Gaming Doesn’t Tell Us The Truth
Games accused of misleading us....again.Published 23/11/2009 at 16:40 by FRUIT0FDOOM
Doctor Who: Game Confirmed [31]
Doctor Who Games Incoming [37]
ITV & BBC To Make Games [51]
The BBC have published an article online about how human rights groups have played a variety of “videogames” to determine if any simulate “war crime” via a breach in humanitarian laws. Gamers killing civilians, destroying their homes and torturing captives were all events condemned by the study. It also stated that developers should make the effort to ensure players are reminded about the limitations the “real world” presents.
Lawyers adept in the interpretation of humanitarian laws watched over as the staff of two Swiss human rights organisations carried out the study – Trial and Pro Juventute – by playing through the games. Twenty games went under the microscope as observations on the conflicts portrayed and player abilities were made, with comparisons between virtual theatres of war and the limits of the real world then established. “The practically complete absence of rules or sanctions is…astonishing,” said the study. Call of Duty: World at War, Far Cry 2, Army of Two and Conflict: Desert Storm were a few of the games under scrutiny.
The games were analysed to determine “whether certain scenes and acts committed by players would constitute violations of international law if they were real, rather than virtual” with games, rather than films, were selected due to the interactive nature of video games. “The line between the virtual and real experience becomes blurred and the game becomes a simulation of real life situations on the battlefield.” Violations of the Geneva Conventions and its Additional Protocols were being watched for. There was a sharp eye on how non-playable characters who surrendered were treated and the effect on citizens present in the warzones, as well as whether the damage buildings sustained was proportionate.
The study found some games punished the killing of civilians but that some also reward tactics used to limit the damage of conflict. The study also found that churches and mosques were attacked, along with torture during interrogations and a few allowing executions. Apparently the games were so complex that it was difficult to ensure the testers had witnessed all possible violations or that no violations were possible.
Allegedly all this could influence a person’s interpretation of war and a soldier’s conduct in the real world. Stating that games are sending a false message saying conflicts are waged with no limits and anything goes as regards counter-terrorism operations. Games failing to show that a violation of international humanitarian law will deem those accountable as war criminals and not victors. Rather than simply making games less violent, the authors have called upon developers to incorporate rules of international humanitarian law and human rights into their games.
“Games really are treated in a peculiar way,” said John Walker – a writer on the Rock, Paper, Shotgun games blog. Mr Walker doubts that anyone would campaign for the fiction in books to abide by the same humanitarian laws or for Bond, James Bond, to not machine gun his way through a super villain’s underground complex. He states; “For all those who mowed down citizens in Modern Warfare 2’s controversial airport level, I have the sneaking suspicion that not a great deal of the think this is lawful, not appropriate, behaviour.” Jim Rossignol from the same Rock, Paper, Shotgun games blog, said there is the opportunity to mix real world rules of war into games. “Whether or not the rules of war are included in the game should be based entirely on whether that improves the experience for the player,” he said. Rossignol goes on to suggest that this study perhaps shows that this research demonstrates that the testers and authors misunderstand what games are and how they are perceived by the people playing them.
That is pretty much the article that the BBC posted online, the full article can be read here.
Now for my views*
With military training and time served in preparation for “real world combat” I find these articles insulting! The government and tax payers (the public) pay a lot of money to ensure soldiers undergo very tough training and education to be effective in combat. Soldiers spend weeks, months and years preparing for combat and to become “unbreakable” in a relentless pursuit to protect those who need protecting, including themselves when out in the field.
I was told to wound rather than kill should the opportunity be “ideal”, that a target wounded should then receive battlefield first aid once it was declared there was no danger to my squad or myself. The 5.56mm L85A2 rifle is ideal for wounding and the purpose was simply to get a target down but alive (in pain and vocal about such pain) with the intention of lowering the morale of any other targets around. With just one bullet you could render a small squad combat ineffective as they scurry to admit first aid to their fallen comrade. You are not then legally permitted to engage upon those treating the injured target – or further injure the target himself.
This in the real world would be a very scary, difficult and perhaps confusing situation to be in which is why the soldiers go through such extensive training. In the “virtual world” this does not make for an entertaining nor constructive experience. I would find it offensive if games simulated these rules and then gave the player the option to breach them. But I cannot think of a game that has stated it is within the rules of real combat and that you are to abide by them. Such a game would need to put us all through years of training and education to make any allegations that we are being influenced with the opportunity to break international humanitarian law stand! The people playing these games are ignorant to the correct procedures and laws governing war and combat. I will bet my right leg that anyone who has played a war game would not reference the game in the heat of real combat! The games are too far over the top with a very simple representation of combat. The laws of “right and wrong” don’t really apply in “virtual interactions” but it will take much more than those interactions for “right and wrong” to be misunderstood or believed to be realistic.
