World War 2 Games
esuna
Rock Bottom Join Date: 2003-04-03 Member: 15175Members, Constellation
Rock Bottom Join Date: 2003-04-03 Member: 15175Members, Constellation
<div class="IPBDescription">Glamourising hell.</div> Well, just chatting away in IRC and it suddenly popped into my mind.
What do people who lived through WW2, or fought on the front lines, feel for the trend of WW2 games that have been spewing forth in the last few years.
It's puzzled me. From accounts of WW2 (I'm only 21, of course i wasn't there) and actual facts, the front lines and battlefields of WW2 were nothing but a pure living hell. I've never really thought of it before, but these games are cashing in on the suffering of millions. It's a sick sick thing, to be blunt.
It raises another point, if games companies are so dead set on exploiting the suffering of others, how long till we see a game about the WTC incident (If there isn't already), or other tragedies that have happened over the ages?
I know these games don't go out of their way to glamourise WW2, that would just be pure evil, but games are about having fun. It seems like someone dancing on your grave to me.
What do people who lived through WW2, or fought on the front lines, feel for the trend of WW2 games that have been spewing forth in the last few years.
It's puzzled me. From accounts of WW2 (I'm only 21, of course i wasn't there) and actual facts, the front lines and battlefields of WW2 were nothing but a pure living hell. I've never really thought of it before, but these games are cashing in on the suffering of millions. It's a sick sick thing, to be blunt.
It raises another point, if games companies are so dead set on exploiting the suffering of others, how long till we see a game about the WTC incident (If there isn't already), or other tragedies that have happened over the ages?
I know these games don't go out of their way to glamourise WW2, that would just be pure evil, but games are about having fun. It seems like someone dancing on your grave to me.
Comments
WW2 changed the way wars were fought: Until then, wars had always been fought "army on army": Countries went to war, armies marched towards each other, then clashed head-on. The stronger army would eventually prevail, pushing further and further into enemy territory until the eventual surrender. Trench warfare was the culmination of this. During the entirety of WW1, the frontlines hardly ever moved, as new troops were constantly brought in to replace casaulties. WW2 changed that with the coming of Blitzkrieg, a strategy that aimed at circumventing the front line to strike at the enemy's supply lines, substantially weakening the frontline forces of the enemy and allowing the bulk of your army to simply steamroller the opposition (and come to the aid of the by now struggling "bliztkrieg-force"). We have many interesting battlefields, Normandy Beach, Berlin, Stalingrad.
Air combat was never more interesting than during WW2. With the coming of air-to-air missiles, air combat was a matter of "I see you first". In WW2, dogfights were still mano-a-mano, one man and his plane against another man and his plane. It's like sword combat and gunfighting: In an open field, gunfights would be boring, as there'd be no cover. It'd be a question of who shoots first.
Finally, the setting: WW2 is one of the largest, if not <u>the</u> largest conflict in history. The conflict was so big that you can't conceivably run out of material. There's always more stuff left to make a game of.
So maybe "exploiting the suffering of others" isn't quite the correct term here. There are many reasons for making a WW2 game.
With that out of the way, there is the moral issue: What would (or do, in a few cases) the veterans think about having the horror of their lives turned into amusement for the masses? WW2 films do the same you could argue, but they usually illustrate the suffering and horror of war as well. You could indeed accuse games of glamourising the other aspects instead: Heroism and killing Nazis. While both these things are great, we usually don't see the more cruel aspects of war depicted very well. After clearing a level, the thought on one's mind is most likely to be "Yeah, I kick dem Nazi ****." What happened to "Those were humans out there, misguided and **** up in their beliefs, but still humans."?
Should WW2 games have less "booyah" and more bittersweetness? Would they be more respectful to the subject matter that way? Would they still be fun to play?
But on the plus side when I started playing DoD back in beta 1.3b it got me alot more interested in WW2 history.
But on the plus side when I started playing DoD back in beta 1.3b it got me alot more interested in WW2 history. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think you're being a wee bit critical here. WW2 is hugely fascinating, and devs are fascinated and want to create the best WW2 experience. It has been staple fare for board games for decades, and in no way has it lead to a lack of creative and imaginative games.
Let us say the sum of creativity is constant. Then you can allot certain percentages of your creativity to coming up with your own story, or focus the full creative force on making something work within certain settings.
Games are receiving to much of a bad rap. Apparently, it's Doom that was the direct result of Columbine. GTA is teaching kids that stealing cars or beating up people to get floating, spinning wads of cash is easy and fun. Etc...
Also, Call of Duty. While being amazingly fun, it's still managed to tell the stories about the battles of companies in WWII. Also, it's not all glamourization. You see gruesome, tough battles (*coughSTALINGRADcough*) that show us what WWII was about. Speaking of which, I'm going to play CoD on a harder difficulty. I just beat it. See ya.
