Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Taking the Safety Off
Scott Jennings, the blogger formerly known as Lum the Mad, has posted an outstanding article that really hit home with me. It's about subject matter. The taboo subjects that games are apparently not allowed to contain:
Broken Toys: The Real Hitler Problem
This article refers to some equally well-thought out essays entitled "The Hitler Problem" and "Dealing With the Hitler Problem."
I feel unworthy and unqualified to comment on this, but that rarely stops me. But I'm afraid on this topic, I have more questions than answers.
I'm one of the people who wasn't particularly impressed with Super Columbine Massacre RPG. Not necessarily because of the subject matter, but because of its treatment (and what I felt was a disingenuous explanation by the author for his treatment of it).
But I am a supporter of games dealing with real-world issues. Including the uncomfortable ones. But we've got a medium that has a legacy of silly, over-the-top, juvenile power-trip fantasies where morality is usually painted in stark contrasting colors. We have journalists and politicians and grandparents who are being forced to notice video games only because of the sheer ubiquity of the hobby, and they are still expecting Pac-Man. Instead, they see Grand Theft Auto.
And granted - I don't necessarily want to deal with real-world ethical conundrums when I play games. When I'm slicing and dicing buttloads of enemies in Ninja Gaiden II, I don't want to think, "Oh, what about this guy's pregnant girlfriend sitting at home alone tonight wondering why he's late tonight? Should I really have dismembered him like I did?" I want the comic book fantasy. Not that comic books are all about black-and-white morality, either. But you know what I mean. I want to just be playing a game. No repercussions.
So do we sterilize history, and our stories, to help the player enjoy an evening of guilt-free, more kid-friendly pleasure? Or do we go ahead and have games that deal with the subject of slavery in the Age of Colonization, and the real horrors of war? Can games deal with real evil, instead of the Saturday morning cartoon evil?
Can we take the safety off?
Will it be commercial suicide to do so? Can only indie games (which are already taking the lead in this respect) really afford to ignore the dogmas of political correctness?
Can we, as in the original Star Trek series, deal with real-world issues more appropriately only by concealing them within metaphors? Are we doing ourselves an injustice by limiting ourselves to this?
Does the interactivity of games enhance our points, or dull them? By putting you in the shoes of a "bad guy" - a real bad guy - do we magnify the impact of the horror, or desensitize the player to it as he mechanically goes about his tasks? Do we promote understanding, or promote sympathy for the Devil?
And is whitewashing the issues of the past and present even worse?
Labels: Politics
- posted by The Rampant Coyote @ 7:40 AM (Permalink)
Comments:
Links to this post:
<< Home
Interesting that you bring up the thought of "metaphor". Art often imitates life of course, because we build our art with the contents of the real world.
We want games to be art, but we don't want our games to be art. We have a problem. We want to be taken seriously but left alone to be mindlessly entertained. But that is the crux of the argument. We want our cake and want to eat it to. But we aren't ready for cake.
We are still learning. This medium is not movies, books, tv, or music. Because it is interactive not all of the rules apply...and they do at the same time.
You get to make art if you want. You get to explore subject if you want. You get to do what you want, because you have all of the forms of entertainment at your disposal...plus you can get feed back...instantly.
Hopefully you guys (the developers) and to some degree the pimps, uh...publishers can come to grips with that and find a place where we can have mindless entertainment when we want it...and to be forced to face lessons of real life and the challenges that offers under a simulated environment.
cl
We want games to be art, but we don't want our games to be art. We have a problem. We want to be taken seriously but left alone to be mindlessly entertained. But that is the crux of the argument. We want our cake and want to eat it to. But we aren't ready for cake.
We are still learning. This medium is not movies, books, tv, or music. Because it is interactive not all of the rules apply...and they do at the same time.
You get to make art if you want. You get to explore subject if you want. You get to do what you want, because you have all of the forms of entertainment at your disposal...plus you can get feed back...instantly.
