MEMBER BLOG

shandog137's Blog
PROFILE
Average Blog Rating:

Modern Warfare Games and Artistic Liberty: What side to portray?
Posted on Friday, October 26 2012 @ 13:29:59 Eastern

This member blog post was promoted to the GameRevolution homepage.

So I bashed Medal of Honor: Warfighter for the plethora of bugs needing to be addressed via a day one patch, but, the following day I read an article regarding a terrorist training sequence found in the early stages of the game. In the last edition of Medal of Honor, an uproar was had over the ability to take on the role of terrorist and actually go against US troops in multiplayer. Now this… it made me think of where the line between artistic liberty and social preference intersect.

In order for a war to occur, it tends to need a minimum of 2 distinct groups; in this case, the US military and the militant terrorist groups. Is it appropriate in this age of information to portray only one side of a conflict? What are the benefits? What is the downside? On the one hand, we seek transparency of our government and you have sources like WikiLeaks dumping confidential information onto the public via the internet. This seems to point to a demand by the current generation to utilize technology to provide and take in as much information as possible.

Historically, it was said that history is written by the victor, but with YouTube, the internet, and numerous other forms of technology, can this saying still be applied today? At a time when it is evident from “fact”-checking “fact” checkers that people are keying in on getting the full/”whole” picture, it leaves developers at a bit of an impasse. They know the public wants reality—see Honey Boo Boo, Tru Tv, etc… then burn your eyes out. But how do developers/creators of war games give the whole story if it is socially unacceptable to portray certain facts, regardless of the fact that it’s simply fact?

From the one perspective, I empathize with the stance of "hey, don’t put kids in the shoes of terrorist to shoot US troops in a game I have several family members who serve proudly", but on the other hand, other countries may view this differently. Do you provide country-appropriate content? It reminds me a bit of HomeFront being banned in Korea… and that was pure fiction. I guess it is difficult to understand the need by the current generation for the “whole” truth while, when presented, it is deemed inappropriate.

Make no mistake, I have no sympathy for some jackass terrorist, but I am hard pressed to believe that they don’t have their own “real” story. What happens when you humanize a term associated with such atrocious acts. As a creator of games, are you ever allowed to portray a human/personal side of a terrorist? It reminds me a bit of Breaking Bad and how someone so average can become such a damn monster. It’s a bit of a conundrum for creators as you know the dynamic is there and we all to some extent want to know what made the characters do such a jack assthing, but how do you present this side of the story appropriately... That’s the question.

The opinions expressed here does not necessarily reflect the views of Game Revolution, but we believe it's worthy of being featured on our site. This article has been lightly edited for grammar and image inclusion. It has been submitted for our monthly Vox Pop competition. ~Ed. Nick

Comments

Lok-Nar
Joined: Feb 2012

Posted: Oct 27th, 2012 at 2:59 am
Developers should just make the games that they want to make. We're not all mobsters or in gangs just because we play Grand Theft Auto. Counterstrike let you play both sides and that was a great game. Ultimately, the consumer decides.

0 2

CaptainPicard
Joined: Sep 2010

Posted: Oct 27th, 2012 at 5:42 pm
Counterstrike didnt exactly have a story though...

0 0

pennpsu
Joined: Sep 2010

Posted: Oct 27th, 2012 at 5:59 pm
So, you think that developers are trying to educate the game playing public on the inner workings and motivations of radical groups? Do you have a more nuanced view of terrorists after shooting some wooden targets in a tutorial or playing a taliban fighter in MP? What you have here is a developer trying to show you how to play, and providing an enemy. That's it. The developers needed a relevant enemy for US troops. Does anyone have a better understanding the Nazi regime after playing other call of duty MP matches as Nazi soldiers? If playing as a Taliban fighter against US troops sold more copies then that's what we would be playing. It's not whats acceptable, its a matter of what more people would buy.

0 2

pennpsu
Joined: Sep 2010

Posted: Oct 27th, 2012 at 6:01 pm
Didn't mean to post this under you Lok-Nar. Mobile interfaces are touchy. Most excellent handle BTW.

0 0

shandog137
Joined: Mar 2007

Posted: Oct 29th, 2012 at 9:44 am
"So, you think that developers are trying to educate the game playing public on the inner workings and motivations of radical groups?" Response: No I think they are trying to tell a story but are finding it difficult to present all of the ideas the way they would like based on public/consumer perception. Similar to a Tom Clancy novel. "Do you have a more nuanced view of terrorists after shooting some wooden targets in a tutorial or playing a taliban fighter in MP?" Response: No but it raises important questions for a third party looking in...for example if I walked in on you playing a nazi in a game it may start a dialogue as to why you chose to play that role where as if the option was not there and I walked in and saw you playing an american soldier it's industry norm so a question may not even be raised. It more about perception than education. "If playing as a Taliban fighter against US troops sold more copies then that's what we would be playing. It's not whats acceptable, its a matter of what more people would buy." Response: Agree and disagree if that were the case there would be no new IP as developers would only create and sell based on demand vs novelty.

0 0

bram00
Joined: Jun 2011

Posted: Oct 27th, 2012 at 6:49 am
I would watch Homeland to get a take on a conflicted individual who is a "terrorist" in some people's eyes and yet still garners empathy from the people who watch the show when they see what he has gone through. He is a white, American Marine, who while in captivity in Iraq got close to a Freedom Fighter or Terrorist and his son. He saw this little boy get blown to bits by an American drone and came to hate the people who did it. When he got back to America, he was angry and torn in what to believe.

