Yesterday, on Wired.com, Clive Thomas made an interesting argument for more, better torture in video games. His argument is that most torture, as often presented in the public marketplace, has no real-world consequences for the characters involved. Neither the torturer nor the tortured is necessarily changed by the act. ie, the tortured may have had the hell beaten out of him, which may lead him/her to give up some key information, but the emotional, mental and moral consequences of the act, on both the torturer and the tortured are never addressed. And, Thomas argues, exploring those consequences may be a worthy endeavor with gaming being the perfect avenue within which to make that exploration.
…torture has devastating repercussions. It permanently erodes the character of the torturer and, worse, of the public that condones the torture. What’s more, torture destroys a nation’s moral high ground — which is why military commanders consistently oppose it — and incites further acts of terrorism. Torture has consequences.
I tend to agree, although it’s unlikely that I’ll ever allow my kids to lay their hands on any of these games.