[Game] Games & Real War
- Thread starter JackB
- Start date
Nice topic.
Personally, there is obviously a disconnect between real world factions and virtual ones represented in a video game. Do I choose a side based on who was "right" or the "good guys", not really. In video games, I find myself choosing a side based on which sides weapons I do better with. In certain games this will be the "good" side and others the "bad".
I find WWII games to be a bit skewed to answer your question, based on history. I think it's easier, or more complicated, to answer by going into the fantasy realm such as the recently released Killzone 2. The Helghast are portrayed as the "bad" faction that are horrible and war-mongering, that are being invaded by the ISA to assassinate their leader. The ISA are likened to the Allies during WWII and the Helghast the Nazi's, but as you play the campaign you wonder whether they are the bad ones or you, the ISA, are truly the bad guys; similar to the US invasion of Iraq. During war, I think sometimes the line between who is right and wrong is so blurred it can be a very difficult question to answer. Obviously, there are exceptions to this.
Different situations present different perspectives. For instance, playing as the Germans in a WWII game, trying to repel the Russian invasion of your homeland would invoke different feelings than if you were in the boots of the Russians, I believe, regardless of historically who was right or wrong.
I think I'm getting a little wander-y with my post, so I'll wrap it up. Basically, no, I don't think about which side I play and it doesn't affect whether I would buy it or not.
Personally, there is obviously a disconnect between real world factions and virtual ones represented in a video game. Do I choose a side based on who was "right" or the "good guys", not really. In video games, I find myself choosing a side based on which sides weapons I do better with. In certain games this will be the "good" side and others the "bad".
I find WWII games to be a bit skewed to answer your question, based on history. I think it's easier, or more complicated, to answer by going into the fantasy realm such as the recently released Killzone 2. The Helghast are portrayed as the "bad" faction that are horrible and war-mongering, that are being invaded by the ISA to assassinate their leader. The ISA are likened to the Allies during WWII and the Helghast the Nazi's, but as you play the campaign you wonder whether they are the bad ones or you, the ISA, are truly the bad guys; similar to the US invasion of Iraq. During war, I think sometimes the line between who is right and wrong is so blurred it can be a very difficult question to answer. Obviously, there are exceptions to this.
Different situations present different perspectives. For instance, playing as the Germans in a WWII game, trying to repel the Russian invasion of your homeland would invoke different feelings than if you were in the boots of the Russians, I believe, regardless of historically who was right or wrong.
I think I'm getting a little wander-y with my post, so I'll wrap it up. Basically, no, I don't think about which side I play and it doesn't affect whether I would buy it or not.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I am Jewish and I live in Israel. I never had any problem playing RO on neither side, ive been asked if it bothers me to play a soldier of the SS/Wermacht and it really doesnt. Its just a game.. although those realism SS dudes who stage executions ingame really freak me out.
I was in the infantry where part of my job was to train American soldiers before they headed out to Iraq/Afgan, however I do not feel myself affiliated with them (or the west in general) and often feel like I would like to see games where you can see (and play) from the percpective of the sterotypical enemies.
I was in the infantry where part of my job was to train American soldiers before they headed out to Iraq/Afgan, however I do not feel myself affiliated with them (or the west in general) and often feel like I would like to see games where you can see (and play) from the percpective of the sterotypical enemies.
Upvote
0
JackB, two words from me: "America's Army". Not to go off on any politicalish tangent, but yeah, the good guys always win. So we can sleep in pieces.
Upvote
0
Being German I do find myself playing the Germans in RO more frequently than the Russians (though for balancing purposes i usually choose autoselect).
This has nothing to do with political preference: it's simply that due to my larger historical and cultural interest in Germany as compared to Russia, larger media coverage and simply the language barrier, I have a certain interest bias towards the German side. Also I find their weapons more appealing and diverse. This seems to go for many westerners actually, since you usually see a small bias towards the German side in RO even on servers dominated by players from the US.
There's always players who choose one side for political reasons, be they Pseudo-Stalinists or Neo-Nazis. People who express political opinions through games are really stupid.
This has nothing to do with political preference: it's simply that due to my larger historical and cultural interest in Germany as compared to Russia, larger media coverage and simply the language barrier, I have a certain interest bias towards the German side. Also I find their weapons more appealing and diverse. This seems to go for many westerners actually, since you usually see a small bias towards the German side in RO even on servers dominated by players from the US.