That jetpack thing really bothers me. Its basicly turning BF1942 into Tribes2. And besides, jetpacks didn't become a reality till the 60's and even then it could only fly for 30 seconds.
Another thing that puzzles me, your worried about WWII games, but you play a mod in which humans are eaten and digested on a regular basis by savage, bloodthirsty aliens? <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo-->
Forgotten Hope has lots of friggen tanks high poly so they look realer. Battle Of The Bulge has snow on the tanks so its pwn. And finally a Tiger can shoot straight. You dont have to aim 3 miles in the air to hit a target 25 feet away!
<a href='http://forgottenhope.bf1942files.com/main.html' target='_blank'>http://forgottenhope.bf1942files.com/main.html</a>
Best yet they are making my fav tank Tiger II !!!
Another thing that puzzles me, your worried about WWII games, but you play a mod in which humans are eaten and digested on a regular basis by savage, bloodthirsty aliens? <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo--><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Trev raises an interesting point here: Why should it be ok to eat people in NS, but not to shoot people in WW2?
I'd say that the answer is that WW2 is a historical conflict. When you're storming Normandy beach, your grandpa could peek over your shoulder and say "Oh, that. Yeah, lost three dear friends to a machinegun nest." I guess everyone can see how that would be mildly disturbing. With NS, we're not only talking fiction, we're also talking about the future: Even if all this was not completely made up, it still wouldn't have happened yet.
But first and foremost, NS is pure fiction. There <i>are</i> no Kharaa, no TSA, no Frontiersmen. It doesn't relate to reality.
A few interesting issues have been raised. One relevant, one a bit more general that has / should have it's own thread.
The first being computer games being the scapegoat to people / societies problems, i'm not going to go into that, it's a whole different matter, but believe me, i will be the first to stick up for computer games.
<b>reasa</b>:
You raise an interesting point (Which crisqo also touched upon, in a slightly more crude manner.). I do feel that there will be more outrage over BFVietnam due to the fact that with WW2 games, as crisqo so delicately put it, "we waited for that generation to die off". I know time is a great healer, but i can assure you that scars from a war will never heal (Once again, not my personal experience, but those of people who were there.). So following from this, what does everyone think is a "safe" time to start making games on a factual events or tragedies?
<b>CForrester</b>:
I'm glad to hear a positive story as to your grandfather's reaction to WW2 games. You're correct, a good number of them, due to using actual events and locations, do teach the gamer a little history. It's a real positive thing to support why WW2 games are a good thing.
*EDIT:
<b>Urza</b>:
There are no real "good guys" or "bad guys". I don't know who said it, but with war, everyone loses. The Nazi's would be considered "bad guys", right? But the fact is, at the time, they must have felt what they were doing was right. Hell, not that many people would have fought and died for Hitler's ideals if they didn't believe what they were doing. It's all perspective.
That was what I was trying to say. They really can understand the word "Nintendo" but that's about as far as that generation's video game knowledge goes.
These games help to educate (a bit) and at least get people interested in looking at the history behind the war. Importantly, they help people remember what did actually happen.
Exactly my point. WWII games are totally unrealistic, and ( @ discozombie)therefore supported by the army since they are useful as a recruitment tool.
These games help to educate (a bit) and at least get people interested in looking at the history behind the war. Importantly, they help people remember what did actually happen. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I have to disagree with you. When i was in school there were no WW2 games to speak of (Does 1942 really count?) and i was learning about the first and second world wars in history class. This went in detail to specific battles. Ontop of that we covered a number of "minor" wars, such as the Korean war.
These things will not be forgotten, they're a part of England's national curriculum, they are being taught every week in schools all around the country, and i'm sure the case is the same in most countries.
I agree with you that war is hell. But people (videogamers) want to be "scared" (excited), so they buy games that recreate the excitement of war. (because war is as exciting as it is scary. i dont mean exciting like a fun sort of thing.)
"When their country needed them they answered the call"
I could see why the army must love this kind of stuff, well we can be sure that war games are not going anywhere if the military likes them, hell don't they make their own <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo-->
Max
Interesting topic.
I don't really see these games as exploiting suffering. A world war II simulator in no way contributes to the actual unpleasant events that took place.
Consider two young boys playing "army". They each are 'armed' with a stick that is in fact a 'pretend' gun. They run around pointing said 'weapons' at each other and yell things like "bang"!. They're having alot of fun. Are they exploiting suffering or are they exhibiting their understanding of the world based on their ages ?
My point here is that with age comes understanding. A mature gamer is going to play a WW2 game, have some fun, and think "geez, glad I don't have to do this for real !". A not as mature gamer is going to play and say "cool, I wast0rz some army d00dz", and probably not think about the reality of being in such a situation.
The game itself though, is a representation of what goes on in the world. A gamer will make of the game what their level of maturity allows for.
