example, the game Mafia Wars. The fact that we enjoy playing this game seems to say nothing at all by itself about our attitude towards organised crime”. Young comments what he things Patridge is saying here – “Therefore, what I take Patridge to be saying here is that if we enjoy playing a game that features organized crime, our enjoyment is not necessarily a sign of our approval of organized crime.” [page 78]

Young, Garry. Ethics In The Virtual World. Durham, UK: Acumen Publishing Ltd, 2013. Print.

 

 

Week Eight

This weeks reading –

Ethics in the Virtual World:
Chapter 6: Are Meanings Virtually the Same?

What is Power’s argument for moral policing in computer games?

Power’s argument is that engaging in the symbolic taboo activities in games is morally wrong even though they may not actually physically be committing the act in the real world. The mere fact that these actions are being depicting a prohibited offline taboo activity is enough to make them morally wrong.

What is meant by the term ‘morally corrupt’?

Those who are morally corrupt do not adhere to the same set of morals to which most of us identify with. They may engage in unethical behaviour such as being dishonest or obscene. In Ethics in the Virtual World, Gary Young uses the term morally corrupt to describe something that “not only commends its audience to delight in the morally prohibited but also, and important, causes them to do so.”

Is it fun to ‘break taboos’?

Of course. It allows us to performs actions, that one would not normally be permitted to perform in the real world, in a virtual world. After all “Knowing that it is wrong is part of the fun and games” Thomas Nys [page 71].  Many authors agree that breaking taboos is most certainly fun. Ludologist Jesper Jule states that video games “are playgrounds where players can experiment with doing things that they would not normally do”. By merly implying that they are playgrounds Jule is acknowledging the fun that comes along with breaking taboos.

Young, Garry. Ethics In The Virtual World. Durham, UK: Acumen Publishing Ltd, 2013. Print.