Games based on wars... really a good idea?

[CoolFunkMan]

I don't know if this is in the right place, so feel free to move it if it's in the wrong place mods. And please bear in mind that this topic is only looking at games from a different perspective, I still love games like I always have.

 

I saw my girlfriend earlier, and one discussion we had (after buying games from GAME) was about games based off real-life wars/disasters. It got me thinking tbh, are these kinds of games actually right? Should they really be made?

 

After all, surely creating accurate representations of these horrific events is disrespectful to those who fought hard, and to those who were killed in these tragedies. And you can also argue that gaming dumbs things down too much. There's no way that games will really capture the true horror of conflict. Sure, graphics and game engines will get more powerful, but that's nothing compared to real warfare/world disasters.

 

I know this topic has probably been done to death already, but what does everyone else reckon?

[theguyfromspark]

I think that if the game is done respectfully to both sides of the conflict and provides plenty of "Oh Shit" moments that actually make the War look dangerous and deadly rather than a friday night in Lazer Quest, games should be allowed to portray real life wars.

[Guest Jordan]

I think its pretty stupid that the word 'nazi' can't even be mentioned in a World War II game...

[Fierce_LiNk]

To be honest, if I had fought in a war, and then found out a game was being made about the whole experience, as a form of entertainment, I would feel quite offended.

[Saminthehat]

I think war games can provide a fun experience, but like you said, they are not the best place to go if you're looking to find out about the true horrors of war. I don't think war games will ever be able to simulate a war properly.

[ViPeR]

I don't think i've seen this discussion come up to be honest. Not in a few years anyway. I remember there being a bit of an outcry when Medal of Honor Frontline came out because of the reenactment of D-Day. It's a difficult argument. Should these conflicts be used as a form of entertainment or just left for history lessons? I think it's probably down to personal preference. I don't think it's as clear cut as you're playing a war game therefore you have no respect for the people who died in those wars. With films it's different as they're purpose is to teach people as well as entertain i.e. Saving Private Ryan.

 

I think it's safe to say the majority of gamers don't play these games out of lack of respect. People who play these games, including myself, just want a taste of what the actual soldiers went through without the danger of actually being shot (lol). They want to understand for themselves what it was like for these people.

[Guest Stefkov]

Could you not say the same about it being made into a film.

Sure it has real people, good visuals and the like in a movie. But you are only watching it.

With games you are the hero of the game. You are there shooting the people. Not just watching like that shot in Saving Private Ryan, on the beaches. (Tom Hanks) gets a shock from a mortar, the camera goes to first person. You hear what he hears and see what he sees.

A game is just like that but all the way through.

[Zell]

To be honest, if I had fought in a war, and then found out a game was being made about the whole experience, as a form of entertainment, I would feel quite offended.

 

Replace the word "game" with the word "film". Would you still be offended?

[Dyson]

I see no reason not to make the games. Without the games, I wouldn't be as interested in the events as I am now.

[Fierce_LiNk]

Replace the word "game" with the word "film". Would you still be offended?

 

With the games, there's a greater sense of prescence. You actually control a character. You're the one who actually goes around doing the shooting, the storming of the bases.

 

That doesn't happen in a film. In a film, despite the fact the film might be focused around a central character, you do not make any decisions. You're merely a bystander. An observer.

 

Would I still be offended? If I was a War Veteran and I felt that they glorified or portrayed the whole thing wrong, then yes, I would be.

[Dyson]

The thing about War Games is they never don't do the real life situation justice. I havn't seen a free-roam WW2 game where you can go around and kill friendlies and get away with it if you're good enough or whatever. You follow a sequence of events that have obviously been seen as realistic enough to go in to the game. The developers will want it to be as realistic as possible (Which is probably why in COD3, they put a lot of miscellaneous storyline from your allied soldiers in, as tensions run higher and higher.)

[Solo]

I dont think there's anything wrong with them. Take the MoH/CoD series for example. Because of those games (ok and maybe Saving Private Ryan) I actually found what happened frightening but interesting, so I looked into it more.

 

They provide a much more entertaining history lesson.

[Oxigen_Waste]

Bring them on. If someone has a problem, boo-hoo, deal with it. One must have the freedom to make games, films, music, etc about whatever one wants! That's what freedom of speech is about!