As gamers we have the luxury of being entertained by interactive media that does not want us to endure the harsh realities of combat. Men and women are fighting and dying to give us the freedom to play these games without fear or constraint. I’ve seen soldiers playing virtual war games as an escape from the realities they face and enjoying the freedom these games offer. These games are so pathetically inaccurate and over the top that they can not be accused of breaching laws in the real world or leading gamers to believe this is how combat is. On top of the fact that the human mind is far too sophisticated to be influenced so easily, the moment anyone signs up for military action – they will undergo such training and face such decisions that videogames simply cannot be of useful reference.
Let me go into a little detail about the procedure of combat. A bullet is fired from a gun in “combat” and that bullet is the result of more than just the trigger finger pulling it. You can trace it back to the mind that sent the signal to pull that trigger. This mind has been trained and taught to observe the situation before making such a decision. Checking for potential damage to innocents, potential danger in giving away his position and likely that of his squad. The effect the bullet landing true will have on the target and those surrounding the target – will it wound and lower morale? Could it exit the target on a dangerous trajectory that may harm additional persons whom could be innocent? That’s after receiving a fire order from the squad leader or a commanding officer. Going back even further and there is the decision from the superiors as to where the “trigger” should be with a (clear) set of instructions/orders on the duty to be performed there. Back even further and we end up in politics and the decisions made by the top brass as to whether the conflict is in the best interests of the nation. The soldier does not have the luxury of knowing whether he is right or wrong in his actions. All this would make for a very boring game and would be insulting to those engaged in real combat if a “game” allowed us to make such decisions under such simulation without real consequence.
Thus I believe gaming does not influence our vision of war and certainly does not affect our abilities to instinctively know what is right and wrong. It protects us from such decisions and the guilt that would break most minds, the actual dangers of combat. It brings people across the world together to communicate, interact and share a positive experience together, ironically such freedom being the result of combat and wars waged over past and present conflicts.
Do games encourage people (other than that “chav” in the hoody “lifting” MW2 from his local HMV) to break real world laws? Do any games what-so-ever seem “real” to you? Or are we all in agreement that videogames are simply interactive entertainment that really only influences the tone of our language, eating and sleeping habits, and spending of hard earned cash? The only additional governing I would like to see in the video games industry is that no parent ever has the right to complain to their child for playing games, unless said parent has a gamerscore above 30,000 or Trophy level of 20.
Now, off to bayonet Mrs Fruit for not telling me where the Pringles are. Been torturing her for days after wiping out her family as a demonstration of my cause but she won’t budge! My stomach is entitled to those Pringles whether they are located on her territory or not!
* Please remember I am not selfish and that you are all entitled to my view too.
Comments
Please note that all comments are the opinion of the individual author and not TheSixthAxis.
JamboGT | 23/11/2009 16:45
Member
428 TSA Points | Member since: Jul 2009
Great tag at the end
JamboGT | 23/11/2009 16:48
Member
428 TSA Points | Member since: Jul 2009
Also,
Whilst this is entirely your opinion and you are entitled to it, I uphold my right to argue and poke holes in your article. However it appears I agree entirely with you so i won’t!
flatspikes | 23/11/2009 16:51
Member
585 TSA Points | Member since: May 2009
Mario: mushrooms make you a big man, stars make you invincible… So perhaps the most famous game in the world doesn’t tell us the truth either… I always find these studies absurd…
Gastos84 | 23/11/2009 16:58
Team TSA: Writer
3888 TSA Points | Member since: Apr 2009
I can’t imagine anyone who plays any of those games and then thinks to themselves: “I really fancy commiting genocide or enlisting in the army”.
Whilst there are certain things that could be done in a more sensitive manner (you know the level of which I speak), I find this kind of study insulting.
Did they also study a range of rhythm based or Karaoke games to discover that it encourages bad singers/musicians to think they are any good?
Did they study a range of racing games to discover that it encourages drivers to think crashing into a wall at 120mph would be fun?
Did they study a range of platform games to discover that it encourages people to collect gold coins and smash brick walls with their heads?
If videogames are breaching human rights it’s because the human rights are ridiculously strict and nobish!
I might be able to understand if the game were called Mass Genocide 3: The Greatest Dictator or Hostage Torturer 2: Tell Me Where The Plans Are.
By the way, great article!
Kings | 23/11/2009 23:40
Member
848 TSA Points | Member since: May 2009
“Hostage Torturer 2: Tell Me Where The Plans Are” Haha genius!
