On Videogames And Inherent Political Bias

An anonymous reader writes "An article for Reason Magazine, recently posted to their site, argues that games, unlike traditional media, are inherently biased - in favor of individual freedom - and that games might influence real-world political preferences." The author starts by arguing: "Video games are evolving into a grand anti-authoritarian laboratory", and concludes: "Computer games, as a class, do appear to favor civil and economic liberty... because of the same human tendencies that free players from domineering storylines and inflexible rules. Games naturally turn players against contrived limits and inconsistencies."

Comments

Re:It's 5:00, time for a sweeping generalization

[Sigma 7]

On the other hand, I do certain games (Civ, Railroad Tycoon, and other strategy games) allow players to exercise political thoughts.

They also let the player relax in the event a nuclear war should occurr - those nuclear missiles only have a range of 16 tiles, which is less than a quarter of the globe. :)

You mean I can't attack the annoying puny little country that just attacked my level 25 city without congress's permission?

I would consider that to be a bug with the game rather than a political issue. In most democratic-style of governments, people would have no problem allowing for retaliation against an attack from an enemy, even if there is some political resistance.

In the case with Civilization II, the senate always forces a peace treaty when a rival nation wants one, regardless of the circumstances. This is unrealistic in two means: first off, it ignores the reputation of the AI players (because AIs don't have that attribute - only human players). Secondly, it allows unprovoked attacks followed by an attempt at negotiation to force a treaty, repeated ad infinitum (same applies if an opponent has a Great Wall or United Nations.) The only way to counter attack is to dmaage your own rep (possibly causing a revolution as well).

Still, it was a better simulation than Civ I - where you could avoid forced peace declarations by not accepting an audience with the emmisary.