Gripping the Controller but Grappling with More: How Player Agency in Virtual Spaces Allows Recognition of Real-World Violence Rather Than Instigating It SH E HRYA R H A NI F
From the lack of a story in Tetris to the basic damsel-in-distress plot of Super Mario Bros. to the decades-long espionage saga of the Metal Gear Solid series, video games have evolved, increasingly tackling themes and issues previously only confined to film and literature. In this regard, the medium has particularly distinguished itself from its aforementioned counterparts by offering control directly to the players. Instead of solely relying on ageold narrative tropes, video games enable players to actively shape their experiences and build their own stories. However, as a result of affording players greater agency, many video games have been specifically attacked for encouraging physical violence and prejudiced behaviors. In extreme cases, politicians and media figures have even blamed the corrupting influence of video games as the root cause of mass shootings. I, however, argue that video games do not necessarily teach violence, but rather allow players to grapple with it. Because players have agency in the video games they play, they are not routinely conditioned into learning violence; rather, their takeaway is molded by their interactions with both story and gameplay. Through a meta-analysis of past texts on video game representations, I will demonstrate that player agency in single-player video games enables consumers to better understand violence — particularly indirect violence that is often free of blood and gore — because they are able to re-interpret their real-world experiences in light of their virtual actions. Since players must grapple with their choices and actions, they have better opportunities for self-reflection, and this leads to the development of greater empathy, a subversion of expectations, and a more nuanced understanding of social relations.
GRIPPING THE CONTROLLER BUT GRAPPLING WITH MORE
157
