Grand Theft Morals, or ultimate role model? (part II)

In part one of this piece I listed some of the powerful teaching and learning traits embedded in good digital games. Now, what happens in the case of GTA IV where we have good learning, with bad content? I’m afraid there are more questions than answers right now as we try to better understand games–based learning. But the few pointers below should help to open the debate that is needed.

In the commercial games industry, which for at least two years has eclipsed Hollywood in revenues, the market dictates which games are winners — those that offer the right combination of engagement (not too hard, not too easy), slick graphics, authentic storyline and overall playability. In this world, GTA IV is the ultimate beast. It has grossed over $500m in its first week of sales. Gamers — that special breed who “get” gaming, who fully immerse themselves in virtual roles and simulations, who love a good, long challenge — have chosen a winner. In short, GTA IV “will change your life.”

While the game is not for sale to under 18s, everyone knows this group represents a major part of the game’s fan base. What happens when the “problem” you have to solve isn’t a wholesome science riddle, but rather involves surviving the mob and building a drug empire? When the “risks” you take involve driving drunk? When the “identity” that you take on is rather unsavoury, to say the least. When you are fully immersed in a world that is extremely authentic — and highly engaging — as a brawler, a hijacker, and a killer? What happens when, for reasons that are permissable in this sordid underworld, you have sex with a prostitute and then beat her with a baseball bat?

Is this where our beliefs about gaming and learning fall down? Is this where the desirable qualities that we’ve identified in games — which we’ve always craved our classroom experiences to embody — turn out to be our own worst enemy, actively encouraging and very effectively training young delinquents? In this scenario GTA IV could be employing very good learning methods to steal away the moral fabric of young minds everywhere.

If you are worried that your teenage son or daughter is suddenly going to become a hardened ganglord, fear not. The chances of that happening are very slim. Does that mean that learning hasn’t happened in the playing of the game, that the player has not been affected in some way? No, it rather means that most people have the ability to separate fantasy from reality, game play from real life. In Reality Bytes: Eight Myths About Video Games Debunked, Jenkins expands on this in the context of military training. The US military uses games for training purposes. In these games it is feasible that the player kills someone. Following this school of thought one might say that teens that play violent video games become real life killers. After all, the military is a high efficient training organisation. However, Jenkins points out that this model only works if:

we remove training and education from a meaningful cultural context;

we assume learners have no conscious goals and that they show no resistance to what they are being taught;

and we assume that they unwittingly apply what they learn in a fantasy environment to real world spaces.

Clearly sitting in one’s bedroom playing a game is different to being in a military compound after 6 months of hard core training.

On how games should affect players in an educational way, Gee suggests three learning principles, which respond to the issue of bad content, that should appear in good games. Ideally, games should make the players think about the real world, about how they learn, and about their culture. Players should critically reflect upon their actions in the game (killing, stealing, etc.), upon the stereotypes in the game (mean bastards come from Eastern Europe) and about what cultural and social norms the game promotes (murder is acceptable, violence is a way to solve problems, etc.).

The reflective process develops critical thinking, media literacy and gaming literacy. The process will most likely be facilitated by a parent or teacher. And ideally, if the cultural norms in the game clash with those of society or the individual, which in the case of GTA IV they do, then playing the game will strengthen the resolve of the player to reject those norms in reality, while still indulging them in the game. For example, while many people enjoy watching the movie The Godfather, they do not support or aspire to gangsterism. They might love peeking into that world, but thank their lucky stars that they’re not in it.

In no way do I advocate violent video games. Nobody under 18 years old should be playing GTA IV. Parents should take an active interest in the gaming habits of their children and talk these issues over. But I do say that being alarmist is not helpful. What is needed is informed research, debate, adult involvement and perhaps stronger enforcement of age restrictions (although how one does this, heaven alone knows!) For years educators have been trying to make learning engaging and motivating. GTA IV is the ultimate role model for this. One critic said this: “It’s been days since Grand Theft Auto IV’s credits rolled, yet I can’t seem to construct a coherent thought without my mind wandering off into a daydream about the game. I just want to drop everything in my life so I can play it again.” Now this is how we want young people to think about learning.

Educators and game designers should look to GTA IV when creating “designed experiences”. Imagine the holy grail of educational games: GTA IV with good content. Those in the emerging field of serious games are tyring to do just that: develop engaging games that are not explicitly for entertainment. Let’s support them.