Political correctness in games

johnny_ultimate

Was reading an article about the politics in games such as GRAW and Rainbow Six (basicially any game Tom Clancy puts his name to) the other day, and how their stories are usually offensively pro-American military. GRAW, for example, has a strong anti-Mexican vibe running throughout.
This is one thing that has always put me off playing these team based combat games, and WW2 games for that matter. Feel almost bad playing these otherwise great games with such unsettling and unagreeable political undertones running throughout. There must be of course a way of dealing with this.
Any thoughts or reflections?

TheAlmightyArse

I feel much the same way. There's a healthy detachment shooting up zombies and demons, or even comedy Nazis as some fictitious hero, but playing as chisled-jawed US troops slaughtering peasant militia, carving up Vietnam and being the "good guys" in questionable, real-life conflicts leaves quite a bit of distaste.

The best way around this is to replace all enemys in all games with punks, clowns, ravers, cowboys, dominatrices and vaudeville. Vive le TimeSplitters.

jonski

johnny_ultimate wrote:

There must be of course a way of dealing with this.

Yeah , don't think about it , play it for what it is , a game , a source of entertainment . I think the whole political correctness thing is gone more than a bit overboard .

TheAlmightyArse

jonski wrote:

Yeah , don't think about it , play it for what it is , a game , a source of entertainment .

Yeah, it's a game, but games often have context and narrative that make up a large part of the experience. Would you be comfortable playing a game about lynching, terrorising and murdering black people, set in the Southern US states? Even if it was solidly designed with excellent play mechanics, would you really not be affected by the subject matter?

johnny_ultimate

jonski wrote:

Yeah , don't think about it , play it for what it is , a game , a source of entertainment . I think the whole political correctness thing is gone more than a bit overboard .

Again, think this is missing the point somewhat. A source of entertainment it may be, but my entertainment is seriously limited when I am playing a situation that I morally object to. As I have said, many of these games have gameplay vastly superior to many of their more objective peers - but when my faceless character or team-mates yell out in pleasure once they kill the real-life bad guys, my sour receptors flair right up.
These games my teach values to many players. IMO, these pro real-life combat values are the incorrect ones to be preaching.

1huge1

sure the same can be said about most war movies, sadly people buy into them but people with a bit of common sense will realise the americans wern't all saints in vietnam etc

humanji

johnny_ultimate wrote:

Again, think this is missing the point somewhat. A source of entertainment it may be, but my entertainment is seriously limited when I am playing a situation that I morally object to. As I have said, many of these games have gameplay vastly superior to many of their more objective peers - but when my faceless character or team-mates yell out in pleasure once they kill the real-life bad guys, my sour receptors flair right up.
These games my teach values to many players. IMO, these pro real-life combat values are the incorrect ones to be preaching.

And are you also the type of person who plays Doom and then goes on a killing spree in a school? There is a difference between games and reality and people can tell the difference. Playing these games doesn't change your beliefs and they aren't trying to. If you've a problem with them then play something else. There's so much to choose from, that all tastes are covered.

TheAlmightyArse

humanji wrote:

And are you also the type of person who plays Doom and then goes on a killing spree in a school? There is a difference between games and reality and people can tell the difference. Playing these games doesn't change your beliefs and they aren't trying to. If you've a problem with them then play something else. There's so much to choose from, that all tastes are covered.

The whole thing about games inciting violence is a completely different topic. The situation here is much more akin to propaganda film.

Games can present cheap, violent thrills. And that's okay. Games aren't real. But some games use subjects that are real. And once real ideals are introduced and, as is often the case, trivialised or abused to acheive cheap, violent thrills, of course it can be distasteful.

Blowfish

1huge1 wrote:

sure the same can be said about most war movies, sadly people buy into them but people with a bit of common sense will realise the americans wern't all saints in vietnam etc

The problem is that there are an incredible number of people who do lack common sense, and let that type of thinking affect them.

Its amazing how many people buy into the 'its our duty to fight for our country' crap.

johnny_ultimate

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

Games can present cheap, violent thrills. And that's okay. Games aren't real. But some games use subjects that are real. And once real ideals are introduced and, as is often the case, trivialised or abused to acheive cheap, violent thrills, of course it can be distasteful.

