We need a game about war.

[stevesan]

Video games are becoming a dominant force in our society, especially amongst the next generation of kids. It's time the industry takes this responsibility seriously.

We need a game about real war. A game that doesn't measure your success by how much or how efficiently you kill, but a game that brings up the more complicated issues of war. We need a game that shows both the pros and _cons_ of war. The civilian casualties, the effects on the soldiers, and the political dramatics.

For example, one could imagine a war game that has civilian casualties in it. It could show that war is not a clear fight between good and evil, because sometimes those who do for good may end up doing evil. Metal Gear Solid often addresses this issue, but with a purely narrative approach. We need a game that actually incorporates such issues into the gameplay.

One game that did this was X-Com. Though it was about a war against alien invaders, it incorporated some of the more subtle issues of war: civilian casualties, destruction of property, and prioritizing your allies - all the while trying to maintain an economically feasible organization.

I bring up X-Com because it succeeds in incorporating some higher level issues of war, yet it still manages to be a very fun and compelling game. People often say, "well, serious issues don't make a fun game." X-Com shows that it is very possible. Imagine a war game where the more civilian casualties you caused, the more likely your enemies would be able to recruit people in that area. X-Com did this in a way: If you didn't defend a country adequately, the aliens would soon make a pact with them, taking that ally away from you and decreasing your funds.

It's time we fully exploit the potential of this medium to address some very relevant issues that we face in the modern world.

 

[Enemy_Combatant]

Okay... consider a game from the perspective of the North American indigenous peoples during their european-imposed holocaust. From initial contact to their demonization by non-natives, to attempts and successes at assiimilation and forced relocation, to minimization and elimination of every bit of their ways of life. I happen to be an indie myself and feel that nearly every other oppressed ethnic group has been allowed recognition and respect. In gaming, American Natives are often stereotyped or presented in rather trite ways.

What purpose to a game of this type? To enlighten and educate players through entertainment and the challenge of assisting in the survival of the natives. And to present as tragic reality the nature of and the motivations for war itself, an extension of politics through bloodshed (and genocide).

>ahemheh heh<

 

[Hey Joe]

"How can you shoot women and children?"
"What?"
"I said, how can you shoot women and children?"
"Oh, that's easy. Just give 'em less lead!"

I can't agree that video games need to show the consequences of not just war but violence in general.

 

[Lance Icarus]

America's Army is the closest thing I've seen to showing actual consequences for your actions, throwing you in jail if you decide your drill instructor needs more lead in his diet. I never liked the idea of video games providing huge consequences for your actions other than "game over".

I play games so I can do things I can't normally do in real life. I don't want to feel all kinds of guilt when I play a game. That's life's job. My example is that one Mechwarrior game that forced you to buy that huge panel thing that was, like, $100 bucks. The worst part was if you didn't eject in time and you blew up in your mech, you were dead. Completely, utterly dead. Your save file was erased, you got a nice little tombstone, get ready to restart as someone else. Yeah, didn't do too well.

However, you always have games like CoD4. Not many war games can tug on your heart strings the way that game does. Really an amazing experience.

 

[sapient]

COD4 is mediocre at best, I didn't see anything new except solioquies about Chernobyl, and they simply didn't work.

A game where you play as a civilian using your brain and limited combat skills or weapons (not Gary Grenadesalot or Captain Runandgun) to escape combat, rather than run into it and get your shit ruined by laservision sporting (insert race that has been villified by war here). A game where you play as the evil side, show it from their perspective (ET:QW did this well, but not deeply) or a game where you affect the politics of war. Sounds good in theory, but it needs a company like Valve or the MGS team behind it to execute it well. Just Cause also had potential, but again Eidos and Avalanche Studios aren't exactly the most brilliant producers.

 

[L.B. Jeffries]

Oof, speaking of X-Com, the point in the game where you have to pick which country is going to get the alien genocide treatment so they'll build a base there was always a rough part. You spend the whole time running such a tight, careful defense and then the game forces you to create a controlled opening.

Brilliant game...one of the few I'd buy if all they did was give it a graphic paint job and put it out on a console.

 

[Mr Wednesday]

*deleted*

 

[stevesan]

Doing this would eliminate fun and replace it guilt for killing. Truthfully I don't really want to play a game that brings human conscience into the equation. In the cut scenes, sure, your character can have his/her moments of "Why?" because it fits with the story but other than that, I would prefer to play a game where I can enjoy being a ruthless killer not regret it.

sorry - my post was clearly too long for you to read. next time i'll make sure to make it shorter so you actually read it all.

 

[stevesan]

Oof, speaking of X-Com, the point in the game where you have to pick which country is going to get the alien genocide treatment so they'll build a base there was always a rough part. You spend the whole time running such a tight, careful defense and then the game forces you to create a controlled opening.

Brilliant game...one of the few I'd buy if all they did was give it a graphic paint job and put it out on a console.

w0rd. although, just to clarify, the game didn't explicitly force you to do it. there was no, "OMG! You have reached the point in the game where the designers think you should make a choice. Pick a country from the list below to sacrifice!" it was just that as you progressed, more and more alien attacks started popping up all over the world. so unless you were really good, there was prolly no way you could deal with them all. and the best thing to do was to just choose a few countries to defend. a great example of interesting choices expressed through pure game mechanics.

