Would Americans play a game in which the United States is the bad guy?
- Thread starter Li Mu
- Start date
As others have said, plenty of games have some faction of the US government being the bad guys. I just started playing the Division (a friend bought it so I'm playing it with him) and I'm getting a sense that the US government is probably not innocent in this whole thing. The whole concept of the game is that there are super secret deep cover agents living among us just waiting to be activated to fight for the country. That doesn't sound at least a little shady to anyone?
Now, if you're talking the American government is the villain in the same way that Nazi Germany is often the villain, I think that may depend on context. The game's narrative, characters, and general concept would probably play a major factor. If the US government as we know it were the villain, probably not. But if it were some sort of Fascist government that no longer resembles the one we know and tolerate, I think plenty of Americans would get on board with that. It's not like distrust of our own government is foreign to any of us. We're generally suspicious of government as a default. "The fastest way to screw something up is to get the government involved" is a sentiment I have heard on many occasions.
But America is one of the biggest markets in the world. It's probably not a good idea to alienate such a lucrative market share.
Now, if you're talking the American government is the villain in the same way that Nazi Germany is often the villain, I think that may depend on context. The game's narrative, characters, and general concept would probably play a major factor. If the US government as we know it were the villain, probably not. But if it were some sort of Fascist government that no longer resembles the one we know and tolerate, I think plenty of Americans would get on board with that. It's not like distrust of our own government is foreign to any of us. We're generally suspicious of government as a default. "The fastest way to screw something up is to get the government involved" is a sentiment I have heard on many occasions.
But America is one of the biggest markets in the world. It's probably not a good idea to alienate such a lucrative market share.
I've played plenty of games AS one of the "evil" nations, so I don't know why I would have a problem playing a game with some component of the western world as evil.
Cambodia, which was right next door, had a higher rate of death than Vietnam did due to that whole Khmer Rouge thing. So, yes, it could have afforded it. Dragging things out even more than they already were would've been horrible, but it wouldn't have been impossible. Other nations have been mistreated worse than Vietnam and have recovered.PaulH said:
I'm not trying to whitewash the war; I'm trying un-whitewash the the immediate post-war record of the Saigon regime. There are no innocents here.
Which is a different country. You do understand the Vietnamese FOUGHT with the Khmer Rouge at the end of the US occupation, and were responsible for ousting it from power. If somebody is giving me guns when I need them, I'll call them an 'ally' as well. Right up until I don't need them anymore.Veylon said:
If anything, extending the war would have meant the Cambodian genocide might have continued. It goes only to highlight the point that I had; "What exactly would you win?" Do we need to pretend a country can afford a war if it only loses 25% of its population? Hell, there's a good argument that keeping the Communist Vietnamese at higher strength would have represented a far greater Chinese barrier. Given the Vietnamese communists were pro-Chinese and pro-Khmer Rouge, only because of US escalation.
Is it well written with a good story and decent characterization?
Then yes, I'd play the hell out of it. That's the main things I look for in a game.
Is it a shooter but the flags on the side of the enemy vehicles are palette-swapped for US flags?
Then no, because I don't play those games as American either.
Then yes, I'd play the hell out of it. That's the main things I look for in a game.
Is it a shooter but the flags on the side of the enemy vehicles are palette-swapped for US flags?
Then no, because I don't play those games as American either.
The Metal Gear Solid series certainly doesn't portray america as all too great. And the overarching villain is British, I mean the whole reason the Boss defects is to get the philosopher's legacy for america. And then it's always either snake or big boss getting fucked around with by the government in every game afterward. Solid Snake is even reffered to as "America's dirty little secret" on accound of him being a human clone. Which is pretty frowned upon internationally.
You are completely missing the point. My point is that the Cambodians had it worse than the Vietnams and it wasn't impossible for them to rebuild, so it wouldn't have been impossible for the Vietnamese to do the same. I don't care whose side anyone was on.PaulH said:
I'm just going to copypasta what I wrote ... I feel as you conveniently ignoring it is part of the problem.Veylon said:
Cambodia is a nation of 8 million. Completely different situation ... and their government didn't survive much longer either. There is a difference between losing 25% of its population to famine and genocide, and losing 15% of the population to war. Stop pretending otherwise. Much less, stop pretending that losing such collateral is at all maintainable in any protracted military capacity.
The division? Kind of? I mean... government operatives that can pretty much do whatever the hell they want and apparently only answer to the president, all the while shooting looters who are in most cases just standing around. Due process was apparently the first victim of that virus...
Anytime a British person complains about American imperialism or talks about American elitism I reel in pain at the irony of it.Li Mu said:
But yeah, as people have pointed out, America being the bad guy isn't exactly a new concept. Metal Gear's been doing it for a while, and how well do those games sell?
Though, as an American, I get annoyed at games like Uncharted that are the least culturally educated games in existence, where someone's entire personality comes down to their accent. It doesn't help the stereotype that all Americans know nothing about foreign culture, which depending on who you talk can be somewhat true.
I am an American. I would play a game where the United States is the bad guy, but only if there was some nuance to the morality. I tend to shy away from games where morals are black and white with no gray area.
I so wish that East vs West would have been completed. Just look at the trailer, I want it. It was supposed to be a strategy game were you could play any nation during the cold war, and you would've even been able to unleash nuclear armageddon.
I've seen Rockstar mentioned, but I'd specifically like to focus on RDR. Your family is kidnapped by the FBI and you are forced to murder your own former friends in cold blood.
Quick question, is it redundant to use spoilers for old last gen games?
I've seen Rockstar mentioned, but I'd specifically like to focus on RDR. Your family is kidnapped by the FBI and you are forced to murder your own former friends in cold blood.
They even go so far as to form a firing squad and kill your player character during the finale. God, I can't think of anything that made me hate an organization more than that.
Quick question, is it redundant to use spoilers for old last gen games?
Some of us "Muricans" are fortunate enough to be raised by parents who teach their children to see their country's history in a more nuetral, balanced way rather than nurturing blind devotion to their country, or, more pertinently, their government. I am one such person.WinterWyvern said:
I am an American...(Hi, American)...and I would gladly play a game where America is the bad guy.