For me personally, it’s just about what I feel comfortable writing. So, for example, in my WIP, the MC can kill people. That’s fine. But I’m not interested in, nor do I think I could write well, a character who gleefully murders civilians… so that’s just not a situation or a choice that appears in my game. Yes, I suppose it does limit what the player can do or be, but I just don’t think I’d be able to write a character that did those sorts of things convincingly or well.
Just here to point out that although violent media has been on the rising drastically for decades in America, the largest exporter of this kind of thing, violent crime has been decreasing on average around the world. To blame the existence of violence in the real world on the violent content in movies/books/games, even indirectly, is a mistake as it overlooks the other contextual factors that play a role.
People don’t commit awful acts because the art we consume simply contains violent content, but rather because of the value the individual’s environment places upon those problematic behaviours and attitudes, be that as a result of their family, peers, community, or society at large.
I suppose my point is that there are too many factors to place the responsibility for educating and changing individuals solely on authors/artists. It simply isn’t their job to ensure their audience is mature enough to handle the topics that are presented. Let alone whether they even could. Look at the way people respond to games that get even slightly political. Art isn’t changing the minds of people, it just encourages them to think about that topic, whatever it may be, for better or worse.
I’ve read a fair share of books with morally grey characters, although I must admit some of them still downright disturbs me to this day. Is it the author’s fault when that happens? I honestly don’t know. There are several factors that could account as to why a book seems to have crossed a line.
The author simply doesn’t care - I don’t know how rare this is, but there are writers who don’t feel any sort of responsibility over their works (glorifying heinous acts while having fun with them).
A question of skill - Maybe the author has a theme they want to get across, but was unable to due to lack of experience. It’s an easy mistake to make when you’re just starting. Sometimes, the writer could be completely unaware that their message actually comes off ignorant or cruel.
Difference in perspectives - Just like how an audience disagrees on how they see a painting, readers could also have differing opinions on what the author has written. It could be illuminating to some - a reminder of a society’s ugliness. But to others, it could be viewed as plain cruel and senseless. This happens a lot, especially with the most controversial classics that are still famous today.
There are definitely other reasons besides those, but the thing is, it’s already hard to judge in the traditional form of books - what more in the world of interactive fiction?
As writers, I do believe we have a responsibility to make a careful effort when traversing these lines. We should be mindful of how our writing will affect our reader - because they can, for some. I’ve learned more about life from reading novels and philosophy as contrary to what my parents had taught me. Words can influence someone, and we need to remember that, especially for those who write about dark themes.
But even that has a limit. We can’t control how the rest of the world would view it. Did we do well in delivering our message? Were we careful enough? In the end, even after all the treading we do, it’s up to the readers how they will see it.
So what I believe is that if you’re writing a story with themes that could be potentially disturbing, just write with care and implement choices that would be more natural with the theme and setting you’re going for. Give reasonable consequences to the character’s actions, good and bad, and set your own boundaries.
I mean, we could all do our best, but sometimes our best still has its limits, and you can’t beat yourself up for that.
I agree with this to an extent. We talk about the writing portion of this, but the game portion can come into play too. I’ve recently been going through games with the scenes text open, and have been thinking about this.
Should every choice (that is given) be a viable one? Aside from puzzles and questions with specific answers, should a choice only punish a character with stat reductions?
Umm we werent supposed to do that…? Oopsie…
On a serious note i dont think authors need to have a social responsibility , the whole purpose of an interactive fiction is to let player explore different things and also let author explore different styles let their creative genius run wild let stumble and learn and improve their craft.
Also as a reader it will really annoy me if a route is cut short or not given importance due to personal views of author being forced upon us , i like to explore everything in an interactive fiction , if i wanted a linear story i could just go read novels , this is just my personal experience and opinion as an interactive fiction reader , treat it as u didnt see it if you disagree.
In short: the notion ‘media doesn’t make one violent’ is correct. But so is the statement ‘media can indirectly reinforce convictions, views, etc. and lead to violence’.
these are two statements that are true simultaneously.