There's always players who choose one side for political reasons, be they Pseudo-Stalinists or Neo-Nazis. People who express political opinions through games are really stupid.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Very good question.
As far as WWII games, I will play either side without preference, and as others stated above, I usually choose the team with the fewest members. I will even try to get into it such as playing Russian and typing into text-chat "For Mother Russian and Comrade Stalin!" I mean, it is just a game.
Now I almost exclusively play RO (and its mods) and I don't see that game giving off any messages at all. I do have (because it was a gift) CODWAW that I play about 3 hours a month (with my clan) and I find it particularly annoying that at the end of rounds, Keifer Sutherland voice comes up and says "Alot of good men died today, and all for nothing." Now I am not advocating war, nor am I against it depending on the circumstances, but I find that saying to be an anti-war message, especially in the context of WWII.
I know my son had a game a year or two ago and I can't remember the name, but it was some arcady thing with aliens in a desert. But at the end, the whole thing was controlled by a previous comrade of your soldiers who right before he died, started ranting off this anti-war (and rather political) speech as he lay on the ground. Kinda long winded if you asked me and it annoyed the both of us as it seemed really outa' place in this game.
Does it affect how I play wargames? No, but if I knew ahead of time that the game had a particular message, especially one I don't agree with, it may cause me to not buy it.
As far as WWII games, I will play either side without preference, and as others stated above, I usually choose the team with the fewest members. I will even try to get into it such as playing Russian and typing into text-chat "For Mother Russian and Comrade Stalin!" I mean, it is just a game.
Now I almost exclusively play RO (and its mods) and I don't see that game giving off any messages at all. I do have (because it was a gift) CODWAW that I play about 3 hours a month (with my clan) and I find it particularly annoying that at the end of rounds, Keifer Sutherland voice comes up and says "Alot of good men died today, and all for nothing." Now I am not advocating war, nor am I against it depending on the circumstances, but I find that saying to be an anti-war message, especially in the context of WWII.
I know my son had a game a year or two ago and I can't remember the name, but it was some arcady thing with aliens in a desert. But at the end, the whole thing was controlled by a previous comrade of your soldiers who right before he died, started ranting off this anti-war (and rather political) speech as he lay on the ground. Kinda long winded if you asked me and it annoyed the both of us as it seemed really outa' place in this game.
Does it affect how I play wargames? No, but if I knew ahead of time that the game had a particular message, especially one I don't agree with, it may cause me to not buy it.
Upvote
0
I would say NO, because my favourite wargame is RO, and it's the most neutral wargame I've ever seen, there are no messages at all, its a team domination game without any kind of storyline or dialogue. I just hop in the team with less players and start playing.
well if there is one message in RO, that would be... you have an extremely high chance of dying in the front line, only a suicidal, a fool, or someone who have no choice would go there in real life after playing RO =P
Upvote
0
I tend to pick up side randomly. Usually it is map based (E.G. I find Odessa often more fun as a defender, and Basovka as an attacker), but even that is not always the case.
And it is pretty much the same in other games. I tend to either pick side randomly or somewhat prefer side X on map Y.
And it is pretty much the same in other games. I tend to either pick side randomly or somewhat prefer side X on map Y.
Upvote
0
This might be an interesting article for you to read.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/war-games-article
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/war-games-article
Upvote
0
Reading that makes me wonder how on earth everyone allows people to make more or less selling game about some other war event (note Call of Duties for example) which are practically just shooting ranges with enemies without any brains and not complain about them, but some other game which on the other hand seems to do things non-shooting-range style, it gets huge flames everywhere.
Shooting 'evil' nazis at streets of Stalingrad is fine, such bloody battle being highly glorified more or less, or shooting some random generic russians and terrorists (note CoD4), but seeing 'the good guys' getting beaten in maybe bit more realistic manner and that's suddenly taboo? Talk about hypocrisy.
Shooting 'evil' nazis at streets of Stalingrad is fine, such bloody battle being highly glorified more or less, or shooting some random generic russians and terrorists (note CoD4), but seeing 'the good guys' getting beaten in maybe bit more realistic manner and that's suddenly taboo? Talk about hypocrisy.
Upvote
0
My favourite war-games dont take a stance on who is right or wrong.
Best example is RO, who just shows combat in a realistic way (ie no bunnyjumping etc but an engrossing experience that sucks you in and makes you feel there) where there is no propaganda for either side.
