184: See No Evil

[L.B. Jeffries]

how exactly does portraying the holocaust in a game suddenly make it profound? profoundness does not come from a lesson in history, it comes from learning an abstraction not thought of before. mass murders have happened before this, and they have been portrayed as well.

you know, it's funny. i just stated in my previous post that developers wouldn't want the commotion about a game if it contained the holocaust; and this discussion just proves my point. this is an article about the concept of a holocaust on a small website in the sea of the internet, and it is already generating enough tension to short-circuit a district fuse box. i can only imagine what would happen if this got further out to the gaming public, and from there to the general public.

From dictionary.com

Profound: 1) penetrating or entering deeply into subjects of thought or knowledge; having deep insight or understanding.

As in, to appreciate World War II, you would need to discuss the Holocaust and gain deeper insights into the experience. Such a game would be profound.

And technically, someone already made a DS game about the Holocaust. Publishers were highly uncomfortable that it would be in bad taste, not that it wanted to talk about a controversial issue.

http://kotaku.com/365711/nintendo-wont-release-holocaust-ds-game

All profits of the game are supposedly going to Darfur victims, which could use a video game of its own.

 

[Grenbyron]

there are a lot of ugly aspects that game designers gloss over or just do not mention. Why? Because it is not fun. If you want to learn about the holocaust in full multimedia, then watch Schindler list. If you want to learn what an atomic bomb attack is really like, read the books about the clean up of Nagasaki. Want to see what horrors humanity is really capable of, read "Rape of Nanking". Shooting Nazi's is like hacking at goblins. Part of the belief is that they are irredeemably evil and that they all eat children and your job as the "hero" is to remove them from the game world. Allied forces entered the camps unopposed or near to it. Other than a cut scene, there is really no place for it. Unless you are suggesting a game where you are a Jewish freedom fighter during the 1930's. I am all for education, but there is a time and a place.

 

[Billybarbara]

I just worry that nazis will end up being portrayed as pirates(sp) are these days can you imagine kids at partys dressed as sscaptin jack sparrow that would be horrific.

 

[theklng]

From dictionary.com

Profound: 1) penetrating or entering deeply into subjects of thought or knowledge; having deep insight or understanding.

As in, to appreciate World War II, you would need to discuss the Holocaust and gain deeper insights into the experience. Such a game would be profound.

exactly how does the experience deepen in insight? in inspiration and impression, perhaps, but not in insight, thought or knowledge. you would still only see the superficial scars of another mass murder; you would not see the world from a new perspective or make a discovery that hasn't been encompassed before. the insight gain you talk about has already been gained by studying other abstractions of the same subject. ergo is there no profoundness in further discussing another instance of the holocaust.

 

[ReverseEngineered]

But in all seriousness, there are several obstacles to portraying a realistic view of WWII. First off, you would offend people who do not wish to be reminded of the Holocaust. Like, for instance, the people who were actually there, or their immediate families. Second, games are meant to entertain, and the Holocaust was anything but entertaining.

The same could be said about film or books. Aren't they also meant to entertain? And just imagine how offensive it would be to Jewish people if someone made a movie where the Nazi soldiers weren't just evil monsters, but were Germans caught fighting a war for a leader they didn't believe in.

But they did make this movie -- Valkyrie -- and it is already critically acclaimed. Millions of people went to watch it and found it very entertaining. It had action, suspense, and some very deep character development. I'm sure there were probably some people offended at it, but that happens when you make a statement.

Most popular video games are analogous to pornography: there's a whole lot of action with only pretenses of a plot and a complete lack of character development. It's pure entertainment with no aspirations to artistic expression. But just like film and literature, games can go beyond pure entertainment. Making a statement, provoking thought, and instilling emotions while maintaining entertainment is difficult, but such is the life of every artist. There's nothing inherent in the medium that precludes this, there just aren't many artists (or studios) willing to step up.

 

[ReverseEngineered]

At the same time, Sylocat brings up a totally valid point: Games are entertainment, and using the Holocaust in a game does seem to be in poor taste. I took issue with CoD: WaW portraying the execution of prisoners. Hell, they went so far as to include actual footage of a German soldier being executed. I thought that was wrong, and using the Holocaust tastelessly in a video game would also be wrong.

But I think there is a way to do it well. Liberating a camp maybe. It's just material that has to be treated with the respect it deserves.

Perhaps it would help to elaborate on the difference between appropriate and "tasteless" portrails of such a tragedy. If you ask me, using the Holocaust (or WWII in general) as a pretense for a game where your goal is to mass murder nameless zombies (i.e. the Nazis) is entirely tasteless, because it doesn't show what the real tragedies were, it's just a skin on a set of rules. They could have replaced the Nazis with waves of zombies, or fields of gophers, or swarms of locusts, and it would still be the same game. The game isn't about WWII, it's about killing things, and WWII is only used like a marketing term to attract people. I would call that tasteless.

