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?
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"
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?
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.
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.
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.
Then they came for the hell demons...
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
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