Where Do Game Subjects Cross The Line?

Thanks to GameSpy for their 'Spy Vs. Spy' editorial discussing whether any reality-based subject should be made into a game, referencing games like Kuma:War, which offers "the hunt for Uday and Qusay Hussein in Iraq and their eventual deaths in a shootout with U.S. forces" as a scenario. The first editor suggests that " I believe that such 'ripped from the headlines' titles are disrespectful to the soldiers in combat and the issues involved", whereas another editor presents a different view, arguing: "I'm all in favor of games working in contemporary events... one way for games to be more relevant to people is to bring current events to an interactive medium."

Comments

There is no line

[Apreche]

I say freedom all the way. If you want to make a game about something, no matter what it is, go right ahead. And if some sicko wants to play that game, that's fine too. If you dont' like it, you don't have to play it. And if you don't think your children should play it, don't let them. And until someone infringes upon my rights, they can do as they please. You know the saying about swinging fists and noses.

If I made a flight sim where you try to hit buildings to score points, that's ok. If you think there's something wrong with that, then it's perfectly within your right to be that way. But you can't stop me from playing it or making it.

That's the way it should be.

One title I would like to see

[missing000]

World conquest through deception.

You start out as a lowly president's kid, only endowed with a small oil company and a baseball team.
The object of the game is to use deception and underground systems such as skull and bones to achieve world domination.

Pitfalls could include alcohol addiction, being bad at Political Science, and getting caught lying to your country.

Your objective could be a success however if you just talk to the right people

Oh no, the slippery slope fallacy

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, if content may potentially be disrespectful to somebody somewhere who probably needs a hobby, let's ban it out of hand. We'll start with Uday and Qusay. Well, after that comes the "we can't have anyone of X, Y or Z race as a hero or villain because it is racist and discrimnatory" argument... then comes the "we can't have violence because what of the children and their darling minds" argument... ditto sex, profanity and adult situations...

So pretty soon the only game allowed is Mario Kart... oh no, wait, he's an offensive Italian stereotype and car crashes are violent... I mean Atari 2600 Combat... oh, no, that's offensive to the brave soldiers who flew pixellated bombers maintaining plausible deniability over Cambodia. Pong anyone? (If the paddles aren't too phallic for children, that is.)

I would be interested in knowing how any actual soldiers -- not some Gamespy blowhard who can't do any better than slinging stereotypes of his own ("jackasses in Montana compounds") -- feels about his actions being emulated by thousands.

Inappropriate and tacky? Bringing the hobby down to the level of tabloid newspapers? This IS the same Web site that ranked Duke Nukem 3D and Shadow Warrior among the best / most underrated games of all time, right? Did they ever play either of those? No, they weren't "ripped from today's headlines," but they're full of inappropriate and tacky subject matter -- as are a whole lot of games.