On the matter of morality

[6S.Manu]

Since I'm usually developing software at home, during summer I work in underpants (and I post on forums too, of course). 

Edited August 29, 2013 by 6S.Manu

[Mac_Messer]

But if we look at any wargame out there, they are all about killing men as "routine". In some games you only see the "platoon icon" (and so according to "morality" these are good game) but in others you need to shoot single men and most of the time there are bloody results: in Red Orchestra the gore level is very high.

I think that since the days of "Doom", most videogamers are not easily impressionable: by now the only thing that shock me are real videos of dying/dead people... youtube is full of "mortal accident" videos, and even if I can't see the drivers they chills me.

 

We can talk about RoF too: there you have to shoot right to the pilot, and most of the time you see him looking at you. But even if the pilot wasn't modelled (ghost pilot) still I can't forget the images I saw on a video (search for "Dogfights: Deaths of the Great War ("Ave Maria"; Pavarotti)": watch out you sensitive people): that's the result of the crash as I "fire" to the plane.

 

The only reason that keeps me "playing" such "games" is the fact that I realize, like Furbs said, that the opposite player is probably "sitting in his underpants flying a sim at home".

Examples like Red Orchestra or an FPS genre is irrelevant here. Those games are directly aimed at killing humans, whereas in simulations this can be easily avoided. Other than that, no , there is no routine of killing humans in simulations. You do not see mutilated remains or individual people dying. This alone dehumanizes (depersonalizes) the act of killing and as that makes a big difference. There is no need to go further in brutalizing the game experience.

 

In a D. M. style I`d say that if you`re not easily impressionable, go play Surgeon Simulator to your hearts content. Watching death cideos or fotos is another thing. People do watch them which doesn`t make any difference in that showing such footage is unpleasant at the very least. I can`t even imagine watching someone engaging such pshysical trauma. I`ve seen some sick post mortem examination during my work and I really don`t like that part of my job.

[Heywooood]

should this turn into a poll...or worse - a one upper, I'm outta here...puns intended

 

mods - please change the title of this thread to "TMI" 

[JG4_Greif]

If the pilot and the chute have a collision model and can be shot, then the developers should make it possible for the player to open the chute when he wants and not like in CoD or in old IL2, you jump out of the plane and the chute opens instanly.

[FTC_Karaya]

If the pilot and the chute have a collision model and can be shot, then the developers should make it possible for the player to open the chute when he wants and not like in CoD or in old IL2, you jump out of the plane and the chute opens instanly.

 

That would be interesting indeed and make it feel less scripted... also I hope there will be a first person view with the chute being visible above oneself.

[FuriousMeow]

Soldier of Fortune had limbs and heads getting blown off. Gears of War, same. Depends on the FPS but many do have grotesque deaths.

 

Yes, in flight sims you do target humans. In WWI there's three things to aim for - pilot, engine, fuel tank. Targeting the gunner in the old two seaters was a priority to silence him. Didn't change in WWII.

 

These guys in chutes aren't defenseless either, they have pistols in the cockpit so I imagine they'll have them when they jump out. They may not be terribly accurate, but they also aren't defenseless.

 

And again, this is a game. 0s and 1s being processed. If that can't be differenciated from real world, probably time to step away from the virtual one.

Edited August 29, 2013 by FuriousMeow

[=BKHZ=Furbs]

Dont approve of chute shooting? what about bouncing a unarmed transport plane? shooting up trucks full of troops? torpedoing merchant ships?

 

Come to think of it, should we be even flying for the Germans or Japanese? 

 

If your having issues playing flight sims because of a sense of morality of shooting people in their chute then you should maybe look at wither you should be playing combat sims at all.

[FTC_Karaya]

Soldier of Fortune had limbs and heads getting blown off. Gears of War, same. Depends on the FPS but many do have grotesque deaths.

 

Yes, in flight sims you do target humans. In WWI there's three things to aim for - pilot, engine, fuel tank. Targeting the gunner in the old two seaters was a priority to silence him. Didn't change in WWII.