 

[CanadianWolverine]

From a game like America's Army I learned if I joined a military and was trained to kill, I would die, easily. Seems kinda weird that if you realize you only had one round and no respawn, you basicly get an idea of what your chances are in a real conflict even if you had training - somewhere very close to nil.

I agree, its about time we had a good and proper X-Com developed with like say, Source Engine as an example. I think there is a ton X-Com glossed over too that could be explored, say, how some people would react to a secret organization that spanned the globe, what might the organization do to sway countries that made contributions, what kinds of affects alien tech would have on economies, making the organization public knowledge vs secretive, and other stuff.

I think some games about war have touched on the subject of propaganda used by militaries though the name of the game slips my mind, perhaps someone else will know. Was it C&C: Generals? ???

 

[Terramax]

So we want an RTS that allows you to select:
Live to fight another day, IE: Run now
Blow up own nuclear plant and live with guilt of killing thousands of innocents

Am I getting this right? Why do we want a war game with moral values, that's just, silly. A game that teaches a child he has the chance to kill millions, and just shrug gives them crazy politicans more ammo.

Agreed. It's pretty much like Hollywood. Look how many films America produces teaching us war is bad (and that the Yanks won the war single handedly) yet that doesn't stop them from stampeding into other countries, up in arms.

Although there may be acceptions. I watched the Yahtzee review on CoD 4 and isn't there a few political statements there?

Also, there's an RTS about saving refugees or something, developed by the UN or something if I'm correct?

 

[Dectilon]

I wouldn't mind a game that made me feel guilty. If someone can truly create a game like that then we'd have the definite answers as to whether games are as good as movies or not. ^^

 

[L.B. Jeffries]

Oof, speaking of X-Com, the point in the game where you have to pick which country is going to get the alien genocide treatment so they'll build a base there was always a rough part. You spend the whole time running such a tight, careful defense and then the game forces you to create a controlled opening.

Brilliant game...one of the few I'd buy if all they did was give it a graphic paint job and put it out on a console.

w0rd. although, just to clarify, the game didn't explicitly force you to do it. there was no, "OMG! You have reached the point in the game where the designers think you should make a choice. Pick a country from the list below to sacrifice!" it was just that as you progressed, more and more alien attacks started popping up all over the world. so unless you were really good, there was prolly no way you could deal with them all. and the best thing to do was to just choose a few countries to defend. a great example of interesting choices expressed through pure game mechanics.

The way I played the game, you had to take over the mind of an alien commander to get the entry codes to the Mars base. The only way to get close to an alien commander was to let them build a base in a country, which meant forcing the country to back out of the X-com alliance. You could only get that to happen by betraying them and letting aliens blow them up for a while.

There was probably a better way though, I dunno. Just a disturbing moment in the game to watch a continent get taken over while you're totally capable of fending them off.

 

[Cooper42]

It's the sort of thing that might be developed by the surge in 'serious games'.

I'd love to see something similar to http://www.globalconflicts.eu/ in regards to the reporting within the Iraq war zone.

America's Army might show consequences for /your/ actions when they go against various conventions of war; in some imaginary world where the Geneva Convention mean squat all. But it's incredibly poor at engaging in any wider issues in regards to conflict other than: American's - wheee! great! Ragheads bad. Kill ragheads. Don't let ragheads kill you. Don't question orders. Good soldier...

 

[werepossum]

America's Army and the real world have similar conventions of war. If anything, the Iraq war currently has much stiffer restrictions than America's Army. The rules of engagement are very tightly defined, leaving the soldiers walking a tightrope between killing someone who is possibly running the roadblock out of fear or ignorance or arrogance - and quite possibly going to prison to do hard labor afterward - and possibly being blown up by a suicide bomber. With no saved games and no respawn this side of heaven. These soldiers are doing a much harder job than actually fighting, they are patrolling city streets knowing the next child who runs up may have a remotely detonated bomb strapped to him, that there may be a sniper on the next rooftop or an IED concealed under the garbage on the side of the road. They deserve your respect. If you cannot respect their sacrifice and yet you don't have the courage of your convictions to meet them on the battlefield - since presumably you side with those who have taken to strapping bombs on children and mentally handicapped women - then at least show them the respect of your silence.

I shudder to think of video games being infused with a social conscience above the very basic level of America's Army, which is the level of ethics I prefer in any game. Don't shoot your squadmates, don't shoot innocent bystanders if you can help it, don't let the bad guys shoot your squadmates or innocent bystanders if you can help it. I don't want to beat up hookers or shoot cops, and although it disturbs me that others do I support their right to do so in a game. But with Hollywood, morals swing between the 10% of heavy-handed, beat-you-over-the-head-do-you-get-it? moral messages, which assumes that I'm even more dim-witted than the writers and directors and actors, and the more usual muddle in which you can't really tell much difference morally between the protagonist and the antagonist because it's considered cool to be nuanced and see only shades of gray. Just as I can't really enjoy a movie in which I have no particular reason to root for the protagonist other than he's being played by a more popular actor and is banging the hot chick character, I can't enjoy games where the protagonist is a car thief or a drug dealer or a hit man. I prefer at least a bit of moral clarity in my games (and my movies), even if it's hip to scoff at such notions today.

And personally I'd find playing as a reporter about as appealing as playing as a running sore on a hooker's buttocks.