Digital moral systems in the game and in reality

Introduction. The comprehensive development of digital technologies makes the worlds of computer games not only models of ideas about reality, but also systems that have similarities with it. Although alternative simulated worlds may differ significantly in goals and development logic, the representation and experimentation with moral systems in games provides a rich experience in the construction of digital moral systems and their limitations.

Materials and methods. The study uses the dialectical method, systems analysis, interpretation, comparison and synthesis. Comparative-typological and comparative-analytical approaches are used to study moral systems within digital game worlds and digital social systems.

Results. Many games introduce quantitative calculation of morality - morality points, karma, honor or reputation, representing either an assessment of actions by actors standing above game events (developers or game gods), or the implied attitude of others. Since in the ethics parameter, unlike other avatar characteristics, it is difficult to separate the protagonist and the player, moral systems are easily rebuilt to assess the behavior of the latter, and in general can become decisive in the ordinary world, as the example of China shows. However, many modern games refuse an artificial quantitative superstructure in the moral system, demonstrating instead the ambiguity of moral decisions and the unpredictability of consequences, presenting the impossibility of building a universal ethical system.

Discussion and conclusions. The existing uncertainty in moral assessment sometimes serves as a basis for assuming the role of artificial intelligence in building a moral system based on contradictory and incomplete data, but in this case we return to a model in which moral assessment is transmitted by an entity towering above reality, which is artificial intelligence.

1. Aristotel'. Nicomachean Ethics. Moscow, EKSMO-Press Publ., 1997. 492 p. (In Russ.)

2. Dubrovskij D. I. Epistemological Analysis of the Socio-Humanitarian Significance of Artificial Intelligence Innovations in the Context of General Artificial Intelligence. Filosofskie nauki, 2022, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 10-26. (In Russ.)

3. Makulin A. V. Ethical Calculator: From Philosophical "Computational Morality" to Machine Ethics of Artificial Moral Agents (IMA). Obshchestvo: filosofiya, istoriya, kul'tura, 2020, vol. 11, no. 79, pp. 18-27. (In Russ.)

4. Patrashov A. Mathematical Guide to Creating Computer Games. Moscow, Izdatel'skie resheniya Publ., 2016. (In Russ.)

5. Serada A. Games against players: dangerous boundaries of the "magic circle". Filosofsko-kul'turologicheskij zhurnal Topos, 2022, no. 1, pp. 7-26. (In Russ.)

6. Topilina A. V. Dehumanization as a basis for human rights violation. Filosofiya prava, 2022, no. 3 (102), pp. 58-62. (In Russ.)

7. AL A., Ahn A., Becker N., et al. Project Sid: Many-agent simulations toward AI civilization: arXiv:2411.00114. arXiv, 2024. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2411.00114.

8. Awad E., Dsouza S., Kim R., et al. The Moral Machine experiment. Nature, 2018, vol. 563, no. 7729, pp. 59-64, doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0637-6.

9. Bandura A. Selective Moral Disengagement in the Exercise of Moral Agency. Journal of Moral Education, 2002, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 101-119, doi: 10.1080/0305724022014322.

10. Coeckelbergh M. Drones, information technology, and distance: mapping the moral epistemology of remote fighting. Ethics and Information Technology, 2013, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 87-98, doi: 10.1007/s10676-013-9313-6.

11. Craddock D. L. Break Out: How the Apple II Launched the PC Gaming Revolution. Schiffer Publishing, Limited, 2017. 255 p.

12. Di Nucci E. Self-Sacrifice and the Trolley Problem. Philosophical Psychology, 2013, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 662-672, doi: 10.1080/09515089.2012.674664.

13. Foot P. The problem of abortion and the doctrine of the double effect. Oxford Review, 1967, vol. 5, no. 15.

14. Formosa P., Ryan M., Howarth S., et al. Morality Meters and Their Impacts on Moral Choices in Videogames: A Qualitative Study. Games Culture, 2022, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 89-121, doi: 10.1177/15554120211017040.

15. Leibkuechler P. Trust in the Digital Age – The Case of the Chinese Social Credit System // Feldner D. (ed.) Redesigning Organizations: Concepts for the Connected Society. Cham, Springer International Publishing, 2020. Pp. 279-289. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-27957-8_21.

16. Mehnert W. The Futures Circle – A Framework for Hermeneutic Technology Assessment. Technology and Language, 2024, vol. 5, no. 1 (14), pp. 129-151, doi: 10.48417/technolang.2024.01.10.

17. Mehnert W. Wording Worlds – From writing Futures to building Imaginary Worlds. Technology and Language, 2023, vol. 4, no. 3 (12), pp. 85-104, doi: 10.48417/technolang.2023.03.07.

18. Melenson J. The Axis of Good and Evil. Schrier K., Gibson D. (eds) Designing Games for Ethics: Models, Techniques and Frameworks. IGI Global, 2011.

19. Mitchell L. Ludopolitics: videogames against control. Winchester, UK ; Washington, USA, ZERO Books, 2018. 341 p.

20. Moral Machine: [website]. Available at: https://www.moralmachine.net/ (accessed: 16.06.2025).

21. Mustafaev E. A Philosophical Analysis of Moral Choices in the Game The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt. Technology and Language, 2024, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 153-168, doi: 10.48417/technolang.2024.01.11.

22. Park J. S., O'Brien J., Cai C. J., et al. Generative Agents: Interactive Simulacra of Human Behavior. Proceedings of the 36th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. New York, NY, USA, Association for Computing Machinery, 2023. Pp. 1-22. DOI: 10.1145/3586183.3606763.

23. Proudfoot S. Look at What You’ve Done: Exploring Narrative Displeasure in Video Games. Popular Culture Studies Journal, 2019, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 158-178.

24. Rainbow 6 Siege X: [website]. Available at: https://www.ubisoft.com/ru-ru/game/rainbow-six/siege/news-updates/3snO7ANe2VLZYitMeP2eqc/reputation-system-beta-status-update (accessed: 16.06.2025).

25. Ricoeur P. Time and Narrative. McLaughlin, Pellauer. Chicago and London, The University of Chicago Press, 2012. 248 p.

26. Russell S., Norvig P. Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach. Pearson, 2022. 1121 p.

27. Sharkey N. Killing made easy: From joysticks to politics. Robot ethics: The ethical and social implications of robotics. MIT Press. Cambridge, MA, 2012. Pp. 111-128.

28. Waldmann M. R., Wiegmann A. A Double Causal Contrast Theory of Moral Intuitions in Trolley Dilemmas. Ohlsson S., Catrambone R. (eds) Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Cognitive Science Society, 2010. Pp. 2589-2594.

29. Wu W., He H., He J., et al. MetaUrban: An Embodied AI Simulation Platform for Urban Micromobility: arXiv:2407.08725. arXiv, 2024. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2407.08725.

30. Xu W., Wang Y. Emotional Visualization: The Metaverse Social in Embodied Cognitive Contexts. Technology and Language, 2023, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 24-39, doi: 10.48417/technolang.2023.03.03.

31. Yudkowsky E. Coherent Extrapolated Volition. San Francisco, The Singularity Institute, 2004.

32. Zhou Z., Song J., Xie X., et al. Towards Building AI-CPS with NVIDIA Isaac Sim: An Industrial Benchmark and Case Study for Robotics Manipulation. Proceedings of the 46th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice. New York, NY, USA, Association for Computing Machinery, 2024. Pp. 263-274.