Ryan1991 | 23/11/2009 17:03
Member
1996 TSA Points | Member since: May 2009
Completely agree. I wish we could just tell studies like this to just fuck off. It really grinds my gears when the governments, people, etc. blame games for crimes committed in the real world. I have been playing games like GTA and COD for many years and not once have I committed a crime.
‘anyone who has played a war game would not reference the game in the heat of real combat!’
No but that would be damn funny. Bullets whizzing past your head and your squad mate turns to you and says ‘God. This feels exactly like Modern Warfare 2!’
gazzagb | 23/11/2009 17:17
Master of speling mitakse
2760 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
Great read Fruit, i totally agree with you. Good ending too
AG2297 | 23/11/2009 17:19
Member
374 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
Well written and thought out article. Completely agree with your views. The thing that gets me is that the video games industry (in terms of developers/publishers and the individuals, directors/producers) is so closed and quiet that you dont get big names coming from them like you would with movie directors or authors. Therefore, there is no big name or anyone who is respected from without the industry enough to argue back and show them how silly and un-fair they are being. Annoys me!
BIGAL-1992 | 23/11/2009 17:25
Member
1257 TSA Points | Member since: Jan 2009
Here’s a better idea; why don’t the swiss, or whoever is playing this, shut up, and be reminded that IT IS NOT MEANT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY.
Redlac | 23/11/2009 17:27
Member
62 TSA Points | Member since: Oct 2008
This is a good article, Mr of Doom.
Well, I can’t say the findings of the study surprise me. Or anyone else on here I presume.
When I was young, my dad made a point of telling us young un’s that what was on the screen was not real, and explained that in the real world, the rules about how many bullets a gun could shoot or how many bullets to the chest a man could take were a LOT stricter in real life.
I’m guessing the folks that did this studies, like many other similar studies, were non- gamers.
As a final note; Gastos84, I think Mass Genocide 3: the Greatest Dictator is already out, but I think they called it Command and Conquer: Red Alert 3 to avoid bad press or something. XD
BoyDay | 23/11/2009 17:30
Member
902 TSA Points | Member since: Oct 2008
You mean stuff I see and do in games isn’t always possible or lawful in real life? Shocker! I thought driving round Libery City and shooting anyone I didn’t like the look of was perfectly within the limits of the law, oh well, too late now!
Also, if you killed Mrs. Fruit’s family, does that not mean that you killed yourself as part of that family and therefore wrote this from beyond the grave? Or is being able to do things after you’re dead something else that’s in games (Ghostbusters) that I believed to be possible until reading this frankly earth-shattering news?
Oh well, it’s 5.30 so I’m off home now to re-evaluate everything I know (or thought I did!) about God, life and the universe.
modwyer | 23/11/2009 17:33
Member
228 TSA Points | Member since: Jan 2009
Good article!
BadBoyBoogie | 23/11/2009 17:41
Let There Be Rock
2689 TSA Points | Member since: Mar 2009
Great article!! I like the Trophy level 20 requirement!!
endlesscupsoftea | 23/11/2009 17:58
Member
277 TSA Points | Member since: Oct 2008
how does cluedo and monopoly fit into this, perhaps a study there too
anyone who is an actor must take this study seriously too …..yawn
tjgb | 24/11/2009 13:19
Member
313 TSA Points | Member since: Jul 2009
Funnily enough, I was going to post something similar:
Monopoly doesn’t really teach us the reality of property development, does it? It’s not criticised for it’s over-simplification of the rules of investment.
That said… Just to play devil’s advocate: There is a certain degree of truth in the article, because I have little or no experience of war outside of films and games. For all I know, most wars could play out exactly the same as Timesplitters 2.
Pixl1983 | 23/11/2009 18:06
Member
491 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
Another classic from fruity. Good stuff bro.
I’ve had to give up on the mass media’s poor representation of video games as the taboos are still enough to stop the general public from considering non casual games as an entertainment medium beyond mass killing and virtual wars.
I still find it unfortunate when I look at how many releases use killing as the main device for the gameplay but this is due to publishers not taking risks. If heavy rain can manage to live up to it’s potential, I hope that it will go some way to broadening the horizons of what a game can be.
Ed the Penguin | 23/11/2009 18:12
Member
342 TSA Points | Member since: Dec 2008
They’ll never stop whining, so I think of it this way: If they didn’t have the games to moan about, they’d remember that they haven’t had a moan about films that ‘have a bad influence’ on the people that aren’t legally old enough to watch them!
Ed the Penguin | 23/11/2009 18:13
Member
342 TSA Points | Member since: Dec 2008
Oh, by the way, great article Fruit!
skibadee | 23/11/2009 18:14
Member
3917 TSA Points | Member since: Oct 2009
great read more silliness why would i let a game make my decisions in real life