Why can't i play Nazi's?

[Yeager942]

We have all seen the many many MANY WWII games in which we play as either the allies or the sovjets. But why are there so few games in which i can play as the Nazi's?

The ethical/political discussion aside, war is hell, for both sides. The Allies weren't fighting demons, the Axis suffered a great deal as well. And i think it's about time we gave Hans in the trench a little bit more of a human face.

I agree that I would like to play on the German side of WWII, but a game where you shoot Russian/British/American soldiers just won't sell.

 

[Ygfi]

We have all seen the many many MANY WWII games in which we play as either the allies or the sovjets. But why are there so few games in which i can play as the Nazi's?

The ethical/political discussion aside, war is hell, for both sides. The Allies weren't fighting demons, the Axis suffered a great deal as well. And i think it's about time we gave Hans in the trench a little bit more of a human face.

pologies if it's been said but NO. playing as NAZIs would always be a bad idea.... actually, scrap that... i think the NAZIs should have been on the front lines, taking the bullets them selves.. but you won't see it for the same reason you won't see any of the {whatever party the allies had that the time}s fighting. it wasn't them. wars are faught by soldiers, not bloody politicians.
however, i'm all for games where you play as whermatch or PE.. or japaneese.
after all, soldiers are soldiers. and it would be much more fun i think too. as a jap, finding a place to ambush from as a group of yanks blunder foolishly into the jungle. or as germans, having tanks on my side that arn't beaten to stupidity with a nerf bat (god forbid a german tank one shot a sherman, or deflect a few rounds in a video game). and it would save me always having to look for the gun i want on dead guys.
also, why are there so few 'nam games? is it 'cause the yanks got the bum's owned (first to fire only 1/10) or for other reasons? it's be great jungle-stalking; i love the intensity of hunter v. hunter.

We have all seen the many many MANY WWII games in which we play as either the allies or the sovjets. But why are there so few games in which i can play as the Nazi's?

The ethical/political discussion aside, war is hell, for both sides. The Allies weren't fighting demons, the Axis suffered a great deal as well. And i think it's about time we gave Hans in the trench a little bit more of a human face.

"World War II casualty statistics vary greatly. Estimates of total dead range from 50 million to over 70 million."

+

"The start of the war is generally held to be September 1, 1939, with the German invasion of Poland"

-> I think I'll stick to playing on the other side. Whether or not the individual soldiers held the views of their regime you would be required to follow orders handed down by senior Nazi officers.

Are you really saying you'd like to be in the boots on the enemies of democracy, gunning down [insert Allied country here] soldiers?

Germany and Japan were the aggressors in the conflict (Italy is complicated), there is no grey line. If you compare the war crimes of the two sides the difference is obvious.

Death rates of POWs held by Axis powers

* Chinese POWs held by Japan: > 99% (only 56 survivors at the end of the war)
* U.S. and British Commonwealth POWs held by Germany: ~4% [65]
* Soviet POWs held by Germany: 57.5% [67]
* Western Allied POWs held by Japan: 27% [68]

[edit] Death rates of POWs held by the Allies

* German POWs in East European (not including the Soviet Union) hands 32.9%[67]
* German soldiers held by Soviet Union: 15-33% (14.7% in The Dictators by Richard Overy, 35.8% in Ferguson[67])
* Japanese POWs held by Soviet Union: 10%
* German POWs in British hands 0.03%[67]
* German POWs in American hands 0.15%[67]
* German POWs in French hands 2.58%[67]
* Japanese POWs held by U.S.: relatively low, mainly suicides according to James D. Morrow[69] or according to Ulrich Straus high as many prisoners were shot by front line troops.[48]

firstly, the germans weren't the enemies of democracy, they were the victims of dictatorship. (USSR was much the same from what i remember). i won't comment on japan because i really don't know what was going on over there at the time.
most germans were against the NAZIs but it's a little hard to explain how the whole thing happened without bringing up a lot of phychology, so i won't. playing as germans would mean simply, you go to war as a solider and carry out your missions.

secondly, if i were you, i'd not be flashing around unsourced statistics. theyre v. likely to be a load of shite when it comes to accuracy. the violations or War crimes was on the most part, by america. (hiroshima and nagasaki ring a bell?). besides, most war crimes on the german side (i think) were commited by the NAZIs (SS). i really don't think this comes into a soldiers job.

 

[Mullahgrrl]

I think the last time Hitler was included in a game was Command and Conquer Red Alert.

Correction: The last time Hitler was in a game was Hearts of Iron 3, which came out a few days ago.

Unless you play the german version of the game. the one without hitler.

 

[rossatdi]

firstly, the germans weren't the enemies of democracy, they were the victims of dictatorship. (USSR was much the same from what i remember). i won't comment on japan because i really don't know what was going on over there at the time.
most germans were against the NAZIs but it's a little hard to explain how the whole thing happened without bringing up a lot of phychology, so i won't. playing as germans would mean simply, you go to war as a solider and carry out your missions.

secondly, if i were you, i'd not be flashing around unsourced statistics. theyre v. likely to be a load of shite when it comes to accuracy. the violations or War crimes was on the most part, by america. (hiroshima and nagasaki ring a bell?). besides, most war crimes on the german side (i think) were commited by the NAZIs (SS). i really don't think this comes into a soldiers job.