0 2

oblivion437
Joined: Nov 2006

Posted: Oct 27th, 2012 at 3:25 pm
It is to the studio's credit that they are unwilling to dehumanize enemies. This is a good thing for games which draw on real-world subject matter. The enemies are almost certain to be human beings and their motives complex. It pays credit to the player's intelligence to include antagonists who are intelligent, motivated, and operating on their own sense of justification. Understanding it may be an important component to defeating them. So, I say, if the old-guard keepers of the keys to respectability wish to denigrate a nuanced view of things let them. They'll find those keys fall out of their hands before they know it.

0 2

CaptainPicard
Joined: Sep 2010

Posted: Oct 27th, 2012 at 5:41 pm
Man! this is one of the best damn articles out there. I like how you pose these difficult questions.And i think that it would be awesome to see the story from the other point of view for once. Maybe im just not patriotic enough, but really its kinda one sided in the industry. Its prolly just cause there aint very many taliban game designers lol... My grandparents were Irish immigrants and had alot of ties to the IRA, so i was raised with stories of these "heroes". But to anyone else its just terrorism. Anyway yeah i can totally see the other side in this particular instance. Shandog this was a great post, lol and i wish i could write like you!

0 2

shandog137
Joined: Mar 2007

Posted: Oct 29th, 2012 at 9:53 am
Thanks man. I ponder quite a bit. Everyone has a story to tell it just seems like we focus a bit on one side at times and I was just wondering when the whole story becomes acceptable. War is shitty for both sides and we now empathize with individuals we were once at war with such as the British. Usually it takes a common enemy for the two warring parties to find common ground in the future so not sure if it is even possible but maybe some collectors will arrive and unite us all

0 0

R0ADK1LL
Joined: Jul 2009

Posted: Oct 27th, 2012 at 7:59 pm
I think it would be a great oppotunity to tell some different stories. Just like the Wire showed us both sides of the story with the cops against the drug dealers, rather than being like every other cop show ever made. I don't really play many FPS games, I prefer the story elements & gameplay of RPGs, but I'm interested to play Spec Ops: The Line mainly because they did something different by doing a take on Heart of Darkness. I'm not from the US so I don't personally see a problem with a game where you kill Americans, you get to do that in AC3 don't you? New Zealand actually has soldiers supporting US troops in a number of conflicts but I don't know anyone in the thick of it however I can see that some people would find it pretty offensive that the targets running around in the game could represent their loved ones. No good can come from dehumanising the enemy though, kudos to any developers willing to take the time to develop real real characters on both sides & tell some good stories.

0 2

shandog137
Joined: Mar 2007

Posted: Oct 29th, 2012 at 9:59 am
The Wire was a good example of the two sides of the story. Watching the street boys grow up was crazy and yet so everyday. The reality is that the drug dealer can be a hero and the cop can be a villain only because they are people regardless of what title they hold or to what standard we place on them. It's funny how we get reminders now and then such as Priest scandals and Rampart scandal, political scandals. People will be people no matter.

0 1

sandineyes
Joined: May 2008

Posted: Oct 30th, 2012 at 9:15 am
A story about (ecological) terrorists = Final Fantasy VII. I think as the subject matter is meant to mirror some realistic context more and more, it probably becomes more difficult to develop antagonists with a good backstory or well developed personality. The types of people who would object to US vs Taliban in games would likely see any attempt at humanizing a terrorist through backstory as an attempt to justify their actions, rather than to simply understand them. In either case, such a person would likely prefer to dismiss the actions of a terrorist as those by some evil creature that is less than a human, rather than acknowledge that a person, like any other, can somehow end up doing terrible things.

0 1

D3TH_KLok13
Joined: Sep 2012

Posted: Nov 1st, 2012 at 3:40 pm
Present things the way they are not how you would like them to be. I do not empathize w/terrorists however they're all someone's child or family in general. Terrorist groups don't just pop out of the ground take for example the guerilla militia wars between Serbia & Croatia who have a long history of mutual violence against each other. In summation terrorist groups are usually either political radicals or are created by their geopolitical climate tension internationally. So despite the stigma around playing terrorist groups in video games their motivations are questionable however corporate America funds PMC's (Private Military Corporations) or "SECURITY CONTRACTORS" such as Black Water simply to protect capital investments, such as oil pipelines. All sides should have equal representation regardless of radical actions or views, however this calls into question should video games with this repping of political shades of grey be rated differently?

0 0

BigTruckSeries
Joined: May 2006

Posted: Nov 2nd, 2012 at 12:32 pm
When will there be a game about a young man who decides to join a terrorist group so he can kill Americans and Jews - after he and his family were blown to smithereens by a Predator Drone Strike which was there to kill some other terrorist that he had absolutely no connection to? It takes a NON-WHITE American to see racism and American Militarism when it exists. No White American could faithfully write that story. I have an idea - how about a game similar to Counter Strike where the terrorists have suicide vests they have to detonate in Israeli Markets? How about a map that takes place on the Gaza Strip? American games are about killing russians and arab/muslims and sometimes hispanics if the theme is the mexican drug war (Rainbow Six). when will the Russians or Arabs field a game about things the other way around?

0 0

BigTruckSeries
Joined: May 2006

Posted: Nov 2nd, 2012 at 12:42 pm
I miss the good old days when TERRORISTS looked like STEREOTYPICAL TERRORISTS. Now the "russians" and "arabs" in the game look exactly like you do and many of them have better weapons. Someone explain to me how it is the arabs can call in Helicopter strikes, B2 Bombers and F22s??? IN REALITY, they are fighting with Improvised Explosive Devices CAUSE THEY HAVE NOTHING ELSE. Killing Americans who are trying to take their country's resources under the guise of "9/11" Terrorist attacks. America's foreign policy is RACIST and only breeds more enemies. George Carlin said it best when he said "America is really good at bombing brown people with marginally effective air forces". We never pull that bullshit on China or Russia.

0 0