However, if somebody actually developed a game that explored both sides of the Holocaust, showing the devastation of the Jews and the mislead slavery of the Germans, I think that would be wholly appropriate use of the theme. Depending on the content, it still may not be appropriate for young kids, but I'd rather my children learn the truth of the Holocaust than some terribly inaccurate stereotype, if that's the exposure they are going to get.

It's no different to me than using a racial epithet. Black men (or even white men) going around calling their friends, "my niggaz," is tasteless in that the term refers to something very different than "friends". However, in a movie about a cotton plantation in the Southern states, it's entirely proper for the white plantation owner to refer to his slaves as niggers. It would even be appropriate to be repeated ad naseaum in a movie about segregation or apartheid. When it's a matter of context and accuracy rather than shock value, even the most offensive scene is entirely appropriate.

 

[L.B. Jeffries]

exactly how does the experience deepen in insight? in inspiration and impression, perhaps, but not in insight, thought or knowledge. you would still only see the superficial scars of another mass murder; you would not see the world from a new perspective or make a discovery that hasn't been encompassed before. the insight gain you talk about has already been gained by studying other abstractions of the same subject. ergo is there no profoundness in further discussing another instance of the holocaust.

Onnnnnnnnnnnnnnce again, from dictionary.com

insight: 1) an instance of apprehending the true nature of a thing, esp. through intuitive understanding

So, yes, making a person walk around Auschwitz in an FPS will prove "insight" because they get to see a fundamental aspect of World War 2. As the article points out, all of the people who were in the camps are almost dead and most of the soldiers who rescued them as well. So recreating that actual act, that experience of being in the camps firsthand, is going to be lost.

By turning it into a video game, you could create that experience and preserve it in ways that books and movies never will. Ergo, there's no real reason to not make a video game that has parts of the Holocaust in it.

 

[theklng]

exactly how does the experience deepen in insight? in inspiration and impression, perhaps, but not in insight, thought or knowledge. you would still only see the superficial scars of another mass murder; you would not see the world from a new perspective or make a discovery that hasn't been encompassed before. the insight gain you talk about has already been gained by studying other abstractions of the same subject. ergo is there no profoundness in further discussing another instance of the holocaust.

Onnnnnnnnnnnnnnce again, from dictionary.com

insight: 1) an instance of apprehending the true nature of a thing, esp. through intuitive understanding

So, yes, making a person walk around Auschwitz in an FPS will prove "insight" because they get to see a fundamental aspect of World War 2. As the article points out, all of the people who were in the camps are almost dead and most of the soldiers who rescued them as well. So recreating that actual act, that experience of being in the camps firsthand, is going to be lost.

By turning it into a video game, you could create that experience and preserve it in ways that books and movies never will. Ergo, there's no real reason to not make a video game that has parts of the Holocaust in it.

i think you're misunderstanding the semantic behind the words here, either deliberately or no. you're trying to say that the impression will be different if you're playing it as a game rather than to watch it as a movie or read it as a book. insight isn't just a petty thing that you see on the surface when playing a game, that's just impression. it is something that radically changes you, your principles or beliefs. if you cannot understand this, then i will not bother arguing further.

so please, stop being smug; you haven't earned that privilege.

for the sake of good argumentation, allow me to quote dictionary.com with "impression":

1. a strong effect produced on the intellect, feelings, conscience, etc.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/impression

Q.E.D.

 

[L.B. Jeffries]

i think you're misunderstanding the semantic behind the words here, either deliberately or no. you're trying to say that the impression will be different if you're playing it as a game rather than to watch it as a movie or read it as a book. insight isn't just a petty thing that you see on the surface when playing a game, that's just impression. it is something that radically changes you, your principles or beliefs. if you cannot understand this, then i will not bother arguing further.

so please, stop being smug; you haven't earned that privilege.

for the sake of good argumentation, allow me to quote dictionary.com with "impression":

1. a strong effect produced on the intellect, feelings, conscience, etc.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/impression

Q.E.D.

I'll stop arguing when you explain why making a game that takes place in the Holocaust isn't worth making. You can shove any word at me you want, you're still just fumbling around with nonsense like it isn't insightful, it's been done, it's not enlightening, it doesn't give a strong impression, it won't change anything.

So what? Does everything have to be profound? Is that even a rational standard in video games? For any art form? Even if it fails, at least it will have tried.

 

[batmantis275]

Portraying the holocaust in a video game would need to be tactful; however, i think it should be done. i'm not sure you need anything "interactive." The gamer doesn't need to take on the role of the executioner, but maybe a cutscene that just shows that it did happen would be enough.

I don't think just representing things in games would solve any problems with "skewed perception" of the event though. Even looking at some of the classic 'historically accurate' games, you can see some pretty horrendous misconceptions and inaccuracies. Oregon Trail and Carmen Sandiego both come under fire for being both sexist and inaccurate. As much fun as it was to have people die of Typhoid, the game never fairly represented history.