QFT.
The likes of Doom are completely removed from reality. Much more people would be able to distinguish that from the games I mentioned above, games which are firmly rooted in questionable reality.
And Doom has absolutely no politics involved. Tis the politics of these games that are appaling, not the violence etc.. If this were a games and violence thread, I would be on the pro-violence side, no doubt.

steviec

I don't see the problem with games like GRAW. Taking GRAW specifically, you're essentially fighting criminals and murderers("terrorists"), who happen to be Mexican. You're not fighting the Mexican army and you're not fighting Mexican civilians, in fact there's sections where you rescue Mexican civilians and a section where you escort the Mexican president. And the same is true of most games of this ilk.

I think this is more a case of 'I object to playing as an American soldier because I hate them' than 'I object to doing morally questionable things'

Do you refuse to play games like GTA where you actually do go about killing civilians? How about the civilization games? Isn't it morally questionable to try and build your empire and take over other ones? Or is that ok because your empire isn't American?

I dunno, this just seems more like an anti-American thing than anything to do with actual game content.

Blowfish

steviec wrote:

I dunno, this just seems more like an anti-American thing than anything to do with actual game content.

Its more of a fear that american made games that constantly portray other countries to be their enemies will affect the beliefs of the people playing them.

It may exist, but i've yet to see a game where the terrorists are American.

[edit] And I do refuse to play GTA actually.

Sand

Perhaps in such games, the squad should stop now and again and debate radical political idelogies and theories, resolve that theyre sick of serving as slaves of their capitalist overlords, raise the black banner of anarchism and storm the white house to defeat the *real* enemy.

Or you could just not buy the game if it bothers you.

steviec

Blowfish wrote:

Its more of a fear that american made games that constantly portray other countries to be their enemies will affect the beliefs of the people playing them.

But that's the point. The game specifically mentioned is GRAW. You fight people who happen to be from Mexico in this game. But you're working with the Mexican authorities and one of the main events in the story involves you rescuing the Mexican president who's being held hostage. How does this portray Mexico as your enemy?

If there was a game where you played as an Irish soldier and you were working with the American authorities to help rescue the American president from an American criminal, would that mean America are our enemies?

The bad guys in these games aren't the army of another country, they are criminals/terrorists/whatever you want to call them. They have to be from somewhere. In GRAW, it happens to be Mexico.

jonski

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

Would you be comfortable playing a game about lynching, terrorising and murdering black people, set in the Southern US states?

Obviously not , but then I wouldn't have bought the game in the first place .

johnny_ultimate wrote:

my entertainment is seriously limited when I am playing a situation that I morally object to.

Well if you morally object to it would you not be better off not buying it in the first place ?

The original poster was talking about political undertones within games , well it's a fact that the big bad Americans won most of the conflicts they were involved in , they also make a lot games , they are also quiet patriotic . When I stop playing a game I don't let it effect my own thinking on past or present subject matters . I believe that most other people are the same .

johnny_ultimate

steviec wrote:

But that's the point. The game specifically mentioned is GRAW. You fight people who happen to be from Mexico in this game. But you're working with the Mexican authorities and one of the main events in the story involves you rescuing the Mexican president who's being held hostage. How does this portray Mexico as your enemy?

If there was a game where you played as an Irish soldier and you were working with the American authorities to help rescue the American president from an American criminal, would that mean America are our enemies?

The bad guys in these games aren't the army of another country, they are criminals/terrorists/whatever you want to call them. They have to be from somewhere. In GRAW, it happens to be Mexico.

But the game portrays Mexico as country of political turmoil and powerful terrorist factions, which to the best of my admittedly limited knowledge has little base in reality, but is portrayed as such. By helping out the President, you are simply helping democracy prevail.
If it comes across as an Anti-American issue, it is simply because it is a predominatly American problem - of the other countries producing mainstream games this is not the case. If for example, a game was released in which you played as fundamentalists or Iraqi soldiers fighting Americans in a real life combat situation, I would be be arguing the same points.
On your questions of morals, I have regularly been unhappy playing certain moments in the GTA series. I think they're great games - as I do with GRAW - but the criminal element does put me off. Which is why I enjoyed Canis Canem Edit so much - that great gameplay, but with a less objectionable story, and the gameplay still intact.
Other mediums have moved on from one dimensional portrayls of politics. The likes of Babel, or Syriana in films have shown both sides of the stories. My main point is simple - if games insist on tackling politics, could they not do it in a mature way? If - like many have pointed out - you simply ignore these issues, there will be no room for advancement, and games will simply stick to these one sided portrayls. Its not as harmless an issue as some would suggest. Everyone who has posted so far is intelligent enough to not recognise these portrayls as fully realistic. They don't let it effect them. But there are others who wont question it at all.

bizmark

Every day i lose more and more respect for humanity and hope for the future :rolleyes:

humanji

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

And that's okay. Games aren't real. But some games use subjects that are real. And once real ideals are introduced and, as is often the case, trivialised or abused to acheive cheap, violent thrills, of course it can be distasteful.

