Slashdot Mirror
The Politics of the Video Game
illuminata writes "Can the video game industry keep its mittens out of the political slugfest? According to Kevin Parker's article Free Play, they sure can't. In it, he cites Dreamcatcher's Gore and Sega's Legacy Online and Jet Set Radio Future as main offenders. He even goes on to point out how some people want video games to convey their favorite political message in the future. Are there any particular titles or game companies that you think lay on the politics too thick, or is it all just a bunch of foof?"
Is this the one where you invent your own Internet?
The only computer game that makes me think of politics and politicians is Thief. Not because of the gameplay...
Trolling is a art,
> Are there any particular titles or game companies that you think lay on the politics too thick, or is it all just a bunch of foof?
Doom for Columbine is falsely accused of being political, but I think that mods like this may pave the way for better use of balance than more politically engendered titles, with corporate backing and all the politics that goes with that. Keeping it freeware is the key! (Then nobody can mess with it.)
The plot really jived with my strong anti-hell demon political stance.
How about the COPS in GTA3? ;)
They seem an accurate portrayal of police in the US, especially now that we have the PATRIOT act. Do you ever see the cops hand you a warrant?
quote
Or was it all just a bunch of foof?"
quote
I thought that was a Pentium bug?http://www.x86.org/errata/dec97/f00fbug.htm
Well, we all know Hollywood sure can't. Game developers don't have quite the level of celebrity or exposure, but they are conveying a message.
It's hard to make something realistic and not weigh in an opinion.
most of the slant seems to be definitely doomsday, environmental, and decidely anti-government..
agan, this is just from reading the article. I haven't played any of the games mentioned.
Watch the Teaser Trailer for "The Lightning Thief" Her
Do you wish video games to have First Ammendment protection, or don't you?
KFG
It is my understanding the NRA sponsored the development of the BFG9000. In fact, without their influence most games today would look like the Sims or Animal Crossing.
t
5 billion people survived the destruction of ALL agricultural plants? What did they eat, the other 5 billion?
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
What about the myriad of war-themed games released in the recent years: Medal of Honor, Soldier of Fortune, BF1942, Call of Duty, etc?
This isn't insightful, it's totally obvious. Is there any doubt that the game is anything but a recruiting tool? What other purpose could it possibly have? The DoD spends $x (don't know how much, don't care to find out) because it thinks there's a shortage of good, free first person shooters out there?
Politicians are always up the gaming industries butt (too violent, causes kids to be violent, etc...), so why can't the gamining industry get up the politicians butt??
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
O.k Let's see an anti-gun FPS. You an (FBI agent) with a Tazer and sleeping gas are supposed to single handedly elminate a Wacoish compound of gun loving fanatics that are prepared to shoot you to preserve their rights.
There are some genres where it's hard to avoid a political agenda informing the game in some form or other. A few years back I designed some combat flight sims and had to devise background material for the campaigns. The temptation to editorialize on a subjects such as, say, the drugs war in Colombia was strong. For the most part I resisted and I hope found a middle way between Hollywood druglord fantasies and the political realities of what was going on in the country at the time. (And today: it's shocking how some of the events I built the campaign around later came true.)
So in my game I had FARC narcoguerrillas, right-wing death squads and I penalized the player for causing unnessesary collateral damage. There are some who will no doubt think I went to far, as if games on current events can somehow be cosily insulated from politics. But I reckon I did the right thing.
Then in Ages of Empires and Civilizations, I was a king!
In Starwars Galaxies, I played a mayor for a while. With a bunch of friends, we started a town, it grown big, my friends and some of the folks were reelecting me each week, until someone started to complain about my politics and won the vote against me. :(
Since I had a lot of powerfull artisans still in my camp, we boycotted thier artisans and raised the prices for them... heheheh, we showed those bastards how it was to be Cuban!!! héhéhéh
Politics make some games great!!! But it is not a must, just a good option games can count on.
"I can not bring myself to believe that if knowledge presents danger, the solution is ignorance." Isaac Asimov
There are of course very few game plots that approach the beauty of a well-written novel, or even a mediocre one.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
There have always been producers that have had biased viewpoints for their titles. For example, Square/Enix seems to love putting their the anti-industrial viewpoints into their Final Fantasy games. Going back even as early as U.S. FFIII (FFVI in the series) it was always the evil, greedy, corrupt, industrialized nations at war with the peaceful, kind, gentle, treehuging fairie creatures who lived in harmony with nature.
