Red Cross Investigating Virtual War Crimes

[conflictofinterests]

Hey, you have all been trolled by the red cross, just like you were by PETA!

For real though, who cares what they think in regards to things they have no scope of power over. And, I can't really recall a game where you were playing the bad guys and shooting wounded, downed soldiers.

In Skyrim, whenever someone is severely wounded, they'll take a knee and plea for their lives. With one or two exceptions, after they heal enough they'll go right back to killing you, so it behooves the smart adventurer to leave nothing but corpses in his wake.

EDIT:
I especially like the people who insult me and then I fail at intimidating, who attack me, whom I quickly beat to an inch of their life, and who then proceed to insult me more, and still not be intimidated by me. There ought to be a patch for that. They're barely escaping with their entrails inside them, yet they're still talking smack and I still can't effectively tell them to watch their tongue.

 

[WolfLord]

I was thinking about this in skyrim the other day. even if i wanted to leave to let some one who i just nearly beat to death surrender when they go down, I can't. They get back up and attack me again. So i would just finish them while they're down. Forcing my guy to be a psycho war criminal,

 

[aashell13]

the key word is humanitarian; there are no humans in games, only blobs of pixels.

besides, the red cross doesn't try to go after people for depicting war crimes in books or movies, why should this be any different?

 

[Not G. Ivingname]

Your KIDDING me.

Shooting at virtual people with virtual weapondry, which they can get RIGHT BACK UP equals a WAR CRIME?

REALLY?

The Mario Peta thing was stupid.

The Mass Errect scandal was moronic.

This?

THIS?

My mind is having problems COMPRHENDING THE STUPIDITY.

You want to put 600 MILLION (by THEIR own estimates) people on War Crime trials?

...

I don't even...

Ugghhh...

 

[Not G. Ivingname]

Hey, you have all been trolled by the red cross, just like you were by PETA!

For real though, who cares what they think in regards to things they have no scope of power over. And, I can't really recall a game where you were playing the bad guys and shooting wounded, downed soldiers.

In Skyrim, whenever someone is severely wounded, they'll take a knee and plea for their lives. With one or two exceptions, after they heal enough they'll go right back to killing you, so it behooves the smart adventurer to leave nothing but corpses in his wake.

Faking surrender is a war crime in it's self (it lessens the chances of REAL surrenders not ending in the surrenderer being shot), so how can I be held respouncable?

 

[Woem]

The Convention agreed that medical personnel are protected and soldiers would not be experimented upon

Bye bye Captain America.

 

[Firia]

The Geneva Conventions have no jurisdiction over our imaginations or creative works, and The Red Cross cannot dictate whether a movie hero tortures a non-combatant or blows up a bus full of nuns on the way to saving the President of the U.N.

What about movies? Or books? I thought the point of a fictional engagement or conflict was that it was FICTIONAL.

What about "virtual world" (their words) do they not get? It's fiction. Fake. Not real. The same can be said about books, and movies. There's some sick shit in sequenced letters and words. Not to mention in arts and crafts. But video games are somehow more real than these mediums?

Disappointed.

C'mon guys, that's some pretty lazy and cheeky criticism. The IFRCs problem isn't that it's fictional, their issue is that it's participatory. The 2007 TRIAL report expressed concern at FPS players becoming "virtually violent", not that the games were nasty make-believe.

Now this news can either be a good thing or bad thing for the gaming industry depending on how we respond and the results may suprise us. If 'Courageous Restraint' was included in a few games we may begin to better understand the stresses and frustrations of real front-line troops. Sure, 'escapism' might take a hit, but taking the source material more seriously might open new avenues and ideas for games to explore. Maybe we should wait till we know more about the initative before painting up the protest banners?

I get what you're trying to say (and after the round of shots I'VE had, that's well done on my part), but I cannot accept censorship whatever its form. I don't have to agree with the content, but I agree that it shouldn't be censored. It's not real, real people are not having their rights or lives violated, therefore Geneva's code does not apply.