 

These guys in chutes aren't defenseless either, they have pistols in the cockpit so I imagine they'll have them when they jump out. They may not be terribly accurate, but they also aren't defenseless.

 

And again, this is a game. 0s and 1s being processed. If that can't be differenciated from real world, probably time to step away from the virtual one.

 

As I have stated earlier (post #12) I have no issues with FPS, I play them myself. The games you mention bear no relation to real life, even Battlefield 3 (which is among the graphically most realistic FPS games atm) has no connection to real life or a real conflict. That is a huge difference. I also play Red Orchestra 2 and frequently witness people getting blown apart by arty or grenades, dont mind either, all of them are armed and fighting back.

 

Btw a service pistol can hardly be deemed a defence when you've got aircraft flying around you sporting at the very least a pair or even battery of rifle calibre machine guns, heavy machine guns or even cannons. Thats like fighting people wielding AK47s with sticks.

Edited August 29, 2013 by JG4_Karaya

[FuriousMeow]

Or like in DayZ fighting people with DMRs using a crossbow.

 

This has little to do with morality and more to do with you don't like getting shot in your chute.

 

And since when does the real or fake conflict matter? Guess what, this whole thing is fake. 1s and 0s.

Edited August 29, 2013 by FuriousMeow

[Tektolnes]

It's really not a moral issue for the game. It's just a sort of measure of how we treat fellow players of the game. Chutekillers are basically tea-baggers. They're not trying to reflect some kind of dark history that happened in WW2 - they're just trying to piss their fellow gamer off. For that reason alone I think it needs to be a server setting.

[FuriousMeow]

Kind of like those guys that relentlessly shoot up planes that are clearly already going down, or put in the last few rounds to steal kills, or just sit over an airfield vulching repeatedly.

 

There is a lot of douchey things people do in these games, you can't just start outlawing them because you frown upon it when it's happening to you.

[Tektolnes]

There is a lot of douchey things people do in these games, you can't just start outlawing them because you frown upon when it's happpening to you.

I never said anything about outlawing. I just said that it should be optional so like-minded players can play online together with a setting that suits how they like to play and not have to worry about some player being a bit of a knob. Yes there's other things like vulching which are harder to regulate if they want to try and ban it but no chutekilling is easily coded.

 

Personally speaking it's all just a game to me and all this stuff doesn't bother me a bit but I can understand those who would at least like the option to remove it. Players who don't like it don't have to go to those servers.

[79_vRAF_Friendly_flyer]

These guys in chutes aren't defenseless either, they have pistols in the cockpit so I imagine they'll have them when they jump out. They may not be terribly accurate, but they also aren't defenseless.

 

And again, this is a game. 0s and 1s being processed. If that can't be differenciated from real world, probably time to step away from the virtual one.

 

If it is all just 0s and 1s, why does it matter whether the bailed pilot has a handgun or not? So far, i haven't seen a sim where the bailed pilot are able to fire back, so it is hardly relevant to the gameplay. Either one enjoy shooting at pixels representing pilots in chutes or one does not.

 

 

Also, I don't think anyone here has expressed anything that indicate they have problems separating a flight sim from real life. This line of argument is a strawman, and I would appreciate it if we stuck to the actual arguments.

[FuriousMeow]

I just said that it should be optional so like-minded players can play online together with a setting that suits how they like to play and not have to worry about some player being a bit of a knob.

 

Absolutely, I already said it should be a server option on page 3. So if it's server side, and an option there - why are we on a page beyond where that was suggested and agreed upon by another poster?

 

If it is all just 0s and 1s, why does it matter whether the bailed pilot has a handgun or not? So far, i haven't seen a sim where the bailed pilot are able to fire back, so it is hardly relevant to the gameplay. Either one enjoy shooting at pixels representing pilots in chutes or one does not.