Even as far back as Frogger, we were witness to the environmental impacts that industrialization has on nature. The brave but fragile frog's futile attempts to cross a busy highway to get back home only show the producer's bias -- they never show the poor truck driver, driving for 20 hours straight just to earn a living, fighting exhaustion but alert enough to avoid swerving his big white truck into oncoming traffic, just to avoid a frog too stupid to stay off the road, as more of a hero.
In my opinion, it's unavoidable that for the most part, serious issues will always be portrayed in games with some bias. It's up to the player, then, to decide for themselves whether the game reflects a viewpoint that can be carried into the real world. Games such as Deus Ex explored a lot of the political ramifications of conspiracy theory, but let the player decide for themselves which was the best path.
Jet Set Radio? You mean the games about street gangs on rollerblades, each one based on a ridiculous* theme like sharks, love droids, and 3-year-out-of-date raver culture stereotypes, sticking it to the man via rail grinds, graffiti and pirate radio?
The one that ends (depending on the game in the series) in either a skyscraper rooftop battle on a giant spinning record against an evil dj booth, or a battle with a three story disco mind-control robot?
Is Kevin Parker seriously trying to say that game has an overtly political message? This just goes to show; some people have a vivid imagination, but little common sense.
*holy fucking shit, Slashdot posters, what's with all the high mod posts with the mis-spelling of this word as 'rediculous' lately? Buy a damn dictionary.
Even Jesus hates listening to Creed.
Here is a story about the group Hezbollah using a game based on the open source genesis3d game engine. It is called special forces, link HERE
Oh, thank God! I was worried. So, I must have missed the finding of the WMDs. Where did they find them?
God Bless America. Why? Did it sneeze?
Pong is considered a metaphor of modern society's struggle with nuclear waste.
:)
In the game, the waste is represented by a tiny dot with the major political players tossing it back and forth until one slips up, thereby accepting the waste within their district. Defeat comes to the player that proves they are unable to protect their constituants, with 21 being the threshold required to lose re-election.
You didn't really think it was a simple game of table tennis, did you?
This is not my sig.
unbiased is impossible. the notion of unbiased (reporting, movies, games, whatever) is dangerous because it offers a disguise for people who are trying to gain momentum behind their political stance. if everybody read (listened, watched, played, etc.) thinking about the source of the content and what they might be trying to push, then the world would be a better place. instead most people seem to be stuck trying to determine if a message is the norm, or the "main stream view". that leads to being easily duped by politicians and salespeople (experts at delivering a message regardless of the content). No message is unbiased. An the notion of an unbiased message is proliferated by those who want to pull one over on the masses.
--Brian
It always bothered me that the SimCity manual editorializes that Reaganomics doesn't work. (Somewhere toward the back, in the section on economic srategies I think -- it's been a while.) I think the game is even set up to demonstrate that 'fact' for you under one of the pre-configured scenarios.
Now, that said, SimCity does a pretty decent job of teaching you firsthand that taxes are necessary and that overtaxation hurts as much or worse than undertaxation, so the political commentary isn't fatal, just annoying.
BTW, to all the Reagan-haters out there (and there are a lot of you) that are getting ready to click the "moderate" button: please consider that disagreeing is not same as flamebaiting or trolling. This is a discussion, not a war.
"Lawyers are for sucks."
- Doug McKenzie
When i was younger, nobody seemed to care much that i was slashing away in Ninja Gaiden on my trusty NES, or spraypainting via some simpsons NES title.
Has technology really changed so much to make this difference, or has the view just been given a shady light in the events of the past 5 years?
I guess what im trying to say....in the words of David Cross, "What were the video games that hitler played?"
> What other purpose could it possibly have?
Oh, I don't know - maybe training for the military?
It's not exactly true-to-life, but the Army has been using video games as training utilities for possibly 10 years. When they first introduced a Delta Force-type game to their soldiers, they found that the soldiers were voluntarily playing at all hours - voluntarily training.
It was a totally new concept for them. And you know what? It took off. I'd say that counts as another purpose.
This isn't the first time the public has received some of the military's modifications. Some of the modifications made to Operation: Flashpoint for use in the Army made it into O:F's expansion.
It won't be the last time, either. Full Spectrum Warrior is being used for training those commanding troops.
You're comming down really hard on something just based on a assumption.