"When their country needed them they answered the call" <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
You play as Russian soldiers and British soldiers btw.
Esuna
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I have to disagree with you. When i was in school there were no WW2 games to speak of (Does 1942 really count?) and i was learning about the first and second world wars in history class.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I learnt only about the second world war, and then only the causes. That was it for WW2 history in the New Zealand curriculum. This wasn't overly much of a problem because I already had a very keen interest in World War 2, but this is not taught as widely as you would like to believe. Nor is it taught to as sheer wide an audience as the likes of the games actually GET to. In order to study something and actually learn you must first be interested in it.
Also considering that not everyone has to do history at many schools, and that not everyone is even CAPABLE of doing history, this isn't a very strong point.
A game can get experiences and similar information through a LOT better in many respects. The first being that you don't have to go to school or have an interest in history at all.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->This went in detail to specific battles.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This isn't common, in New Zealand, no battles are even mentioned.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Ontop of that we covered a number of "minor" wars, such as the Korean war.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, and how much would people actually remember after that? I doubt it would be very much at all.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->These things will not be forgotten,<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Really? What was the biggest naval battle in history (Without googling it?). Now ask as many people as you know to tell you that. I'd bet less than 10% would get it, and I can attest that 0% of my friends would know the answer.
WW1 IS being forgotton, this is pretty much fact. What you (and many others) are failing to realise sadly is that the last of the people alive during that war are dying off. When these people die, the historians that have followed the war will follow (and already are). Inevitably WW1 will be relegated to a mere curiosity much like wars like the Boer war and others. WW2 however will live on in peoples memories for an incredibly long time, and this IS due to the amount of media (Games, movies, books etc) on WW2. No other war is THIS extensively covered (feel free to name one that IS though).
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->they're a part of <b>England's</b> national curriculum,<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It is a
<b>WORLD</b>
war thank you very much. In America it depends on state as to if it's taught or not, I've covered New Zealand and Australia is similar. Quite frankly, what happens in England is not significant considering that a lot more countries than England fought in World War 2, you realise that right O_o I've also already spoke about the problems of trying to actually teach history to the likes of high schoolers and such briefly (I know, because I DO actually teach history, and it isn't HALF as easy as you think it is to have students retain information on even the likes of WW2).
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->and i'm sure the case is the same in most countries. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That would just be another thing you wrongly assumed.
"When their country needed them they answered the call" <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You play as Russian soldiers and British soldiers btw.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Umm, to be blunt, no ****. Are you assuming only Americans are patriotic? I don't see anywhere in the statement you have quoted me being specific about any country.
Considering that the Russians used to call WW2 the great patriotic war, no not at all. However, in previous discussions about the game most people seem unaware that you don't play as anyone but the Americans.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I don't see anywhere in the statement you have quoted me being specific about any country.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, considering I'm not even certain there is a Russian language version of the game, and there isn't such an ad of the PAL version, I assumed you were American. When you spoke of 'the army' however, you are implying ONE army. You don't talk about 'THE' world army, because there is none, therefore you HAVE to be talking about ONE army in particular.
As I've assumed your American, then I assumed you are talking about the American army. Unless of course, you think that somehow 'the army' is actually plural <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
What do people who lived through WW2, or fought on the front lines, feel for the trend of WW2 games that have been spewing forth in the last few years.
It's puzzled me. From accounts of WW2 (I'm only 21, of course i wasn't there) and actual facts, the front lines and battlefields of WW2 were nothing but a pure living hell. I've never really thought of it before, but these games are cashing in on the suffering of millions. It's a sick sick thing, to be blunt.
It raises another point, if games companies are so dead set on exploiting the suffering of others, how long till we see a game about the WTC incident (If there isn't already), or other tragedies that have happened over the ages?
I know these games don't go out of their way to glamourise WW2, that would just be pure evil, but games are about having fun. It seems like someone dancing on your grave to me. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well shame on you for being a gamer.
IMO, you think to much about crap that doesnt matter. Just enjoy playing games, theyre entertainment. They are there to entertain, not educate, not to uphold any kind of social relavence. And your really stretching making a statement like "game companies are dead set on exploiting the suffering of others". The games industry is pretty damn good about disciplining itself in regards to content even tho rules arent clearly defined.
And yes 1942 counts...its a game about WWII, unless your complaint has more to do with graphics than the war being exploited, in wich case...what is this discussion really about? Regardless, there are more important issues in society, but it never helps to blow them out of proportion. WWII a fictional war in the future, its irrelevant. Its a game.
Also, Call of Duty. While being amazingly fun, it's still managed to tell the stories about the battles of companies in WWII. Also, it's not all glamourization. You see gruesome, tough battles (*coughSTALINGRADcough*) that show us what WWII was about. Speaking of which, I'm going to play CoD on a harder difficulty. I just beat it. See ya. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
When you correlate video games to real-life something is deeply wrong.