There are just sides and roles to fulfill, and nothing else.
Another example would be Hidden and Dangerous 1 and 2 i think.
There the Germans are not portrayed as evil, just your enemy at hand. And they are not the only ones you face, but you fight the Japanese as well in Burma, all great atmospheric missions that are immersive and feel real without the need of showing Japanese soldiers doing beheadings or whatever.
Brothers in Arms, though not a realistic shooter, does feel authentic but also makes the Germans seem a bit evil more or less.
Not so in the first two games, but in Hell's Highway you see a girl dragged into a barn and being hung there for example, or a girl being shot on the doorsteps of a hospital, stuff like that.
Ofcourse, one doesnt know what these girls did: the one in the barn might have been a resistance member, which was very active in Holland back then. You just dont know, but seeing Germans do such things makes you hate them (though the girl in the barn is a real thing: it actually happened, they got the story from a veteran who is still troubled by it to this day.)
Now not game-related, but it is related in a way.
I want to say something about the book All quiet on the Western Front.
It would have been easy for the writer to say something about the French making them look evil. After all, they were his enemies in the war and he must have seen horrific things, and he has.
But yet all he talks about in the book is how someone in HQ made the French their enemies, while they could have been good friends, and "How could we do this to eachother, comrade? You are a man like me, why do they not tell us and make us kill eachother?"
In the book he just shows war, without really taking sides. He is ofcourse on the German side, but he doesnt make his enemies look evil, just the war and what it makes people do.
This is very important in games as well. Show the horror of war, and dont take sides. All sides do horrific things, but without war, nobody would have. It's a mindtwisting experience that kills off all human emotion just to survive.
Best example is RO, who just shows combat in a realistic way (ie no bunnyjumping etc but an engrossing experience that sucks you in and makes you feel there) where there is no propaganda for either side.
There are just sides and roles to fulfill, and nothing else.
Another example would be Hidden and Dangerous 1 and 2 i think.
There the Germans are not portrayed as evil, just your enemy at hand. And they are not the only ones you face, but you fight the Japanese as well in Burma, all great atmospheric missions that are immersive and feel real without the need of showing Japanese soldiers doing beheadings or whatever.
Brothers in Arms, though not a realistic shooter, does feel authentic but also makes the Germans seem a bit evil more or less.
Not so in the first two games, but in Hell's Highway you see a girl dragged into a barn and being hung there for example, or a girl being shot on the doorsteps of a hospital, stuff like that.
Ofcourse, one doesnt know what these girls did: the one in the barn might have been a resistance member, which was very active in Holland back then. You just dont know, but seeing Germans do such things makes you hate them (though the girl in the barn is a real thing: it actually happened, they got the story from a veteran who is still troubled by it to this day.)
Now not game-related, but it is related in a way.
I want to say something about the book All quiet on the Western Front.
It would have been easy for the writer to say something about the French making them look evil. After all, they were his enemies in the war and he must have seen horrific things, and he has.
But yet all he talks about in the book is how someone in HQ made the French their enemies, while they could have been good friends, and "How could we do this to eachother, comrade? You are a man like me, why do they not tell us and make us kill eachother?"
In the book he just shows war, without really taking sides. He is ofcourse on the German side, but he doesnt make his enemies look evil, just the war and what it makes people do.
This is very important in games as well. Show the horror of war, and dont take sides. All sides do horrific things, but without war, nobody would have. It's a mindtwisting experience that kills off all human emotion just to survive.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Thanks for your input, it's really interesting.
You've raised a point that's been brought up elsewhere - the messages inherent in the way that warfare itself is portrayed in a game.
Do you think that the manner in which warfare is portrayed affects a game's message?
For example, is RO 'anti-war' because it shows how horrible and dehumanising frontline warfare is, or is it pro-war because it depicts the satisfaction gained from a well-aimed headshot?
Likewise, do more 'arcade-y' shooters have a different message about war because in them warfare is portrayed so much differently?
You've raised a point that's been brought up elsewhere - the messages inherent in the way that warfare itself is portrayed in a game.
Do you think that the manner in which warfare is portrayed affects a game's message?
For example, is RO 'anti-war' because it shows how horrible and dehumanising frontline warfare is, or is it pro-war because it depicts the satisfaction gained from a well-aimed headshot?
Likewise, do more 'arcade-y' shooters have a different message about war because in them warfare is portrayed so much differently?
Upvote
0