Post-War Iraq And Videogames

DarkBlackFox writes "MSNBC has an article on how gamers relate to the rebuilding of Iraq, and how current world politics influence strategy and action games." A slightly odd article, but it begs the question - considering there are already games based on the Vietnam and Gulf Wars, how soon will it be before the Operation:Iraqi Freedom shooter or RTS, and how delicately should recent wars be handled in games?

Comments

Desert Storm...?

[neostorm]

It wasn't long after the first gulf war fiasco that they started cashing in on it. If I recall correctly, 3D0 released a Gulf War themed game the same year that it ended.

Add to this that the US government has recently embraced interactive media as a form for spreading propaganda (Americas Army) and training troops for the field. It's a great way to convince another subculter who's "right" and who's "evil".

They put on a straight and sombre face when talking about it, but in reality it seems it's a disgraceful race to the money tree...

Did you catch the Sony comment?

[Ayanami Rei]

He alluded that Sony tried to register the name "Shock and Awe" with the USPTO just after we withdrew, and then decided against it. I thought Sony was in the process of registering it already?

Anyway, the idea of a video game that involves practicioners of political science to implement their policy in a virtual world does sound interesting. But it remains to be seen how valid such a (relatively) simple model can be used to predict something so complex.

I want to see that sort of idea tried on a smaller scale. For example, residential planning, college boards, business deals, etc. Of course, the starting point will be "studies" staged by shrinks, think tank eggheads, pol. sci and comp. sci graduate students, where they get undergrads to brainstorm ideas to solve problems around campus using a virtual forum/interface. Then the let the thing chug and present the outcome to see how the kids react. Then maybe they let them implement one of the proposed solutions to the "problem" (which may not even be real...) and see how it plays out in comparison.

If that shows promise, excellent. But why bring in the game developers now? He doesn't seem to address that. In fact the article sort of drifts off into talking about upcoming games about Iraq.

Yawn indeed (oooh, Hollywood and video game designers look to real life for inspiration, how novel!) ::blink::

Sim-Baghdad

[Associate]

How about a Civ/Sim type game where you rebuild Baghdad. Manage the building of new hotels, government buildings, markets... If the Iraqi's get out of line, send in more troops and what not.

How delicately? Not at all.

[Babbster]

I think that given the capacity for realism in terms of graphics and sound in today's games, they shouldn't handle war games delicately at all. I think it sends the wrong message when you tone down violence and bloodshed in a purportedly realistic game. Much like movies such as Saving Private Ryan can bring home the brutality of war, games can potentially do the same given the chance.

What would be wrong, for example, with a game wherein you're part of an infantry regiment/division in Takrit and your goal is to take the city with as few civilian casualties as possible? You could be penalized for causing civilian death and even end the game court-martialed because you didn't exercise good judgement in a firefight. Such a game would include all the carnage of a real war and, handled properly, encourage the player to think about the lives lost in the process of winning or losing the game. No doubt it would be rated "M" for Mature but it might be a game that actually deserves the rating for good reasons as opposed to bad.

We all know that war games (strategic, tactical, FPS, etc.) will be made. It would be good to see a high-profile war game, though, that tried to really address the negative side of war instead of simply glorifying violence and conquest without consequences.