Fighting WWII Online: Good, Bad, Both, or Neither?

From my latest entry:

"You wonder how much these games turn the war into a theme park for grownups, without all the genuine horror that's inseparable from it.... Can real historical appreciation and entertainment go together like that?

Discuss!

Interesting. I think we all know, or at least should know, that horrible things happen in wars. People do nasty things to each other and people die. In wargames, like Battlefield1942 (which I've been playing a lot lately), it's all about having fun. You may get frustrated from time to time, when your side is loosing or the same guy keeps blowing you up over and over again...but none is really hurt or dies. So there is no real horror. (My grandmother would probably disagree, and think it was terrible that anyone could enjoy playing a game around WWII...especially if you're playing an axis soldier. To her WWII is not something you read about in the history books, it's something from her past.)

Maybe this is a long shot, but I still think such games can lead to historical appreciation, as they may make the players interested in what really happened in WWII. The players then start reading books or studying other material about the war to learn more. Of course, then you are no longer in the game when reading books...so it's not a direct link.

I used to play a lot of role-playing games (pen and paper), and was especially insterested in historical source books (in GURPS), which lead to me reading a lot of other history books about ancient China, the Aztec indians and more. I don't see why the same shouldn't be possible with a computer game.

Danny

I don't think so. I mean, there is nothing 'entertaining' about war. Only when you cut it up and segregate it from the awful destruction and death that results from it can you turn it into a 'game'. Speaking of WWII in particular - no computer game i know of tries to simulate the gritty realities. You die, you respawn and start again. There are no medical hospitals with wards of wounded and maimed soldiers, no cries of pain as men are left wounded on the field losing control of their bowel movements -begging for their mama's or their bros...none addresses the rampant segregation of blacks/whites during that time, as if it isn't an issue at all. There are few or no attempt to speculate on the causes of the war beyond terms of good and evil as opposed to economic/market competition/imperialism, etc...
In the end, it leads you to wonder why DO we like to glorify it so much? We don't fight wars like that anymore, and i surely hope we never will again. In a way i feel that it helps to ingrain in us a certain sense of acceptance that war is an just mean to an end.

WW1 and WW2 - The Wars to End all Wars.

Or rather the wars to spawn an endless variety of digital ones. Read the difference between the original and the players edition of WW2Online. The difference is the war in the players edition is more "real". Or Planetside and Shattered Galaxy... "A never ending war, the battle is always raging, 24/7!".

Imagine a game where you LOST if the outcome was war.

There are a few games out there where war has very negative consquences. Civilization is a good example. In that game waging was has very serious consequences. If it drags on too long the discontent of your populace rises. Soon you have cities break down into anarchy. They stop producing. That causes a ripple effect and soon all of your cities have stopped producing and your ability to feed the war machine and your citizens comes to an end. The next thing you know you're frantically trying to get your enemies to accept your cease fire.

There are war related games I think are lots of fun to play but I've never mistaken them for a realistic portrayal of the horrors of war. I would hope that most people can distinguish between fantasy and reality. I'm a complete pacifist and am strongly opposed to war. Yet I still enjoy playing war games. Playing that war game has zero chance of ever altering my pacifist views. I've always found it a bit silly that people attribute such power to games and media to alter people's views.

There is one big exception though... The game America's Army that was funded and released for free by the United States military in the hopes that people who play it would want to enlist so they can go to some foreign land and "play" for real. I find that hugely disturbing. I hear it's a pretty good game, but I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole. And the hipocrisy of it simply boggles the mind. On the one hand you have certain senators trying to ban certain games because they might cause kids to go blow up their highschools, while at the same time the army is creating a game specifically designed to encourage people to sign up to wage war and kill people.

Like I said earlier I don't believe that any game has the ability to alter someone's predisposition towards violence, however our government believes that they can... [sarcasm] and I guess that's okay if it's designed to incite violence on behalf of their political agenda [/sarcasm]

I played this for a while, it was a really well done squad based FPS. The thing is though, if anything, this game would discourage me from joining the army, because on pratically every mission on every map, most of the players on both sides would DIE every round.

Also, please note that if you didn't lie about your age and say you're under a certian age, you could only play on MILES servers. On these servers, you're playing an advanced version of laser tag, were if you "die", the sensor on the end of your gun beeps and you have to sit down for the rest of the round.

Intersting, i was wondering why America's Army was never released as a boxed game - we've paid for it already. I'll agree Wednesday, it's an excellent incentive NOT to join the military...well infantry anyway.
But all things considered, I have played the game quite alot when it first came out, and found it to be the best FPS game out there since more than any other it actually promoted team play. Which of itself, if a pretty good thing. After all these ARE games and in the end they do more in teaching us a little about ourselves than about war. Football, basketball, soccer, and the like could all be argued to be war-games translated into communal exercises. Promoting physical fitness, building resolve, determination, positive characteristics. Honestly though it does look hypocritical for our government to promote violence in the way of America's Army, though i suppose it's how you look at it. Is it just chaotic violence? Are you murdering women/children in their homes? Are you looting and raiding? No, it's just the traditional us vs. them and you shoot it out til none of the other side is left - or vice versa.

I think there is actually a boxed version of america's army - it retails for $25 or so. Kinda funny.

bbc

You can get it for free on CD by walking into any Army recruitment center. Not that I recommend doing that <g> From all accounts it's an excellent team based FPS... it's just the source, and the reasons it was created that make me a consciencious objector when it comes to that game, hehe. No thanks. And coming soon: Truth Truth Lie: The Oval Office Edition!

Well, one of the reasons I've heard for it's creation (and one I can understand) is to show players, even if they're not interested in joining the military, that it's NOT like Quake. I've only played it briefly, as I prefer the more fantastic games to the more realistic ones. Of course, 'tactical squad based shooters' are a dime a dozen these days. I've never really found issue with the concept. It's not like we're playing Pokemon here to try and get kids into the Army. I don't really see how this is any different from having TV or radio ads, and, in fact, I PREFER it. At least with America's Army, players supposedly get a better idea of what it's like to be in there, rather than just having rock music and catchy graphics blasted at them.

... wow, this thread got derailed.

Actually, you can d/l the game for free, but the "retail version" has the free game and a "strategy guide"... you're paying $25 for a strategy guide and a $1 CD and Jewel case.

The really funny thing is that all other strategy guides that the publisher makes (Prima, IIRC) cost $15. In other words, you are paying $25 for what would normally be $16. I wonder where the rest of that money is going to? The Army? The publisher?

Bye bye for now,
Alexis