The figures are from wiki, all sourced at the bottom. When it comes to unsourced, what is this based on? "most germans were against the NAZIs".

Wiki on Nazi Germany, sourced from there: "After the July elections of 1932, the Nazis were the largest party in the Reichstag, with 230 seats."

Although there was resistance to the Nazi rule in Germany it doesn't appear to have been terribly large, certainly poorly organised: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Resistance. I'm certainly not blaming ordinary Germans for killing jews but its not the country was unwillingly crushed under the boots of the SA. There was one public protest about the deportation of jews. One.

 

[PhiMed]

Well I guess my English dictionary is bad. What does "to empathize" mean then? Cuz I thought it meant what you stated (The first is by...). You and I want the same, immersion. I was just trying to point out that THIS PARTICULAR immersion is made difficult by a "taboo on evil".

Yes, there are games in which you can be evil. But there is a huge difference in something that is entirely fictional and something that is based on something that was once very real. You might even have a grandfather/ grandmother who survived the Holocaust and who's story you've heard. Although WWII was more than 60 years ago...it's legacy survives to this day. Denying the Holocaust is a huge taboo as has been confirmed recently...well..what kind of news coverage will a game get that allows you to play as the Nazi's (and probably execute some historically accurate atrocities)?

As regards the human condition: drop the word Nazi and wait for a reaction. Most people are conditioned by society to respond in the likes of: Nazi = bad. It's a reflex-like shortcut, cancelling out conscious "in-depth" thought. We have lots of those. Sometimes they are handy: red light = stop/ danger/ attention required, green light: go on, safe, everything is in order.

But when it gets complicated/ abstract that's when they can cause serious "damage": what does "fighting for freedom" mean? Sounds good right? Well some of the worst atrocities (yes, I like this word in human history were conducted under the flag of freedom, and are still conducted this very day. But who wants to be bored by a long story when there are so many obligations and activities in life?

It's funny how you've made almost a psychological profile from a general statement (Human beings think a lot less than they think they do) and felt the need to show me your intellectual prowess. Let's just say...you're special...I'm special..everybody happy. Deal?

I'm curious though...do you acknowledge that there is a distinction between "the common man" (plebians) and the aristocrat/ elite? And if it truly exists...why does it offend?

I don't understand your statement about empathy. Perhaps if that word or any of its forms had made an appearance in your original post it would make more sense to me. I'm not trying to be a smartass. Honestly, I'm just looking for some clarification as to what point you were trying to make.

On the topic of immersion, you're correct that the subject matter makes it a difficult task to get the player to accept the game world. The fact that it is (sort of) nonfiction may play a part in this, but only because the people your character kills are archetypes representative of people who actually existed. In addition, the entire concept of a war game rests on the player adopting a sort of warrior role. The concept of the warrior rests on the fact that acts society teaches us to shun are acceptable if undertaken for the greater good. If we don't believe the cause to be just, and in fact sympathize with the opposition, what's the point?

Where I think we fundamentally disagree is that you seem to be making the point that the developers WANT to tell this story, but are afraid because of public perception, whereas my position is that they realize that effectively telling such a story and making it an enjoyable experience is beyond their capabilities at this point. There are plenty of games with a great deal of exposition and excellent storytelling. Many are successful in doing what would be necessary for this game: convincing us to want to do unpleasant things that are necessary to succeed. Most of them fall into the category of RPGs or some form of hybrid, but they do exist. If developers ever discover a way to tell a story of that scale and complexity in an action game without using feces as mortar to hold the game together, then maybe we'll see a WWII game from the German perspective.

I apologize if you feel I was psychoanalyzing you based solely on your post. It wasn't my intention to make any statement about you as a person, just your comment. It still strikes me as the type of goofy truthiness that Dr. Phil might spout, but everyone has their moments, good and bad. I do find it ironic, though, that you again do the very thing which you condemn when you say I'm creating a psychiatric profile based on your statement, then essentially accuse me of being a narcissistic snob based on my statement. Granted, you had more material to work with, but at least step out of your glass house before you start chucking psychoanalytic rocks.

 

[Spartan Bannana]

Thing is, you can't set the Ethnic/Political discussion aside. The only reason CoD5 allowed us to play as the soviets is because we, as a country, and we, as they allied forces set aside our differences to bring down a greater evil. The specific nazi soldiers may not have been evil people themselves, but whether they fought by choice or were forced to, the issue still stands that they were fighting for a slew of awful ideas, in the name of a terrible man.

 

['Stache]

Um...because Nazism is a moral abomination which mandates mass killings and violent expansionism? Because the Nazis were the clear aggressors in WWII? Because playing as a Nazi would require you to gun down Allied troops on the orders of high ranking Nazi officials?