[ZeldaFreak]

To be honest, if I had fought in a war, and then found out a game was being made about the whole experience, as a form of entertainment, I would feel quite offended.

 

See I see things slightly different - If I had fought in a war and found out a game was being made about the whole experience I would be flattered.

 

This is because if people forget about the war you fought in then all the pain & suffering will be forgotten. And I find that far more disrepectful than having it as a form of entertainment. As by that logic there shouln't be any films based on real life wars, plus you must remember it depends on the entertertainment medium & how realistic it is/was to the real thing.

[Chris the great]

its certainly an interesting topic. the gamer/artistic side of me says that playing a game that portrays the envents with a degree of accuracy and respect is no diffrent from watching a film on the war.

 

but then a side of em says its also turning the subject of war into one of fun, i certainly rmember how much fun it was in frontline when the tank burst through the wall and i franticly tried to destroy it.

 

films can be made that arnt fun, the pianist being a good example, ahrrowing and utterly respectfull, offering both horror of mans crulety and examples of heorism and kindness, i dont think ive seen a gamer that hasnt tried to be fun.

 

if it was my war, id be offended, having to kll a person isnt somthing that you can brush aside, you cant really expect to undersand the horror of war, if some kid was saying how cool it was to getin the action, were id seen men, friends and allies killed, and lets face it, dying isnt glamerous, beening shot, having your insides pulled out of your back by a bullet, your brains scattered to the wind, its not like a movie.

 

still, it must be said, many games companies employ reality chackers, men who were there who make sure the game dosent leave the relms of reailty.

[Flaight]

I see war gaming is an extension to little kids running around with toy guns (or their hands as guns) making noises and shooting at each other from behind trees in a park. I don't see it as much of a problem generally.

 

But, one thing I worry sometimes is whether war games glamourize a war. It's horrible, painful and cause indiscriminate suffering to all. That's the truth of war. War games don't put that across so they can be misleading?

[Aimless]

With games you are the hero of the game.

That pretty much sums up the problem of war games. If you're playing a game you want to be the coolest character in the room; it's basic wish-fulfillment. And you are essentially invincible. If you die you just reload the latest checkpoint, and you're not going to be thinking about all the soldiers that died, you'll be thinking how annoying the game is. If you're going to take on this subject matter I think there's an obligation to do it justice, and I don't think making a corridor shooter which Nazis does that.

 

If I were making a game based on WWII I'd set some of it in the trenches. I'd give you a trench buddy, someone to show you around your literal hole in the ground. He'd tell you a bit about himself: he had been studying at Oxford before the call out, wanting to become a vetinary nurse when he got back to England; his dad was a butcher, but he'd always preferred animals in the fields rather than hung up on a rack; he had a girl called Jenny back home, although they'd only be seeing one another a month before he was sent off; he misses her a lot, and lots of the other soldiers rib him about it. I'd give it some time, let you get to know know him during your time in the trenches. Then I'd kill him. No glamour, no ceremony, just a stray bullet that leaves him gasping on the floor with fear in his eyes. Your captain squats down beside him and takes the dying soldier's hand before putting a bullet in his head. "Punctured lung," he says, "nothing we could do for him."

 

Maybe you think that's a bit overdone, but there's plenty of other things that could stop war games from being the target shoots they basically are. Show the injured, show the dying. And show the innocent and how they suffer. Make you shoot deserters, have characters deranged by shellshock take their own lives. Take away your hope, take away your guns.

 

Maybe these things aren't 'fun', but if that's all you think games can be then I think you're selling the medium short. And currently the medium is doing so itself; don't give them Hollywood, give them war.

[Gaijin von Snikbah]

Well, if played as a terrorist in the game 11 September it might be more offending than playing a firefighter. Most war games however puts you on the side of good or righteous for some reason... From a business perspective that might be the best idea. Dont want the mob breathing down your neck.

 

But youre asking if games based on disasters is morally right. I dont see why not. People love telling stories about crazy stuff. A game is no different than a story. Perhaps its the buyers of these games that are immoral instead of the makers.

[Supergrunch]

Games based on wars like this have always seemed wrong to me, as it's just too close to something real.

[martinist]

Medevil and Rome Total War FTW