I think role playing games are fun. They call for the same
sort of commitment readers make when they get involved in a story and suspend
disbelief, feeling the fictional characters to be at least as real as they are
themselves. My novella, Alternative
Dimension, is about the attractions and the dangers of playing games and
entering a virtual reality. For me, being part of a fantastical online
community was a source of humour, a chance to indulge in some gentle satire, as
well as a place where I met and got to know people I’d never have come across
otherwise.
People are surprisingly unguarded there, revealing intimate
secrets to others, even though they’re only interacting with an avatar and they
have no idea of who the person behind it is. The risks in that are obvious, and
the whole business of grooming and manipulation is very sinister and very real.
And, of course, as someone unloads their childhood traumas onto you, you’ve no
idea whether they’re true, whether the person’s male, female, Aryan supremacist
or Jehovah’s Witness. (It could even be your partner on a laptop in another
room – which is an even scarier thought.)
But games are making legitimate claims to be a separate art
form in their own right. They’re like movies, they’re like books, but they have
dimensions of interactivity which go beyond the traditional. The immersive
atmosphere they create, the power of their music, which now has mainstream
respectability (the London Philharmonic has recorded several of the best-known themes),
the fact that you, as a player, actually inhabit the story and the settings –
all of this makes different demands on the creative input of designers but also
of players.
So the BBC radio programme I heard about the whole subject
made for fascinating listening. One interviewee talked interestingly about how
increases in computing power and the refinements in the disciplines involved in
creating all aspects of a game meant that today’s ‘best’ experiences were
constantly being superseded. Whereas Dickens, Hardy, Shakespeare and the rest
continue to be read and performed, old computer games seem limp and passé.
As I said, all of this was very informative and interesting.
But, as she continued to enthuse about the excitement and value of getting
immersed in games, she made one throwaway remark which I found very chilling
and which made me rethink the values she was ascribing to them. To make her
point about how games do have an afterlife in the memories of those who’ve
played them, she described a night she’d spent escaping from some captors,
gathering weapons, fighting her way along and eventually dragging her boy
friend’s body from where he’d been held captive. There was a smile in her voice
as she described it all, and the residual excitement was obvious. But then,
after all these ordeals, she said ‘God, I felt like I’d gone through Vietnam ’.
And there, it seems to me, you have a hidden danger. Not
just treating war as a game but diminishing
reality itself. It’s a paradox. This isn't
a criticism of her and I don't mean to
imply thoughtlessness or insensitivity on her part. She was
interesting, enthusiastic and very knowledgeable. The experience for her
was real, draining, even traumatic, but its ‘reality’ was immediately put into
perspective by the inappropriate parallel she implied with true stress and
horror. OK, it wasn’t a considered remark but, in a way, that makes it worse. As I said,
I'm not condemning her, I'm asking whether our priorities and sensitivities are
shifting.
No comments:
Post a Comment