In my opinion it will always be the responsibility of some other media to inform about history; however, i think it would be fantastic for a game to try to cover the "whole story" and actually engage the player. If nothing else, maybe it would get them interested enough to read the rest of the story. Perhaps it could just provide a little more insight.

 

[Terazeal]

These games present their own version because by copying WW2 they'd be using a plot everyone knows. So, if they want to make a WW2 shooter, there is no need to explain the overarching, important bits of the war, like the Holocaust, just individual stories of the soldiers.

 

[reilster]

Well one major advance we need to make is seeing both sides doing terrible things to other humans. CoD 4 did this with the british, but there should be a scene for every country perfroming some kind of attroicity (but only if real proof can be found). In war no side is innocent of doing evil.

On this note i was just thinking of a game where you spend time as the axis and as the allies in a WW2 setting but both sides showing the other as equally evil. E.G. American troops take a German fortress and find something horrific such as prison chambers that are covered in blood and feaces (sorry for spelling, also I would recconmend a sight that actually happening in WW2 rathar than a made-up story as this could over-exxagerate) but then in the next mission the Germans take a American poistion (from the Germans PoV) and they discover americans killing Axis forces brutally (like it or not some americans in WW2 would have been mindless killers and would have enjoyed this.)

I am Sorry If I have offended anyone with this post, but I personally think it would be a interesting idea for a game.

 

[Combined]

This is part of why I hate World war II games. They always show us sides in black and white.

Sure, I'm all for showing the holocaust in a game. It is possible to portray it without actually making someone angry. But if you're going to show that, then show also what the Russians did. Show what the Allies did too. If you're going to put something like the holocaust in, then you better make sure to show that there were a lot more than just Jews being killed. Have enough of a soul to show that there were no "white" sides. Just different shades of black.

 

[theklng]

i think you're misunderstanding the semantic behind the words here, either deliberately or no. you're trying to say that the impression will be different if you're playing it as a game rather than to watch it as a movie or read it as a book. insight isn't just a petty thing that you see on the surface when playing a game, that's just impression. it is something that radically changes you, your principles or beliefs. if you cannot understand this, then i will not bother arguing further.

so please, stop being smug; you haven't earned that privilege.

for the sake of good argumentation, allow me to quote dictionary.com with "impression":

1. a strong effect produced on the intellect, feelings, conscience, etc.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/impression

Q.E.D.

I'll stop arguing when you explain why making a game that takes place in the Holocaust isn't worth making. You can shove any word at me you want, you're still just fumbling around with nonsense like it isn't insightful, it's been done, it's not enlightening, it doesn't give a strong impression, it won't change anything.

So what? Does everything have to be profound? Is that even a rational standard in video games? For any art form? Even if it fails, at least it will have tried.

everything doesn't have to be profound. i just wanted to prove you wrong in using profound as a choice of word where it isn't applicable.

as for the game, you said yourself why they won't make it. is there any more depth to this discussion?

 

[Terazeal]

Well one major advance we need to make is seeing both sides doing terrible things to other humans.

Well, in most games, both sides usually commit mass murder, which is absolutely terrible.

 

[Logan Westbrook]

i think you're misunderstanding the semantic behind the words here, either deliberately or no. you're trying to say that the impression will be different if you're playing it as a game rather than to watch it as a movie or read it as a book. insight isn't just a petty thing that you see on the surface when playing a game, that's just impression. it is something that radically changes you, your principles or beliefs. if you cannot understand this, then i will not bother arguing further.

The key point that LB is making is that the interactivity implicit in games means that the experience can be deeply and uniquely affecting. By the logic you seem to be putting forward, reading about Auschwitz is the same as going to Auschwitz, which is obviously not the case.

 

[reilster]

Well one major advance we need to make is seeing both sides doing terrible things to other humans.

Well, in most games, both sides usually commit mass murder, which is absolutely terrible.

Yes but mass murder in the heat of battle when Its you or him/her, is very different to mass murder when it is innocent/helpless victims. And generally games don't show that helpless deaths on BOTH sides. games are too biased to one side.

 

[Bagaloo]

Why would anyone want to buy a videogame based on the holocaust? As many people before have said, a game has to be entertaining. The holocuast is not entertaining.

There are a plethora of films and books on the subjects. If you want to learn about the holocaust (and lets face it, who actually doesn't know about it in this day and age) then pick up a book.

 

[Logan Westbrook]

Why would anyone want to buy a videogame based on the holocaust? As many people before have said, a game has to be entertaining. The holocuast is not entertaining.

There are a plethora of films and books on the subjects. If you want to learn about the holocaust (and lets face it, who actually doesn't know about it in this day and age) then pick up a book.

Not entertaining, engaging. To use a movie example, Schindler's List is not 'entertaining' but it is very engaging.