 

 

Also, I don't think anyone here has expressed anything that indicate they have problems separating a flight sim from real life. This line of argument is a strawman, and I would appreciate it if we stuck to the actual arguments.

 

Actually, Aces High allows the bailed pilot to fire back. This isn't an argument, it's a statement of fact as this topic is based on an argument of real life applied to a virtual one. If you believe morals apply in a game - then you can't separate reality from virtuality.

Edited August 29, 2013 by FuriousMeow

[Tektolnes]

Absolutely, I already said it should be a server option on page 3. So if it's server side, and an option there - why are we on a page beyond where that was suggested and agreed upon by another poster?

 

Ah ok.. so once you suggest something and "another poster" agrees with it then that's the matter fully settled then. Duly noted for future rambling forum threads with no real point.

[FuriousMeow]

Or more this point since you seem to be so offended you didn't come up with it first: So if it's server side, and an option there - why are we on a page beyond where that was suggested

 

I'm sure you have a good reason to continue this discussion. Perhaps you can point it out? It's certainly not morality, morals don't apply to video games.

Edited August 29, 2013 by FuriousMeow

[Tektolnes]

Haha it's hardly a ground breaking suggesting and I'm not in the least bit offended. It had been suggested in the thread before you had your "brainwave" anyway. No worries - it's all just a bunch of 1s and 0s on an internet forum at the end of the day and we're all free to pretty much write down any old load of tripe we want whenever we want so not worth getting worked up over something being repeated. Internet forum threads tend to ramble on as people voice their opinions in case you haven't noticed.

[FuriousMeow]

It's not ground breaking in the least, that's why it's so confusing this thread exists. Could it not just be a simple feature request to allow server operators to dictate shootable chutes?

 

Instead morals, and this nonsense in a game, being the driving force? Very bizarre.

[Lord_Haw-Haw]

Kind of like those guys that relentlessly shoot up planes that are clearly already going down, or put in the last few rounds to steal kills, or just sit over an airfield vulching repeatedly.

 

There is a lot of douchey things people do in these games, you can't just start outlawing them because you frown upon it when it's happening to you.

Why not?

Has been normal practice on many IL2 servers, known chute-shooters = no entry simple as that. It makes for a much more enjoyable match

as like the kill stealers, rammers the chute shooters almost always also add a lot of "pleasanties" on the chat bar or TS.

Just let the server host have the option which settings he prefers and fine. As there are many that refuse to play with chute shooters.

[FlatSpinMan]

Enough, guys. It's Friday (here at least) - kick back and let it go. Just to clarify, feel free to discuss the topic all you want, just do it without points scoring and winding other members up.

[Rama]

Part of the problem is that discussing about morality allways leads to nowhere. Everybody has his own values and moral beliefs and can't accept other's moral beliefs legitimity. That's what's the laws are for: giving the same background to everybody (laws are based on a common subset of moral beliefs, but they don't endorse all the particular beliefs of everybody... or absolutely everything would be forbidden... ). So if you want to talk about what's acceptable or not and reach an agreement, the only relevant reference is law, not morality. As far as I know, no country ever set a law against chutekilling in a videogame... this should close the debate about morality.

 

Now, as some have pointed it, the problem isn't really morality, but that players are more or less pissed of when they get chutekilled. Since combat flight simulations are games, which purpose is to give fun to players, it could be understandable that the possibility to play in server where chutekilling is'nt allowed exists. So the sugestion to have server option to allow or disallow chutekilling seems to me to be a very good way to solve the problem.

[Freycinet]

A very good argument from earlier in the thread: if chute-killing is banned then we will have no option to see who is 'virtually chivalrous' and who is not.

 

I say: allow it, so we can be allowed to show our opponent mercy, if we want to.

 

And then please don't use words like 'infamy', 'cowardice' and so on. This is a computer game and it does not matter at all if somebody shoots down a chute or not. If you use those big real-world words about a game then you are relativizing their importance. Shooting down pixels in chutes or pixels inside planes means absolutely the same, i.e. nothing at all.

