May Kantians commit virtual killings that affect no other persons?

Are acts of violence performed in virtual environments ever morally wrong, even when no other persons are affected? While some such surely reflect deficient moral character, I focus on the rightness or wrongness acts. Typically it’s thought that, Kant’s theory, an act is wrong (i.e., violates Categorical Imperative) only if mistreats another person. But argue can be their avatars affected. First, explain why many have general affecting can’t violate Imperative. For there real world that clearly do, but it seems we consider same sorts done alone a environment, they don’t Imperative, because others were involved. then, how could any like these, affect avatars, Imperative? then indeed cases acts—some due to actor’s having erroneous beliefs about relevant facts, and not error, intention leaving out facts while immersed environment. conclude by considering implications my arguments for both our present technological context as well future.