No document available.
Abstract :
[en] Where ethics come into play Video games are arguably the most popular cultural format of this century. Since the beginning of their commercial history, video games have been linked with ethical reflection. This situation likely reflects that games are experiential media that place players in decision-making and action roles that require considerations of how those roles affect others Therefore, they can serve as powerful tools for reflection, education, and ethical critique (Poels, & Malliet, 2011). As an experiential medium, games place players in situations where they can experience or direct shocking, hurtful sequences, or those that challenge the integrity of certain human groups, rather than simply being confronted with them passively (Poels, & Malliet, 2011). Indeed, some researchers contend that children and youth are perceived as less capable of setting boundaries within games than adults (Ferguson et al., 2017). Games also foster the development of diverse communities. Among those, some are characterized by their disruptive behavior or discourse such as tacism, sexism, ableism, and exclusionwhich often target already vulnerable or marginalized groups (Beres et al., 2021). As games evolve towards fully-fledged social spaces, connected with all spaces of human activity, hate and harassment may may become highly pervasive in their players’ lives (Kilmer et al., 2024). In addition to early concerns about the content of games and the discourse of players, the economic models within the game industry have come under ethical scrutiny. The advent of the "games as a service" model has led to the development of exploitative, diverted, or manipulative monetization and retention strategies, sometimes reaching the level of dark patterns (Zagal et al., 2013). This shift extends to all aspects of video gaming: it is accompanied by the success of problematic game genres such as casino simulations or cryptocurrency speculation games (Denoo et al., 2024; Zaucha, & Agur, 2023), by the commodification of game streams, and by the commercial exploitation of player data (Sas et al., 2023) . This situation necessitates that what are currently calls for a more ethical game industry become the norm to address increasingly concerns and representation of growing number of groups including women, LGBTIQA+, non-Western, and people with disabilities) (Grace, 2021). Further, the game industry warrants more humane, worker-oriented, and sustainable organization (Sotamaa & Švelch, 2021) in which design patterns, monetization paths, and marketing models are honest, transparent, and protective towards audiences, especially those considered the most vulnerable (King & Delfabbro, 2018; Petrovskaya, 2024). There are also more holistic initiatives that aim to promote diversity and progressive attitudes, actions, and content on all fronts of games as a cultural industry (anonymized). Such initiatives may take the form of codes of ethics. Developing a code of ethics for the game industry always involves reflecting on three deeply interwoven questions, which are our research questions. First, which aspects must be addressed by such a code to cover the diversity of games and the contexts in which they are produced and culturally received, and which values must be promoted to progress towards the good? Second, how can the content, form, and dissemination of the code be optimized to ensure broad acceptance by all stakeholders in the gaming industry? Third, what factors can turn this acceptance into factual enforcement, i.e., stakeholders applying the code in their actions rather than only supporting it in their official discourse? Designing our own code: Methods We approach these questions through a concrete case, that of writing our own code of ethics (anonymized reference), which we are currently developing in collaboration with stakeholders from the video game industry and culture as a whole (creators, researchers, game design teachers, policymakers, player collectives, cultural actors around video games). Within this iterative process characteristic of policy recommendation design (Dunlop et al., 2023), we focus on three types of data: Data already collected during four co-creation workshops of the code with 78 representatives of our stakeholders; Reflections currently expressed within our team before, during, and after this data collection;b and Reflective feedback provided by an expanded group of stakeholders (comprising the 40 participants but also other critical reviewers yet to be recruited) regarding a draft version of the code in progress. Research for policy, policy for research: Aims By answering our research questions based on the analysis of these data, we hope first to shed light on the development process of our own code and its prospects for adoption and application. Beyond this particular case, we wish to conclude our presentation with a broader reflection. We want to explore the role that ethical codes play within the ecosystem of video games, and more broadly within the global platformized cultural industries. In other words, how do the code as a text and the ethical activity it entails connect with the practices and discourses of video game and cultural technology stakeholders? Of course, this question is vast, and our presentation does not claim to answer it definitively or exhaustively. For this reason, we find it appropriate to focus on a specific portion of this issue, namely the role of research among these connections. Thus: what can research do for ethical policymaking – and what does ethical policymaking do to our vision of research aimed at a more inclusive digital society?
