A critical element of moral education is the opportunity to reflect on your actions. This diverges from character education which emphasizes habit-development. While I’m far from expert in this area, I think the current science is pushing towards a new way of conceptualizing moral/ethical thinking that might in fact unify the two. It seems that habit development AND reflection (and other things, too) are all important in our moral development.

Perhaps plot outcome is not the best measure of whether a choice is meaningful or not? is it enough that there is SOME KIND of reaction to your choices? Do the characters that you let die in Mass Effect constitute meaningful repercussions? I don’t know the answer to any of this, i just know that I have been frustrated by a lot of games that advertise the player’s ability to make choices, but don’t really deliver.

I’m baiting Matthew Weise here, but one of the worst offenders to me was Metal Gear Solid 2. Throughout the game and especially during the last battle, you are bombarded with extensive diatribes about control, fate, free will, and choice. The end boss demands that you kill him, and the game backs him up, not allowing you to opt out of compliance even if you go the harder route of a non-lethal takedown. I suppose you could just quit, but that seems like a cop-out as well. Or does it all boil down to the message of Wargames: the only way to win is not to play?

I’m having some trouble clicking on that second link but I don’t think it was leading to this page so I thought it would share it with you: http://www.psfk.com/2011/12/gaming-for-good-al-gores-finalist-picks-announced.html. The Climate Reality Project and PSFK actually put out a request for proposals a little while ago for games that address climate change, and Al Gore helped select some finalists, which you can see at the link above. I also want to say I’ve been enjoying your blog, and it actually inspired a two part post on my own blog about civics games.

All the best,

Josh