You mean like tv? As I said, people are (or at least should be) smart enough to be able to tell that these games are not real. The games that are being mentioned, GRAW and the like, have a basis in reality (although, do I have to point out that they are actually set in the future?) and take elements of real events and situations to emerse the player more effectively (it's easier to associate with things you know than things you don't). These story elements add to the game, that's all they're there for. Not to brainwash us into waving little american flags.

That's why I brought up the point of the Doom games causing violence etc., it's jsut the same excuse, thinking that games cause people to change.

steviec wrote:

I don't see the problem with games like GRAW. Taking GRAW specifically, you're essentially fighting criminals and murderers("terrorists"),

Actually, in the new GRAW, from what I got of the plot, you're trying to stop Mexican freedom fighters who want to stop the US taking control of their country. I haven't finished it yet, so I'm not sure if there is some hidden plot twist that changes this, but that's it so far.

It seems very immoral, but then again, so is GTA.

Sand

But the game portrays Mexico as country of political turmoil and powerful terrorist factions, which to the best of my admittedly limited knowledge has little base in reality, but is portrayed as such.

Well, there are grounds for portraying violence in Mexican society and powerful paramilitary groups - see this example which cites gangs duking it out with heavy machineguns, grenades and bazookas which arent typical of low level crime tbh.

thebman

Sand wrote:

Perhaps in such games, the squad should stop now and again and debate radical political idelogies and theories, resolve that theyre sick of serving as slaves of their capitalist overlords, raise the black banner of anarchism and storm the white house to defeat the *real* enemy.

Or you could just not buy the game if it bothers you.

I'd buy this game!

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

Yeah, it's a game, but games often have context and narrative that make up a large part of the experience. Would you be comfortable playing a game about lynching, terrorising and murdering black people, set in the Southern US states? Even if it was solidly designed with excellent play mechanics, would you really not be affected by the subject matter?

I'd get this game assuming it was supposed to be a politically incorrect joke the whole way through.

Seriously they are just games. If the story line is that stupid, you should be able to laugh at how ridiculous it is. They are fictional story lines in the vast majority of games even if they are wars that happened that are used as the location for the game.

I don't get why anyone would take it so seriously. Those games story lines have the effort and intelligence of a Die Hard movie. If it seems pro American that's probably because anti-American games don't sell well in America and it is a huge market for computer games.

TheAlmightyArse

jonski wrote:

Obviously not , but then I wouldn't have bought the game in the first place .

Exactly. It's a brilliant game, yet you wouldn't buy it because of the highly questionable narrative concept. And yet you say this:

jonski wrote:

Yeah , don't think about it , play it for what it is , a game , a source of entertainment .

Do you see? The political and moral leanings of a game are important, even though it's just a source of entertainment.

humanji wrote:

You mean like tv?

Yes, just like TV. See: the travesty that is Fox News.

humanji wrote:

These story elements add to the game, that's all they're there for.

So why is it so strange to think they might add something undesirable?

humanji

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

Yes, just like TV. See: the travesty that is Fox News.

Actually the point I was making is that tv, along with movies, have taken away the impact of the harsh realities of the world. Just take the example of Bob Geldhof showing the world the starvation in Africa back in the eighties, to nowadays, when people just change the channel. But it's not just extreme images that people have been numbed to, it's also the politics involved. It's like a mass sense of apathy and people just look past it.

And anyway, is it so surprising that an american game is america biased? Would you expect an Irish made game to portray the Irish as violent, drunken leprechauns? (although that actually sounds like a funny idea for a game, now that I think about it ).

TheAlmightyArse wrote:

So why is it so strange to think they might add something undesirable?

Who says they don't?

Doom says you're safe from the demons of hell as long as you have big guns.
GTA says you can use violence to get to the top of the food chain.
Pacman says that popping pills and chasing ghosts is good.

It's just a story.

stevenmu

johnny_ultimate wrote:

if games insist on tackling politics, could they not do it in a mature way?