Hopefully you guys (the developers) and to some degree the pimps, uh...publishers can come to grips with that and find a place where we can have mindless entertainment when we want it...and to be forced to face lessons of real life and the challenges that offers under a simulated environment.
cl
True. I also don't think it's a strict either / or situation. But we do run into some problems when we say, "Hah - hah, it's ONLY a game," and then the next day say, "Why don't you take games seriously? They are important!"
I think there's a broad spectrum that can be covered there - just as movies can be silly popcorn flicks or have a real impact on people's lives.
Same thing with games. But we do have to feel out our position in things. The whole "games as art" thing is something that particularly gets in my craw. I mean, I *do* believe that games are art. But my definition of "art" might not meet some highbrow critic's vision of art. But I guess I'm more craftsman (if a crappy one) than an artiste. My favorite art is the stuff that gets USED. Not just appreciated.
I think there's a broad spectrum that can be covered there - just as movies can be silly popcorn flicks or have a real impact on people's lives.
Same thing with games. But we do have to feel out our position in things. The whole "games as art" thing is something that particularly gets in my craw. I mean, I *do* believe that games are art. But my definition of "art" might not meet some highbrow critic's vision of art. But I guess I'm more craftsman (if a crappy one) than an artiste. My favorite art is the stuff that gets USED. Not just appreciated.
Lots of people aren't capable of recognizing and interpreting metaphors. That was true when Star Trek aired the first time and today it's not different at all.
What's different is that we now have TV-shows depicting interracial or even homosexual life in society while it was very risky to show a kiss between Kirk and Uhura back then.
The depiction of sex and violence in the media has become quite relaxed in several countries.
Example: In Germany the original 'Die Hard' (1987) got a "16" rating - but only as a cut version! Today we can see the original, uncut US version with the same age restriction.
On the other hand it's the norm for German versions of violent video games to be cut (corpses vanish, no red blood splatter, no gibs, no flamethrower effects, no screams) - even if they are rated adults-only. This has gotten worse and worse over the years and I know that other countries have had the same development.
What's different is that we now have TV-shows depicting interracial or even homosexual life in society while it was very risky to show a kiss between Kirk and Uhura back then.
The depiction of sex and violence in the media has become quite relaxed in several countries.
Example: In Germany the original 'Die Hard' (1987) got a "16" rating - but only as a cut version! Today we can see the original, uncut US version with the same age restriction.
On the other hand it's the norm for German versions of violent video games to be cut (corpses vanish, no red blood splatter, no gibs, no flamethrower effects, no screams) - even if they are rated adults-only. This has gotten worse and worse over the years and I know that other countries have had the same development.
I have had a few raised eyebrows over the Unexpected Lesbian Option, but very few outspokenly upset. The one person most bothered by it didn't seem to be bothered so much by the fact that the player-character has the option to accept (or not, as desired) but that what e thought of as a 'nice girl' had turned out to be gay...
Now, off to find some youth to subvert! Er.
Now, off to find some youth to subvert! Er.
I've always found games that allow you to dive into moral grey areas and explore the consequences of your actions by FAR the most interesting games.
# posted by 
: January 22, 2009 8:43 PM
: January 22, 2009 8:43 PM
"The Hitler Problem" essay doesn't make much sense to me at all. Isn't AXIS AND ALLIES a successful boardgame?
This seems like much ado about nothing. People have been stepping into Hitler's shoes while playing wargames for decades now.
And his claim that the Crusades don't upset anybody any more is a claim that, frankly, upsets me. The Crusades are still a raw point in the Middle East to such a degree that political snafus happen when American presidents refer to their wars as "a crusade".
Although the truly taboo subjects are a more interesting topic to consider.
Post a Comment
This seems like much ado about nothing. People have been stepping into Hitler's shoes while playing wargames for decades now.
And his claim that the Crusades don't upset anybody any more is a claim that, frankly, upsets me. The Crusades are still a raw point in the Middle East to such a degree that political snafus happen when American presidents refer to their wars as "a crusade".
Although the truly taboo subjects are a more interesting topic to consider.
Links to this post:
<< Home
