game developer responsibility

I am starting to teach a game programming club.
I would like to just put this out there to see what differing opinions are. What, if any responsibility do you think a developer has when it comes to his creations? That is to say if I was in a development shop and I was tasked with an application that I felt to violent, or innappropriate should I refuse to complete the task? or Is it not my call?

Everyone is responsible for their own actions. Always be prepared to get fired though.

I'm not sure what a 'development shop' is.

The developer has 100% responsibility for what he does. Unless he has a contract with a publisher and they're pulling the strings.

Whether you want to get involved in a project that you think is too violent - that's your call to make.

Depends on how valuable you are to them I suppose.

Make it fun, make it enjoyable, make it not crash.

If you're uncomfortable with it, just ask to be put on another task.

If you're asking if parenting other peoples children is your responsibility then the answer is no.

In short. You do what you want to. If you aren't comfortable, why are you working there? It isn't more complex than that. There are plenty of christian organizations that are having games made, and there are even more places that have just decided to not make violent games.

Everyone is responsible for the status quo. The extremes are defined by what people are willing to sit by and deal with. Why are gas cars still the norm? Because so few people are willing to spend a little more and to take a little more time to find places to fuel up. If you don't like that, you buy a car that doesn't use gas, or at least a hybrid.

It isn't your responsibility to parent someone elses child. But there are plenty of other people to make those gore-fest games. If you don't want to. Don't.

I do what I want and I take responsibility for my actions. If someone does something because of my product and that was not the intended result, that's his or her problem for being a half-wit. If I don't like something, I won't do it unless I'm either contractually obligated or going to be worse off by not doing it. And even then I might look at the contract to see if there's a way out.

Personally, I'd refuse to be a part of anything I felt morally uncomfortable with. That includes anything in life, not just videogames.

There are too many opportunities in life to be a part of something that you are proud of. Your moral obligations depend on your morality. Your Morality is just that, yours. You must decide if being part of something that you disagree with at a fundamental level is OK.

There are opinions, beliefs, Values and Convictions. If someone (or something) violates your opinions, beliefs and Values, you'll get mad and then get over it. If they violate your Convictions, you may not get over it. (google "Holy War")


For Instance, I would never be associated with a product that glamorized Prostitution, Stealing things or hurting women. Would I quit? Yes.

your primary job is to find a job that you feel good about doing.

You can't not be responsible for what happens when someone uses your software. I believe that everyone is connected and there is no such thing as a neutral action or an unintended attack. You can't just leave it up to someone to decide how they will react to something, and then think that you're being responsible. That is entirely founded on believing that people are completely separate, that what happens to someone else is not happening to you, and that it is even possible for there to be individual wills opposing each other or acting on their own. We are all One. In that sense, everything that you put into a product, even seemingly unintentionally, is intentional and affects everyone.

That said, I also believe that everything in the world is not real and the things that we think are causes do not have any real effect. Someone can only be affected by something if they choose to play the role of being a victim, and only by them choosing to believe that the effects are real can they be effected at all. But then, when they choose not to believe they are a victim, and that there are no real effects in the world, they simultaneously are taking real responsibility and owning up to the fact that none of this really matters. It's all just a dream, and being responsible means being what you really are, which is the Creator's Creation (to put it non-religiously).

So really, within the world it seems like you have this issue of being responsible or not responsible, but the world is not really there and you are just dreaming it all. So there really is no grounds for deciding whether your software would be more pure or spiritual by focussing on certain elements of life rather than others. It's all the same. None of it's real. The only rationale you could possibly have is to `look normal` or `be acceptable` or `act within the law` or `be appealing to your audience/market`, for the sake of people who think that what you do to them is what really happens against their will.

You can't offend someone who is, themselves, taking responsibility for who they really are. You only seem to need to concern yourself with the people who aren't taking that responsibility, and then it isn't even your fault because they want you to offend and attack them to fulfill their beliefs. Not that any of this is justification to do so, but that's what happens.

I think it's up to you what your motives are and what you think is okay and what you believe is the right approach, based on whatever reasons you personally choose to be meaningful to you. That's the best you can do, other than asking for guidance from outside of yourself. If you are really concerned maybe ask your audience if they would be offended and acquire a sensitive feel of compassion for their situation, so that you gently present gentle ideas.

Some people really think it's great for you to greatly affect them against their will, and some people think it's awesome when you opt for darkness and destruction as your themes. Does that justify your actions? No. Your product doesn't really exist anyway and people WILL project their own beliefs and attitudes onto it. They don't even see it for what it is, so how can you possibly orchestrate what they will experience it as. At best you can make a rough guess which might work some of the time for some people.

There is no conclusive answer as to how you should approach it. Your guess as to what is right is as good as anyone else's. This world does not make sense and is quite insane. There is no part of it and no foundation of it that has any sanity or real meaning, because it is founded on insane ideas. The only right approach would be the perception within yourself that you are not even in this dream world and are happily continuing as you were created, outside the dream, which is a personal experience not a software development philosophy.

However, I do happen to take the vantage point, personally, of trying to bring certain philosophies and ideals into what I'm creating, knowing that it is not real and that I can't really have the influence I intend. You just do what you can and don't take it too seriously. At best you can only create symbols of purity, honesty, virtue, spirituality, whatever. You can even teach through those symbols if they represent something meaningful, so it's really a matter of what you are teaching by your example. You teach by your demonstration of what you believe is True and everything about your product extends from that.

wow... What a long long long moot point..

Maybe you didn't understand it.

Or maybe there was nothing to understand.

here some points I find interesting,
a recurring theme is and I apoligize to Noel for using you as the example

If I don't like something, I won't do it unless I'm either contractually obligated

So if you are contractually obligated you will do it?
why?
I guess its your perceived consequences vs. your conscience

Another point and I see this thrown around alot not just with video games is parenting others children. that answer just seems to easy to me. as in, I produced this media and your child, because of your poor parenting, consumed it and shouldn't have therefore you bear all the responsibility.

Yes.

Because I'm contractually obligated. Natch.

No.

Oh really? Wanna know what's even easier? Blaming video games (or as applicable Music / Movies / Homosexuality / Society ) because your little precious turned out to be a psychopathic murderer.

There is one significant flaw in your argument - namely that media is potentially dangerous - and acts as a trigger for divergent behavior, when all credible research indicates that it acts as a dampener. I think Ed Boon and John Tobias (the creators of Mortal Kombat) are happy they've helped contribute to the lowest violent crime rate in the US in recorded history. I know I would.

I said nothing of any media being dangerous or as a trigger for divergent behaviour. Why did you read that in?

but I kind of subscribe to the it takes a village to raise a child philosophy. obviously parents are not going to be the only influence on a child. and video games, music, whatever especially if it is off-limits is going to be intriguing to a child.

So while precious little Johnny probably won't turn out to be a psycopathic murderer from playing mortal kombat. He might play the game when his parent's did not want him to, should the developer care?

I think any game developer worth his/her salt that joins a team should know that the sky's the limit when it comes to violence, etc. In the military if a soldier decides he or she is against violence an immediate discharge is in order.

I just realized how stupid my above reply is.

Well people who fail as parents (not implying that mean you) often do - it's so easy to blame society for ones own screw-ups. I believe in the survival of the fittest philosophy.

"Nature should be allowed to do its job of killing off the weak and sickly and ignorant people without interference from airbags and batting helmets" - George Carlin.

No. The child might also want a cookie when his parents don't want him to. Should the baker care? The child might even want to play with Sodium Hydroxide when his parents don't want him to. Should the chemists care?

If children can handle the real violence at home and in schools, they can certainly handle pretend violence in a computer game.