[Uufflakke]

I've already said what I wanted to say in this thread but as this subject pops up on every combat flight sim forum I really can't wait to see that other notorious subject:

 

The bar in the FW-190.  

[Lord_Haw-Haw]

I've already said what I wanted to say in this thread but as this subject pops up on every combat flight sim forum I really can't wait to see that other notorious subject:

 

The bar in the FW-190.  

You forgot a few! I would add the well remembered topic of the all mighty .50cal, teamkilling? Killstealing?

I think we are in for many pages of hot air!

[thx1138]

It is not my aim to force my moral views onto others, just trying to understand why some want it and making my point of view clear to others.

 

Also linking this sim to freedom and the sacrifices of millions is very far fetched, dont you think?

 

 

Easy to understand. I'm not showing up (IL 2 or ROF) to do battle between machines but rather against the pilots in those machines. And in online Il 2 servers there usally a set number of pilots per side, the first one to run out, it's over. I just tried to get the other side to run out of pilots first !

 

So yes I always go for the pilot, and if he bales out and no other real threats are around than I go for him in his chute. And yes people occasionaly complained about it, Oh well. Same with vulching. Easiest cure for vulching is good AAA at airfields, which generally sent me elsewhere. Bottom line don't bale out in front of me and you won't get shot in your chute...

 

War simulated or not, is not just people shooting at other machines, it just isn't. It's about people shooting at other people period. Can you understand this ?

 

BTW, I still play COD UO, and Battlefield 3. Shooting people there is mandatory. That's Ok to you right ? So what's the difference ?

 

 

And it's BS mentioning the Geneva Conventions. War in and of itself is a crime !

[79_vRAF_Friendly_flyer]

And it's BS mentioning the Geneva Conventions. War in and of itself is a crime !

 

Actually, mentioning war is BS too. It isn't, it's a computer game. Neither the Geneva convention nor the laws of war (or lack thereof) apply, unless we want them to.

[Bearcat]

Also, on the issue of it being a war crime:

 

Parachuting air crew weren't protected under the Geneva Conventions until 1977. In other words: Shooting a guy hanging from a parachute wasn't illegal in 1942. Paratroopers have never been protected and are specifically exempt from the protection under protocol I, article 42.

 

(cough cough..) Sainte-Mère-Église

 

This isnt a question of morality, you cant have that in a simulated world of aircombat, chute shooting is just something that pisses people off because their online pilot is killed, hence resetting their kill streak and ruining the Kill/death ratio, same as vuching aircraft on the runway or landing.

 

Me? i dont give a crap, il shoot you landing, taking off or in your chute and i expect the same to be done to me, though i dont go chute hunting on purpose because thats a good way to get bounced.

 

Ive been vulched taking off and landing loads of times, yep it pisses me off but my morals or the guys doing it are not offended.

 

The only time i wont shoot down a crippled plane or the chute is if i had a really good dogfight with someone and feel they dont deserve to have their online pilot get killed, but never for pretend morality.

 

I agree.. to a point.. and the notion of "morality" in this is silly from the git. I personally wont chute shoot unless it is done to me and I do it as payback.. I also will not shoot someone landing .. especially if they are damaged.. but that's me. Unless it is AI.

 

If the pilot and the chute have a collision model and can be shot, then the developers should make it possible for the player to open the chute when he wants and not like in CoD or in old IL2, you jump out of the plane and the chute opens instanly.

 

+1

[thx1138]

Actually, mentioning war is BS too. It isn't, it's a computer game. Neither the Geneva convention nor the laws of war (or lack thereof) apply, unless we want them to.

 

 

Yes you are correct, so I apologize for the knee jerk reaction.

