UK Defense Secretary Calls for Medal of Honor Ban

[13lackfriday]

[HEADING=1]Hey Logan,[/HEADING] just because you're a gaming journalist doesn't mean you always need to take gaming's side.

The UK defense secretary is an elected official responsible for the lives of a country and its soldiers, something which is rather mutually exclusive. When you know the feeling of sending people to their deaths in service to what you have to convince yourself to be a greater good, an entertainment giant looking to profit off the very real suffering in this situation can be deemed a bit insensitive...wouldn'tcha say?

Modern Warfare's managed to toe the line by inventing very similar, but fictional Islamist insurgents diluted with the time-and-time-again used Soviet Union revivalist hoke. EA felt they needed to follow, but decided to discard sensitivity to go for the "hardcore" edginess of portraying a current, real-life conflict.

Unfortunately, real lives are being lost, not just virtual.

 

[DoctorObviously]

*Just came from the ACTA thread, sees this and smashes head against the desk repeatedly*

 

[Jezzascmezza]

It's only in the multiplayer for crying out loud.
You're not recreating actual events from the current conflict.

 

[cutecuddely]

there is a little thing called satire. and i was refering to the midddle east today

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

Why then should game developers not defer to the Muslim civilians who've been killed as collateral damage, and make NATO an unplayable side as well? The civilians aren't enemies, and surely it is also "too soon" for them?

And would a completely dehumanized enemy through who'se eyes you'll never get a chance to see not further the bad "black-and-white" approach to the whole thing?

At any rate, it's not the a government representative's job to try to verbally censor any statement that's not illegal; let private organisations complain about it and call for boycots. A government should rule its people by law, not condemning propaganda.

We just don't have any semblance of tasteful deference anymore. People have shifted into a corporate mode where they fight, tooth and nail, for every last inch of whatever is rightfully theirs by law. This game is perfectly legal, as is picketing gay funerals and abortion clinics. Legal does not equal tasteful, and I think any public figure is well within his or her rights to discourage tasteless behavior.

As for the hypocrisy or double standard, that's sort of how politicians work. They're elected by a particular constituency, and they're expected to be myopic and biased with regard to that constituency. I don't blame one guy for that dynamic. Further, I personally have a huge problem with all games that depict ongoing contemporary conflicts. I think it's incredibly insensitive - especially when the games in question are focused mostly on visceral thrill-seeking multiplayer. We're not exactly deconstructing the conflict in the vein of film or literature, are we?

 

[Gigano]

...
We just don't have any semblance of tasteful deference anymore. People have shifted into a corporate mode where they fight, tooth and nail, for every last inch of whatever is rightfully theirs by law. This game is perfectly legal, as is picketing gay funerals and abortion clinics. Legal does not equal tasteful, and I think any public figure is well within his or her rights to discourage tasteless behavior.

As for the hypocrisy or double standard, that's sort of how politicians work. They're elected by a particular constituency, and they're expected to be myopic and biased with regard to that constituency. I don't blame one guy for that dynamic. Further, I personally have a huge problem with all games that depict ongoing contemporary conflicts. I think it's incredibly insensitive - especially when the games in question are focused mostly on visceral thrill-seeking multiplayer. We're not exactly deconstructing the conflict in the vein of film or literature, are we?

While the lack of deference can indeed be viewed as troubling, such deference can also dampen expressions of individuality different from the majority norm. If you cannot risk "offending" larger groups in society, how will you differ from them? EA's purpose is of course strictly commercial, which mean that in this particular instance deference should perhaps play a larger role, but on the whole, I'd personally weigh individuality and the expression thereoff well above not hurting anyone's feelings. And unlike the pickets, this game is not forced on anyone who dislike it, which to me make quite a significant difference.

As a public figure he's certainly within his right to state his view on the matter, provided he makes it absolutely clear that it is not an official view; which had to be done for him [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/102956-UK-Culture-Department-Distances-Itself-From-Medal-of-Honor-Outrage].

That his view is indeed biased robs it of any worth in my opinion. Why should I be convinced to care about the feelings of British soldiers, when he does not care about Muslims Civilians (who are not enemies)? Why should even British citizens care more for them, surely the worth as a human of a British soldier is not any greater than a Muslim child accidentally killed by him? Only Nationalism and group mentality could be the reasons for such difference, and I have no respect for either. The bias makes it a mere statement to those already so inclined; not an argument worth considering for the rest of us.