I can draw really well. I can write really well too. If I make a book that allows readers to experience disturbing events on a level of participation, would that be worthy of banning/censoring my book on the grounds that the content violates the geneva convention... of fictional people?

As I mentioned, I've had a lot to drink. That's all the debate you'll get from me. I can close by saying; I don't agree with the assertion that something fictional can violate fictional characters rights lives or wellbeing based on the Geneva Convention, regardless of the grounds of it being participatory. I hope the people in that room all thought so too, and gives this topic a pass to focus on real issues.

 

[OniaPL]

Eh, I'm still going to execute wounded enemy soldiers in most hilarious ways in GoW3.

 

[Sarah Frazier]

Trying to regulate acts of cruelty and violence in video games? HA! That may work with cut scenes, but it'll be as useful as a screen door on a submarine when it comes to mechanics. Even if it's simple tea bagging, players will do whatever they can to their enemies during or after combat. I don't think some vague Human Rights committee is going to make anyone stop and think for even a minute before lining up a shot to some thieving elf's crotch.

 

[Voltano]

The impression I got from this is the player should be held responsible for the deaths of virtual objects representing humans in our games. Which is absurd because that is criminalizing the player for initiating the proper function of these objects in the first place.

And how does this stop just at modern warfare games? Should the Geneva convention, or any other laws in reality criminalizing murder, be applied to other fictional games like Skyrim, Saints Row, or Mass Effect? Should every player be held responsible for triggering the "Death()" function in these objects by performing the natural actions to trigger said function?

 

[ExileNZ]

I'm all for it but first, since they have a much larger audience, they need to make similar laws for what the heroes can do in movies, TV series and of course books.

THEN they can get onto video games.

 

[BoTTeNBReKeR]

Man, I played Fallout New Vegas yesterday. I guess I'm going to have to serve some time in jail for warcrimes and crimes against humanity .

 

[Gatx]

So would tea bagging be a war crime?

 

[Roserari]

I'd be completely fine with this if they included Movies, TV shows, books, comics, paintings and any other form of art or entertainment.

 

[Ickorus]

If they actually try enforcing the Geneva Convention in games they're batshit insane but I can see it working if they get developers to add gameplay elements to their games that enforce the conventions in the context of the game.

 

[Baresark]

Hey, you have all been trolled by the red cross, just like you were by PETA!

For real though, who cares what they think in regards to things they have no scope of power over. And, I can't really recall a game where you were playing the bad guys and shooting wounded, downed soldiers.

In Skyrim, whenever someone is severely wounded, they'll take a knee and plea for their lives. With one or two exceptions, after they heal enough they'll go right back to killing you, so it behooves the smart adventurer to leave nothing but corpses in his wake.

EDIT:
I especially like the people who insult me and then I fail at intimidating, who attack me, whom I quickly beat to an inch of their life, and who then proceed to insult me more, and still not be intimidated by me. There ought to be a patch for that. They're barely escaping with their entrails inside them, yet they're still talking smack and I still can't effectively tell them to watch their tongue.

Haha, as I was typing that I thought of that very thing. I even considered mentioning it. But then I figured that I would skip since it's a fantasy setting. But, I would imagine that if they had the power to change it, they would. But, as you said, as soon as they heal they are attacking you again, so you might as well just cut them down when they take a knee.

 

[Vivi22]

I'll say here what I said on the other [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.329038-Serious-Business-Red-Cross-offended-by-videogame-War-Crimes?page=1] thread: When you say something to the tune of "Movement partners discussed our role and responsibility to take action against violations of IHL in video games", you've lost all chances of being taken seriously.

Much bigger fish to fry

I can't agree more with this. Perhaps they should spend more time worrying about the myriad of human rights abuses that actually happen everyday instead of what happens to virtual characters in video games who are about as intelligent as my car.

 

[BOOM headshot65]

No, NO, NOOOOOOOO!

The Geneva convition has already ruined real life war, And I will NOT let it happen in videogames.