 

What really bothers me in online flying is shoulder shooting and kill stealing. I used to be a not so bad pilot but not the greatest shot. And to have someone just zoom in behind you and shoot past you at your target is plain wrong. Several times someone else zoomed in from behind, cut in front of me to get my intended target. In every case I continued shooting which usually meant that I got my own teammate. One guy was really PO'd because I shot him down. When I explained that he cut in front of me his excuse was that he already had given me enough time and he wasn't going to wait forever for me to finish my victim off. Well I reminded him that he went down too. He then used quite a few foul words aimed at me. Turns out he had 3 kills that mission before I got him, and he told me I ruined his score. (mine took a BIG hit too, so what...)

 

I will always abide the rules on what ever the server I'm on. Let the people running the server (s) decide whats allowed and whats not.

 

ItSaGame

[HagarTheHorrible]

Strangely enough, I want as realistic representations of aircrew in the aircraft as possible, I want them to move in a convincing manner that makes me think that there are real human occupants in that aircraft that I'm attacking, even if it is just an illusion.  I don't necessarily want the bloody gore etc, but I want to make a connection, I want it to feel like I'm  doing something profound, killing and injuring other people, not just some hunk of metal, wood and rubber.  I want to reflect on the fact, about what I've just done, it's not just another kill streak, it represents what real people did 60 odd years ago, it wasn't all noughts and ones, it was real human beings, brothers, fathers, boyfriends, sons, just, real, normal, average people.

 

 

 

 

 

[Recon]

Maybe you can unlock the chute killer badge for this.  And if you do it too many times your morality gauge will start to point to the dark side of the force.

 

It's game where you shoot things... preferably the enemy.

 

What is immoral in flight sims is (1) shoulder shooting and (2) friendly fire    

[Foobar]

Maybe you can unlock the chute killer badge for this.

 

No bad idea at all :D

[Bearcat]

Maybe you can unlock the chute killer badge for this.  And if you do it too many times your morality gauge will start to point to the dark side of the force.

 

It's game where you shoot things... preferably the enemy.

 

What is immoral in flight sims is (1) shoulder shooting and (2) friendly fire    

 

 

As a variant of that I'd say kill stealing and team killing.. shoulder shooting and friendly fire sometimes happens by accident.

[Lord_Haw-Haw]

As a variant of that I'd say kill stealing and team killing.. shoulder shooting and friendly fire sometimes happens by accident.

Sometimes yes, I am certain almost everyone who has played flight sims for a while has accidently done that once or

twice, but there are also the speciallists who go at that with a "professional" zeal.....

[Finkeren]

(cough cough..) Sainte-Mère-Église

 

I don't get it Bearcat. What does that have to do with the topic of paratroopers not being protected by the Geneva Conventions during the jump? I ask in all honesty, I really don't see, what you're getting at.

[Bearcat]

The paratroopers shot in their shoots on the way down. granted it was by ground forces... That's all.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

They were combatants though even if they were hanging from trees/churches.

 

My wife['s Grandfather was in Singapore when the Japanese parachuted on to the airfield he was stationed at and they shot many of them in the trees as well. They were finally overrun and decided to get out of dodge before they were captured.

[Lord_Haw-Haw]

Ah but that was the real thing, no one would wag a finger if you vulched a enemy airbase either.

But since it is a game, many get upset about that. I have had that "So & so is a vulcher" pop up

serveral times when I bombed a enemy airbase at high level. Just need to think of BoB where airfields

where a regular target, anyone using real strategie of targeting the airfields would have his ears ringing

with abuse! Some seem to mix reality which knew no holding back and a simulation on a computer

screen where you still face your oponant reguardless of how many times you have shot him.

Edited September 1, 2013 by Lord_Haw-Haw

[Finkeren]

The paratroopers shot in their shoots on the way down. granted it was by ground forces... That's all.

Ah ok, I just got the impression, that you wanted to argue that it was a war crime.

[J2_Trupobaw]

It's eastern front. Trying to apply morality or good taste would be ahistorical. Leave it for fighting as or against western allies (excluding flying as Poles or Americans  )

[senseispcc]

If not being able to shoot a guy at the end of parachute means I gain 0.001 fps I am happy with it otherwise like in the real war it is a personal choice!