Overall, I've got no problem with games which depicts historical or on-going conflicts, as no one is forced to buy them. They just exist, as does fetishist pornography and all other sorts of things various - large - groups heavily dislike, and as long as no one is hurt in their production, and viewing is entirely voluntary, I can find absolutely no basis for condemning them. Those who dislike them should simply look the other way.

 

[Cid Silverwing]

I swear game devs are just trying to see what they can get away with these days. It's not artistic or realistic at all to be making games with controversial content like this (and don't even dare forget the "No Russian" mission in MW2).

 

[FolkLikePanda]

Wouldn't ban it but I ain't to keen on the idea of being a Taliban.

 

[XT inc]

I don't see the issue for me teams are just teams whether I'm allies or taliban. Hell to me the Opfor was about the same in mw2. I think they really think when we are playing these games when we get to control the taliban that we're honestly being motivated to kill our troops instead of it being a game.

I've never seen multiplayer any other way. Red vs Blue, Allies vs Axis, Humans vs Aliens, what ever all I am concerning myself with it capping that flag, getting mvp, and having fun.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

snip

I think the "purely commercial" aspect of these games is precisely what invalidates them as artistic expressions worthy of protection by the free speech crusaders.

I don't have a defensible argument against this game. Legally, they can make it. I have no recourse, in this thread or elsewhere. I'm just saddened by the lack of restraint. It'd be nice to live in a world where some dev said "this seems a little crass given the circumstances overseas - maybe we should put it on hold for a little while". Instead, there's some suit frothing at all the free pub this game will get for being controversial and insensitive.

I guess I'll just sit quietly and fire my disapproval rays.

 

[Gigano]

snip

I think the "purely commercial" aspect of these games is precisely what invalidates them as artistic expressions worthy of protection by the free speech crusaders.

I don't have a defensible argument against this game. Legally, they can make it. I have no recourse, in this thread or elsewhere. I'm just saddened by the lack of restraint. It'd be nice to live in a world where some dev said "this seems a little crass given the circumstances overseas - maybe we should put it on hold for a little while". Instead, there's some suit frothing at all the free pub this game will get for being controversial and insensitive.

I guess I'll just sit quietly and fire my disapproval rays.

I can see where you're coming from, perhaps even agree a bit due to the commercialism and controversy marketing strategy, but I still think that one definitely shouldn't go public with an attempt to hurt sales of a product based solely on one's subjective dislikes.

Once EA - possibly a bit insensitively, but well within their rights - had set this boat afloat, I would think it prudent that deference (i.e. ignoring it) was at least shown by those who personally disliked it, but had no valid objections beyond that; also to not fuel the questionable controversy marketing strategy.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

Once EA - possibly a bit insensitively, but well within their rights - had set this boat afloat, I would think it prudent that deference (i.e. ignoring it) was at least shown by those who personally disliked it, but had no valid objections beyond that; also to not fuel the questionable controversy marketing strategy.

I think that usage of "deference" strongly resembles the idea of preserving someone's freedom to limit my freedom. It gets tricky and possibly pointless further down this path, though.

 

[Gigano]

...

I think that usage of "deference" strongly resembles the idea of preserving someone's freedom to limit my freedom. It gets tricky and possibly pointless further down this path, though.

Well obviously nobody should be able to limit your - or his - access to complain on subjective grounds, I'm just saying that I subjectively view that as a needless gesture of nothing more than subjective statement - rather than objective argumentative - value, and also playing into their hands.

As for the release of the product, that would not limit your freedom in any way, unless you define it so broad as being free from living in a world where it exists for others to enjoy.

 

[ckam]

Pshaw. Why would anybody want to play as the Nazis or the Japanese Empire? That's crazy talk.

 

[cefm]

Sure he's not French?

 

[Leftyrem]

and anyone else remember the american revolution they werent saying how un british shooting americans was then were they?

 

[Lord Mountbatten Reborn]

And I thought it was just the Education Secretary who was insane. This is why I have such trouble pledging my undying allegiance to the Conservative party.

 

[Kris015]

I bet this will make even more british people join the Taliban

Yeah this will recruit more english people into the taliban. Damn what hole do you people crawl out of?

It was a joke..