The International Committee of the Red Cross has confirmed that it won’t prosecute gamers for participating in pretend war crimes, but that doesn’t mean it wants to leave the topic alone. The Committee has released a statement in which it outlines its desire to collaborate with videogame developers to show the consequences of a player’s actions if they engage in virtual torture, the harming of civilians, attacks on medical personnel, or anything else covered by the Geneva Convention.
It stopped short of clarifying quite what these consequences should be, suggesting only that “game scenarios should not reward players for actions that in real life would be considered war crimes.” On the other hand, the ICRC feels players found “respecting the law of armed conflict” should be rewarded.
Somewhere along the way, it got to be uncool to reduce one’s risk of failure.
Part of this may be because the risk of failure is dramatically lower than it used to be. But another reason is that many people don’t actually understand what research is, and have somehow conflated concepts like “rapid prototyping,” “lean startup,” “minimal viable product,” and “[insert] other smart-sounding thing to do” with avoiding research.