Question of the Day, August 20, 2010

[Supernova2000]

I answered "it's just a game" but really, I think it's just terribly unimaginative and I can all too easily imagine the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars, 60 years from now, being recycled as ruthlessly as WW2 has been over the last decade.

Besides, I took one look at the trailer and a massive neon sign in my head started flashing "CoD4 CoD4 CoD4 CoD4!!!". I'm not buying it; I don't see the point, they might as well just rename it Call of Duty: Illegal, Pointless Warfare!

 

[OmegaXIII]

Joypads do not equal guns. I cannot even begin to describe how much i hate the media for this kind of shit. Kids who are not aware that they are playing a virtual medium and subsequently may become desensitised already are in desperate need of help

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

It depends on the game. Some are useful commentary on conflicts. Others are just games.

Maybe there is a rare occasion where one could be considered an exploitation.

 

[Sikachu]

I see no problem with it. If films, books and TV series are allowed to be made based on current conflicts, then there's no logical reason why videogames shouldn't be either, assuming they remain tasteful and accurate.

Erm, films, books and TV series do not remain tasteful or accurate. The news isn't even fucking accurate. Why should videogames have this extra burden?

 

[ShadowKirby]

I see no problem with it. If films, books and TV series are allowed to be made based on current conflicts, then there's no logical reason why videogames shouldn't be either, assuming they remain tasteful and accurate.

Issue is, nobody in the industry ever remained tasteful and accurate. Either you go at it, talk about the current conflict and take a stance on it or you at least try to be respectful. Putting the Talibans as some skin in multiplayer matches just seems like the easy way out. Even the developers tip-toed their way around it by saying "Well it's like when you play cops and robbers, someone's gotta be the robbers". It's not the same thing and saying that is just avoiding to face reality and hide behind the dreadful "It's just a game" excuse.

Hell, the fact that 63% of the people over here are also avoiding discussion by saying "Welp, it's just a game buddy!" is kinda making me mad. Remember a few years ago when the Escapist Magazine was read by people who cared about gaming as more than some kind of fun little entertainment thing where you don't have to think too much.

 

[Tom Phoenix]

Let me put it this way. If the game industry will always remain too frightened to tackle current issues, games will never grow as a medium. It is simple as that.

Infact, I would argue that EA didn't go far enough. If they wanted to provide an accurate potrayal of the current conflict and then let the player be the judge, they should have potrayed the Taliban in the singleplayer campaign as well and then let the player pass his own judgment. As it is, they are only playable in the multiplayer; a compromise that satisfies neither the critics nor the supporters.

It is true that games have traditionally supposed to be "fun". But one can think of many books and movies that weren't meant to entertain, but that the reader/viewer still finished with a sense of satisfaction and enligthenment. If games are really an artform, then they must cease to limit themselves to being a form of amusement.

Also, this is mandatory viewing for anyone interested in this subject:

 

[CrashBang]

I hate it. For some reason I feel really strongly about it. I have no problem with modern warfare games on made-up issues but games like the new MOH which are based on actual current events are tasteless and horrible. They're taking events in which people of both sides are crippled, killed, raped, abused and tortured and making it into a videogame for kids to enjoy. Hypocritically I have no problem with WW2 games because I feel no personal link to it as it was 70-80 years ago, but if I came back from Afghanistan in a wheelchair after being a terrorist trying to stop terrorists (laughably hypocritical, but that's a subject for another time) and I saw this game based on my situation then I would be insulted and angry beyond belief

 

[oppp7]

If it's handled tastefully, then there shouldn't be a problem with it.

 

[Olenthros]

ok OVERALL ... it's a game who cares and that's what I voted

BUT

If a game is going to be based on a war going on or even historically I think anymore they need to have more than 1 story mode a story for each faction as if written to attract gamers who are of the nationality of that faction. I'd find that way more interesting with all this slew of war games that keep being throw on the shelf if someone had the balls to do stories in it that not just promoted my American mind BUT also did a story promoting the enemy mind and why they did what they did beyond the stereotypical media bullcrap. We are beyond the commie days and the cold war days and yes even though it can be fun to blow up a bunch of bad guys but to play as a bad guy not casted as evil but casted as a hero for his side RIGHT AFTER you played a hero for your own cause would definately be mind opening. Hell we play crime games and get caught up in them I don't see how this wouldn't pay off.

 

[liveslowdiefast]

So MOH is allowed to use a current crisis as basis for gameplay, but six days in fullugh isn't. goes to show what you can do with a big publisher.

 

[ShadowKirby]

So MOH is allowed to use a current crisis as basis for gameplay, but six days in [Fallujah] isn't. goes to show what you can do with a big publisher.

No you see, Six Days was going to talk about actual events as they were told by actual soldiers who were there, a very specific story that was probably trying to pass a point, a message. MOH on the other hand is not really basing itself on anything real except for the backdrop of the war in Afghanistan. By not talking about real issues and staying vague they get a pass. Can't anybody stand up against the critics in favor of an expressive medium?

 

[742]

i think its kinda sad that its even possible considering the amount of time it takes to develop a game.

i do however think theyre generally bland and boring, and if they want to pass the censors they dont really have much of a choice on that; responsible commentary is not an option for a developer.

im holding out until we declare war on rapture.

 

[cainx10a]

I wonder if people would still say "It's just a game" if the main characters were the Taliban, the Iraqi Insurgents, or Gojira.

 

[Chainsauce]

I actually prefer when modern-war games are set in at least a real area/country.

Feels like a big cop out when you're fighting in unspecifiedistan.

 

[Fightgarr]

I think having gaming be a valid forum to generate discussion is a great idea. Games should be able to give relevant commentary on the world, it's something I have long thought games have overlooked. Games should be fun to play, but that does not mean they can't actively comment on the world around them.

A problem does arrive through that, though. The world changes at a fast pace, and games take a while to make, commentary on specific events could quickly become obsolete or even be rendered tasteless by future events. Thus the best solution is to use to predict the future so that games with that kind of commentary come out as the event is occurring. Clairvoyance is a really marketable skill if you know where to sell it.

 

[Scrythe]

Modern settings are a lot more refreshing than having a new WWII and space shooter every year.

 

[MikailCaboose]

It's just a bloody video game. Hell, I tend to be quite patriotic, yet I've clocked in more hours playing the Nazi's in Battlefield 1942 than any other group so it just doesn't bother me. I wouldn't buy it, but that's because I tend to try to keep away from modern anything. I'm just stuck in the past and future.

 

[Naheal]

Modern settings are a lot more refreshing than having a new WWII and space shooter every year.

At least someone else has that opinion.

A war, in the eyes of a director, designer, or author, is little more than a story that's occurring right at this moment. If you'd like to portray a war from a little under three-quarters of a century ago, cool. Overdone, but cool. If you want to portray a war from... say, now, go right the fuck ahead.