Personally I don't believe these games are tackling political issues. At their core, Ghost Recon and Rainbow 6 are tactical simulaters (altough the more recent incarnations have trended towards a more arcade-ish style). Their aim is to present the player with a tactical scenario which the player must defeat. The story is simply there to provide a reason for those scenarios and to some extent to give the player a consistent goal and a sense of a larger achievment at the end, for those who go for that sort of thing. The story is simply a quick and simple piece of fiction to give the player a believeable reason to be shooting people in a particular place, it is not attempting to tackle political issues, I actually read an interview before with a developer from Red Storm Entertainment about this very issues, and they basically said that they decide what kind of locations they want and then try to match that to a real world location where it's not likely to cause huge offense.

They also have to have the story lines present vaguely realistic situations, for eg. military special forces units are far more likely to be used fighting foreign terrorist units abroad than to be fighting local terrorists at home. On the other hand, like in SWAT 4, police forces are more likely to be fighting native terrorists on home soil. In GRAW it simply makes sense for the Ghosts to be fighting abroad because that's what military special forces units do.

Fanny Cradock

Americas Army is a classic example of a recruitment/ unashamed propaganda tool. As far as I remember you have to go through several in game exams - i.e. virtual soldier training - that focus on aspects of the army. In game you will always appear as US soldiers and the enemy (other online players) will appear as middle east terrorist types. They in turn see you as middle eastern terrorists and themselves as as USMC.

steviec

Fanny Cradock wrote:

Americas Army is a classic example of a recruitment/ unashamed propaganda tool. As far as I remember you have to go through several in game exams - i.e. virtual soldier training - that focus on aspects of the army. In game you will always appear as US soldiers and the enemy (other online players) will appear as middle east terrorist types. They in turn see you as middle eastern terrorists and themselves as as USMC.

That's because America's Army is a recruitment/propoganda tool. It was specifically designed for that purpose, so it's hardly representative of computer games in general.

thebman

humanji wrote:

Actually the point I was making is that tv, along with movies, have taken away the impact of the harsh realities of the world. Just take the example of Bob Geldhof showing the world the starvation in Africa back in the eighties, to nowadays, when people just change the channel. But it's not just extreme images that people have been numbed to, it's also the politics involved. It's like a mass sense of apathy and people just look past it.

I don't agree with that at all.

Studies show people can tell the difference between fake violence like in a horror movie as opposed to real violence like from CCTV footage or whatever.

In tests, people find the horror movie entertaining but the real violence makes them feel ill/scared etc ...

I've been playing computer games all my life and that appeal effected me. Maybe some people just don't care. Maybe there have been so many of those appeals people don't pay attention. Maybe it makes them feel so guilty their sub-conscious blocks them from paying attention to it so they won't feel so guilty/sick etc ... that they just bought a huge SUV and 50" tv.

Who knows exactly why people react like that!

Fanny Cradock

steviec wrote:

That's because America's Army is a recruitment/propoganda tool. It was specifically designed for that purpose, so it's hardly representative of computer games in general.

Really?

If you care to reread my post I never stated that Americas Army was representative of computer games in general.

Branoic

Blowfish wrote:

It may exist, but i've yet to see a game where the terrorists are American.

Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell : Double Agent.

The bad guys are an American terrorist group called John Browns Army.

quad_red

steviec wrote:

I don't see the problem with games like GRAW. Taking GRAW specifically, you're essentially fighting criminals and murderers("terrorists"), who happen to be Mexican. You're not fighting the Mexican army and you're not fighting Mexican civilians, in fact there's sections where you rescue Mexican civilians and a section where you escort the Mexican president. And the same is true of most games of this ilk.

I think this is more a case of 'I object to playing as an American soldier because I hate them' than 'I object to doing morally questionable things'

I find GRAW irritating to play cos it's firmly entrenched in the kind of military adventurist mindset which sees America in the predicament it is in ie. incompetent third world country needs military 'assistance' to see the light of democracy and capitalism etc. etc.

The American record in South and Latin America in the last number of decades is deplorable. They have shown themselves to have zero interest in democracy/freedom and have very recently worked diligently to undermine popularly elected politicians in favour of brutal puppets.

These games serve an important political and propaganda purpose and anyone who can't see that is blind. To American youths completely insulated from objective news sources, these games serve to reinforce the 'message'. ie. Americans have the duty, nay right, to deploy and project military force at will. That foreign borders do not apply to American soldiers and that anyone who stands in America's way is anti-democratic/a crackpot etc. etc.

That these games are not aimed at us lessens the political overtones. But should a British company release a game where heroic and saintly paratroopers were 'restoring order and freedom' in 'London Derry', only to be faced by criminal and brutal IRA/SF/SDLP 'gangs', then you'd get the political point pretty goddamn quickly. Because it would be hypocritical, offensive and belie a broader political agenda.