Summary of the Core Content
This article focuses on the book "Monster Hunting: The Birth and Evolution of Video Game Monsters," exploring why monsters in video games are always portrayed as enemies and the underlying logic behind this design—namely, the "enemy ontology" from the Cold War era (which viewed all others as controllable and defeatable adversaries). It discusses how monsters have evolved from complex, ambiguous characters in mythology to digitized, commercialized entities in modern games, with the PvE (Player vs. Environment) mode being a prime example of this logic. The article calls for a breakthrough in this outdated paradigm and a reevaluation of the concept of monsters as well as other beings in reality.
1. Monsters in Games: From "Mysterious Entities" to "Targets to Be Eliminated"
Monsters in games are quite different from those in mythology and literature. Mythological monsters (such as the demons in "Journey to the West") have their own stories and personalities, often embodying both good and evil traits. However, game monsters are created using data and programming, with attributes like health bars, regeneration rates, and attack ranges that turn them into "calculable targets." For instance, Ludwig from "Dawn of War" is a tragic boss, but players must still defeat him to earn rewards; the small enemies in "Vampire: The Survivors" are merely there to provide players with points. Game developers use traditional visual elements (inspired by mythical creatures) to attract players, yet they destroy the mystery through numerical representations—these monsters may seem dangerous, but they are actually "tamed" (since players know how to defeat them), and although powerful, they are vulnerable (they die when their health is depleted). This contradiction creates monsters that both stimulate players to fight and ensure their victory.
2. Is Cold War Thinking Hidden in Games? The "Enemy Ontology" Makes Monsters Inevitable Enemies
Why must monsters be enemies in games? The root of this lies in the "enemy ontology" from the Cold War, a worldview that saw the world as a battlefield of conflict, influenced by military technology concepts like "cybernetics" (the idea of controlling everything). The PvE mode is a direct result of this mindset. Early games didn't necessarily require players to defeat monsters; it was only with the advent of PvE that they became more prevalent. The "environment" in PvE games is not real nature but a space for confrontation, where monsters are controlled by third parties and must be defeated. "Dragon & Dungeon" is considered the pioneer of PvE, turning monsters into mere numerical representations (with defense levels, health points, and loot), stripping them of any inherent meaning beyond serving the player's goal of becoming a hero.
Military technologies from the Cold War era (such as computers and real-time interaction) were funded by the U.S. military, and these innovations were later applied to games, introducing the logic of "controlling enemies" into entertainment. Thus, game monsters can be seen as a "cultural legacy" of that period's mindset.
3. Are Monsters Also Comercialized? Health Bars and Rewards Turn Monster Hunting into Resource Gathering
Monsters in games are essentially commodities, designed to be tools for players to acquire rewards. No matter how terrifying they appear, they ultimately become points, achievements, or items (such as gold or experience). This commercialization strips monsters of their original dignity. For example, Pokémon, originally based on Japanese folklore with distinct personalities, have been turned into calculable, tradable assets in games; the demons in "Black Myth" still have stories, but the gameplay revolves around PvE mechanics where players must defeat them to progress. Technological "path dependencies" (game companies' habits) and "gamification" (turning everything into a reward system) have led to a repetitive design for monsters: they are always enemies and always defeated.
4. Are There Games That Don't View Monsters as Enemies? Yes, Indeed
There are games that challenge this convention. For instance, in "Wanda and the Giants," players must kill 16 giants to save their loved one, but the process involves witnessing their suffering and listening to melancholic music, leading them to question the morality of their actions. Another example is when the author played "Dawn of War" and chose not to fight the "Lady of the Universe" simply to admire her appearance—this goes against the game's basic rule of defeating monsters for rewards. These examples show that players are beginning to reject the notion that enemies must be defeated.
The article concludes by pointing out that the Cold War-era "enemy ontology" still influences our society, making us accustomed to viewing everything as a competitive entity and measuring everything through numerical indicators (such as scores or performance). Breaking free from these outdated game patterns also means questioning the tendency in reality to treat all others as enemies and to quantify everything.
This article uses the concept of monsters in games as a reflection of the "Cold War remnants" in our thinking, urging us to move beyond the obsession with defeating enemies and embrace a more complex and diverse world.