 

[DanielPowell33]

Who wants to play the losing side?

 

[Robert632]

because there saving that bit of "inovation" for a little while longer.

 

[Dorian Cornelius Jasper]

We have all seen the many many MANY WWII games in which we play as either the allies or the sovjets. But why are there so few games in which i can play as the Nazi's?

I've crashed so many planes on the Allies as a German in El Alamein that I don't know how to respond to that.

(Battlefield 1942.)

And anyway, portraying the Nazis as sympathetic in a single-player game would dig up too many emotions from the public, I'd think. It's too soon. Wait another generation or two.

There is a difference between Nazi and German soldier and while I agree with you that Nazi's and terrorists are fuckheads so were the Russians, I mean the things Russians did in the war are horrible and lets not forget the mass murderers that are the Americans(atomic bomb) but yet we constantly play as them, slaughtering people by the thousand.

The atomic bombs killed far less people, even including radiation aftereffects, than German concentration camps or the Japanese occupation of just about any given chunk of eastern, southeastern, or Pacific Asia.

(Or the Soviet, er, anything. But they were allies at the time so there's kind of an embarrassment with bringing them up.)

America slaughtered people by the thousands while others were slaughtering people by the millions. At worst, we were the lesser evil.

 

[demotivational fail]

Therefore, the losing side was composed entire of baby-stomping child molesters.

Baby stomping child molestors? I feel like they wouldn't stomp the babies before.... Nevermind I don't have the heart to say it.

 

[Mullahgrrl]

Um...because Nazism is a moral abomination which mandates mass killings and violent expansionism? Because the Nazis were the clear aggressors in WWII? Because playing as a Nazi would require you to gun down Allied troops on the orders of high ranking Nazi officials?

Actually that sounds like a winning gameplay formula.

 

[Bocaj2000]

I can see what he's saying. Maybe not play as an SS Nazi, but as a drafted private. As the game progresses he learns more about what's going on. Depending on choices, you can die in Dresdin, Russia, or in an attempt to kill Hitler.

The developer can involve emotional problems, hard decisions, moral issues, and self loathing.

There you go! A good game that is deep and not racist.

 

[Jenkins]

i think it's about time we gave Hans in the trench a little bit more of a human face.

I agree, both sides of my family fought for the Nazi regime, and media like "Inglorious Bastards" makes me want to strangle the writers, I can guarantee most of the Nazi soldiers were either indoctrinated ot did not want to fight for the regime at all, but rather were forced.

I hope you realize that that movie is not supposed to be taken seriously, its MEANT to be over the top.

 

[hippykiller]

We have all seen the many many MANY WWII games in which we play as either the allies or the sovjets. But why are there so few games in which i can play as the Nazi's?

The ethical/political discussion aside, war is hell, for both sides. The Allies weren't fighting demons, the Axis suffered a great deal as well. And i think it's about time we gave Hans in the trench a little bit more of a human face.

you can play as the Nazis in COD:world at war.

 

[SultanP]

I think it's just one of those places where companies just don't want to go.

Maybe once we see the passing of the last WW2 survivors, but until then? Nah. Same reason we don't have any games about escaping from concentration camps and so forth.

There is one, well, don't know whether war prisoner camps count, but if they do, there is Prisoner of War.

 

[SnowCold]

How about this, at the start of the game a some guy pops up on the screen and say:"Ok, in this game, you play as the nazis, this doesn't mean here at (developer company) we think the nazis were right, it's just that we though it would be intersting to see their side of the battled field, so don't complain about us being nazis, espacially you Fox new!"

 

[Ygfi]

The figures are from wiki, all sourced at the bottom. When it comes to unsourced, what is this based on? "most germans were against the NAZIs".

Wiki on Nazi Germany, sourced from there: "After the July elections of 1932, the Nazis were the largest party in the Reichstag, with 230 seats."

Although there was resistance to the Nazi rule in Germany it doesn't appear to have been terribly large, certainly poorly organised: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Resistance. I'm certainly not blaming ordinary Germans for killing jews but its not the country was unwillingly crushed under the boots of the SA. There was one public protest about the deportation of jews. One.

right, even if the source is right, i'm sure there's no realy way to accurately measure war crimes. if we're going by civilian deaths, i suspect america is the highest casualty rate.

and just because the NAZI party had the largest number of seats does not mean they had the majority of public support. a lot of corruption was happening around then. (wasn't it made a drime to be a member of the opposing faction anyway?)

and the resistence to the NAZIs was low for many reasons. and it wouldn't "Appear" unless people were willing to get themselves killed just to protest.
quite simply put, when it comes down to us vs. them, and being them gets you killed and us gets you treated more like a proper human, you go with us.
a gun to your head will generally stop any resistance. heres a hypothetical: i've got a gun, you've got... a rock. i tell you that if you throw the rock at some other guy, i'll give you some cake; but if you throw the rock at me, i'll f***ing kill you.
tell me what you do with the rock?
and public protest was asking to be shot. i'm not going to explain it more than this because it'll involve digging up phychological stuff.