-lw
Mods: Disagreeing with me != my post Offtopic / Flamebait.
World without hate or war, invaded. Tragic?
Unless you have played a game similar to planetarion, or similar game, you have no idea how much on-line games can have huge political conflicts.
The entire game was a "strategy" game but it really involved simple uot and out politics. There were two kinds of successfull players.
1. Players that were good at the game, and good at the politics (the top tier)
2. Players that were bad at the game, but good at the politics.
Being Good at the game, that involves management of resources, being on till 3 am and getting up every 2 hours via an alarm clock.
Being good at politics was to find a lot of friends to help you.
When I started in round 3 of the game, you simply did not have to be good. All that you required was that you had friends that would CRUSH ANYONE THAT FOUGHT YOU.
I was a "good" player, which means I stayed up way to late, and got up way to early to monitor my fleet. I got crushed several times because I was picking on players who were not as good players but had better political connections.
The next round I actually got a couple friends together and we constantly were sending messages/e-mails/sitting in chat to constantly improve our political situation. My goal for that round was to get my galaxy (which i controlled a group of 25 people) to get into the top 800, instead we got into the top 400, mostly because of strong strategic alliances.
The game was pure rampant capatilism, except all companies had the same product and a few got a relative monopoly (the top 400 galaxies controled well over 90% of all resources)...
The game always reminds me as the best argument for government controls on large companies.
Planetarion sucked later on, but it really was exciting during that time.
If you don't vote, you don't matter, so don't waste your time telling me your opinion
Then they came for the hell demons...
Don't think South Park is political? To me, it's one of the clearest examples of political views being baked into entertainment out there today.
Maybe I'm just a liberal hippie communist, but I always thought the basis of free government was a willingness to follow the rule of law, not brainwashing children into military service.
This is only accurate to the degree that everyone else is willing to follow the rule of law. When that is not the case, as seems inevitable, society must have organizations which operate outside the usual limits in order to enforce said laws. There are things the police do that an average citizen cannot. SC portrays the far extreme of that power, which may or may not actually exist. (If it did, by definition we wouldn't know...) While it remains debatable what powers such organizations should have (Patriot act, etc), the need for the existence of such organizations and for people to serve as a part of them is rarely, if ever, debated.
As long as there are those who would operate outside the rule of law, freedom will remain something which must be defended. The perceived nobility of the task, combined with the ability to operate outside of the normal societal limits make such organizations material for video games.
I think the author of the article has conflated "politics" with "economics" in the first few paragraphs. While I appreciate that Parker is critical that recreational pastimes like gaming may be taking themselves too seriously, I'm not sure what the hell his point is.
Is he also critical of Monopoly, with it's trvialized depiction of pre-tax-reform US industry and culture? Are fat little men in top hats really in charge of all public utilities, and able to charge whatever they want for rental of their slums? Shocking!
Singling out the so-called massively multiplayer games like Asheron's Call for being too "real" because the players are demanding a certain level of reality in their game play is a pretty weak argument that games, in general, are getting too political. Microsoft is in the business of selling software and subscriptions. Whether or not they are "scrambling" to offer what their subscribers want is hardly relevant.
People who design software and systems know that how the software is used in the wild is often very different than the your own idea of how it should be used. It's not surprising that people who pay good money to play Asheron's Call and Star Wars Galaxies want to create simulated economies, culture and history. As far as I'm concerned, this is just a more sophisticated versions of old BBS culture.
People grow culture. It's what we do.
I'm not convinced that any of this has anything to do with his other contention, that the software manufacturers themselves are getting over-political. Which is it? Are the customers demanding more immersive worlds, or the designers injecting overwrought politics into gaming? Are these really the same thing?
The other games he mentions seem to fall easily into the post-apocalyptic near-future scenarios that share dystopic fictions with a whole range of popular culture. Comics, anime and (of course) science fiction stories have mined this vein for decades. Placing your otherwise undemanding first-person shooter in some kind of science fiction setting to explain why you happen to be a hyper-muscled uber-soldier tearing holes in the "bad guys" seems perfectly reasonable to me.
How is this different from, say, Escape from New York or even "Buffy"?
While the author brings up some interesting points, he seems to miss the mark on every target he aims at. Maybe he needs to just relax and play some Unreal Tournament.
-- clvrmnky
...America's Army: Operations is little more than a thinly veiled recruiting tool for the U.S. Army.