It can reinforce attitudes the person already holds by giving the person something to point a finger at. People would much rather deflect blame, rather than accept it. Which in the case of art, means blaming art for their actions, rather than admitting the problem lies with the attitudes taught to them by the real people that influence them.
A pacifist raised in a household that taught healthy conflict resolution skills at a young age and fostered respect for everyone, isn’t going to start punching people because they can do so in a videogame. just as someone who was raised in a household that taught violence as a reasonable way of resolving conflict won’t suddenly become the nicest person ever because they played a pacifist run in a game.
Ideas in art aren’t presented in a vacuum, but they aren’t consumed in one either.
But you do have it, due to art being fiction, that choices of how to handle something are made deliberately.
An example (some might know which show I am talking about): there’s a show on amazonprime, in which the protagonist at some point gives a thinly veiled, out-of-nowhere rant against worker’s unions. You can’t tell me this was not shoehorned in because it’s amazon pulling the strings.
If you know what’s going on, you’ll recognize it, if you don’t, it still gets stuck in your head and might influence how you view worker’s unions irl (already happened, so this isn’t a hypothetical scenario)
You really think Alice, who is pro union could accidentally absorb an anti union stance by watching a short rant spoken on an amazon prime show? Or Bob who doesn’t even think about unions, he would now ardently oppose them because he failed to critically examine the show?
I don’t think most people spend enough time consuming fiction that this alone could breed biases where no previous opinion (or opposite opinion) existed.
This is a reminder to keep on topic which not only includes social responsibility but player agency within interactive fiction.
If you have already said your piece then take a step back and let other people have the opportunity to speak. Keep your posts focused on the topic at hand and avoid sniping at other users. It’s not cool, don’t do it, and it doesn’t add anything to the discussion.
I would guess that if exposure to media could not affect a bias in any way, we would not have much of an advertising industry. Commercials are a sort of fiction writ small.
I guess my primary issue with “social responsibility” is… what even is it? Who gets to define it? You? Me? Is what’s social responsible what the government finds politically acceptable?
It’s a phrase that seems to be ominously hanging in the shadow of censorship.
Writers are not obligated to write a certain way for anyone. Saying that they need to write a certain way is both entitled and calling for censorship.
If a book pushes messages that you find reprehensible, then you are well within your rights to criticize them, and they are will within their own rights to ignore you. And if the story really bothers you… stop reading.
When it comes to something like video games, sure, they often game-ify violence. But isn’t that the point? When I boot up something like Titanfall 2, I don’t spend my time going “Wow, this fictional war has taught me to disregard human life and adore violence”, I just want to have some cathartic fun. If every single time you shoot an enemy soldier, it cut to a screen detailing their grieving family (the reality of war and violence), it’d destroy the pacing and entertainment value.
Again, not every book needs to have some overt message. Stories can exist just to entertain or serve as escapism. Especially for IF, where readers can make their own characters, shoehorning a message and railroading the MC’s opinions is probably going to anger readers.
I’d say commercials are more akin to propaganda than general fiction. Most fiction doesn’t attempt to sell you on idea that violence or what have you is cool. Advertisements exist solely to sell you something.
I don’t disagree that there probably shouldn’t be any hard set lines or rules for this sort of thing, but I think saying social responsibility sits in the shadow of censorship is a little over the top. As for what social responsibility actually means, @Mango_Pirate gave a pretty good definition that I’d use.
One example that comes to mind is Stephanie Meyer and the Twilight series. She decided to use a real Native American tribe, the Quileute, and her choice and the way it was written had a real effect on the tribe. Notably, this was not a case of a reader misinterpreting the author as many have expressed worry about in this thread; I would argue that Meyer had the social responsibility to do more research and even speak to members of the tribe before including them in her work, let alone the harmful tropes she leaned into—she failed.
In short, the only point I am trying to make here is that there is such thing as social responsibility, and this is what I believe it is.
Social responsibility is when you put warning tags if your story has body-horror/gore in it. It is when you’re not submitting an erotica to a family-friendly aisle in a bookstore. It is when putting a disclaimer “this is a satirical work” on your overly-top satire that mocks the prominent figures of the world.
