Moral Contrast in Gaming

  Spoilers for Bloodborne and Shadow of the Colossus ahead.

  I really like games that have some element of a moral dilemma to the story. It's even more interesting when you don't realise it at the start of the game. You begin your adventure with a goal, and you'll destroy anything or anybody that stands in your way if need be - because that's what you've been told to do.

  But what happens when you inevitably realise that maybe you're not the good guy? Just because you're the player, does that give you a right to assume that you're the protagonist?

  I was thinking about Bloodborne and how the story reminds me of Shadow of the Colossus. Not the plot, per say, but the way you're tossed into both games and taught to kill everything in your path because it's trying to kill you. Only when you meet a certain NPC in Bloodborne who explains that all the beasts are people, suffering due to a scourge completely out of their control, do you start thinking about what you're doing.

  "You must not disturb this place. The beasts do not venture above and mean no harm to anyone. In case you fail to realise, the things you hunt, they're not beasts; they're people."

  The same goes for SotC, except usually, it's not until the very end of the game. The credits roll and all the dead and broken Colossi flash up on the screen in the order that you killed them. As you watch, and the emotion-evoking music plays, the fog lifts - you murdered an entire race of creatures that were essentially minding their own business... all for the sake of your own selfish goal.

  Both are beautiful games with fantastical stories but above the graphics, the mechanics and the plot, both give you the opportunity to look your decisions right in the face and question if you did the right thing. I think any game that can do that is one to be remembered.

Signed,
Elijah.
Meta Sentience.
17/03/2018