True, but it doesn't always work for them. Just look at that OTHER DoD game, America's Navy: Paint Chipper/Latrine Scrubber.
Witness "The Passion", which was an enormous success largely because it got people out to movies that normally can't stomach them.
Anyone who can stomach the ultraviolent Passion, but not The Daily Show, has more serious problems than just being politically offended.
Most of the posts are missing the games that REALLY have politics in them:
The Civilization (including Alpha Centauri) series. These games make certain political ideologies inherent in the game, as well as allowing players to make their own political choices. Alpha Centauri makes (implicitly) the point that a Fundamentalist religious government is a viable form of government, while on the other hand, implying that certain losses of liberty would take place. This is a very political statement. It lets you choose between horribly oppressing your citizens and letting them run free and happy -- (and lets you win either way) a VERY political choice.
The SimCity series is a perfect example of implicit rules -- it assumes that unless you, the Mayor (the government), do it, nothing will happen in your city. While fun for gameplay, does this send the right message? You can agree or disagree.
Does anyone remember Privateer 2? The finale of the game was you taking over your dead brother's interstellar crime ring that you'd been fighting the whole game. There's definitely some serious debate here, or with Jedi Knight, where if you make the "bad" choices, you become the Evil Emperor yourself. But if you look at the "choice" you make, it's certainly up to debate about whether it was right or wrong.
Someone above mentioned Splinter Cell:Pandora Tomorrow. The makers of the game have very specific political beliefs, but they're pretty subtle in the game.
At any rate, I found this article to be very interesting, and expanded on some of the points it mentioned.
http://reason.com/0404/fe.kp.free.shtml
Yes it looks like all the "bad" worlds have a liberal slant. However it is also true that liberal distopias (sp?) make for a more interesting background for a game. The evil powers were overcome with greed, resulting in fantastic effects that even they did not plan on, possibly resulting in a world where everybody including the evil is in bad shape, where there is no way to fix it so the game play is limited to a controllable microcosm.
A conservative distopia would be a Communist dictatorship, or a world like 1984. In that the individual cannot do anything, so there is no game. If they could then it is not a conservative distopia, as there is possibility of overthrowing the evil government. Perhaps you could play a nasty enforcer, locating those who dare to speak out against the government and getting rid of them, but it seems people don't want to identify so closely with an evil character.
I would say conversely that all the "good world" games, especially those space-trading ones, present an Ayn Rand fantasy world where everybody seems quite happy despite the absolute freedom to even shoot your competitors.
Most political game ever is Civilization III! I always play as the Communists...
Think about it - Max Payne = the problems w/ drugs.
NARC, same thing.
Deus Ex - politicians.
EVO (back on the SNES) and Ecco the Dolphin = environmental nutjob propaganda.
Most of the Japanese titles have the same stuff going on as well, only they're really big into post-apocalyptic stuff after Hiroshima/Nagasaki took place; lacking an evil-stereotypical-bad-guy for their culture (you know, the one who is merely "Out to Rule the World) they go for the "I'm gonna blow everything up haha I'm insane" bad guy instead. (see: Sephiroth)
Games are (generally speaking) a work of fiction that involve humans, and being fiction you need a story. I would argue that it's almost impossible to tell a story that involves human beings that would not become "political" if it has any degree of elaboration.
Example:
"Bruce Wayne's parents were shot in the alley one night." OMG ANTI GUN AGENDA!
"Your parents were poor and sick, and being unable to afford medical help died when you were at a young age..." OMG SOCIALIST MEDICINE AGENDA!
Both of these are fairly standard boiler-plate backgrounds, but fall under the article's scope of questioning.
One night while inebriated and playing Vice City, I came to a realization: it subtly reenforces society's morals on the player. If you kill someone, they send cops. And if you kill the cops, they send more cops! Rob a store, cops come. Bump your car into a cop, cops chase you. It's through the operant conditioning of cops chasing you making the game harder, that it pushes the messages of not killing, stealing, and driving responsibly.
-no broken link
the money to pay for it came out of the Army's recruiting budgets. Thay also said it was a tool for recruitment.
No real secret.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
NARC had a plot?! Come on. Narc had about as much of a plot as Final Fight or Double Dragon. That's not to say that NARC didn't have an anti-drug message, but I don't think it was preachy so much as ridiculous. I mean did anyone really think that there were junkies running around the streets throwing giant glowing hypodermics at people?