Blog
A Cartridge Too Far?
Part II: A Little Less Sancitmony, A Little More Action, Please
by theturk
Click here to read PART ONE of this article
Whether it was sheer voyeurism or a yearning to witness and replay a major event, I find still today that any footage of the destruction of the World Trade Center towers glues me to any television or computer screen that it's displayed on. Perhaps it's as simple as wanting to revisit that genuine feeling of shock and surprise, but like the Kennedy assassination of a past generation, pouring over such material is simply interesting to me. I imagine many people feel the same way, as they also probably feel that such an interest should not be condemned as a sick thrill or morbid novelty.
It wasn't until a year or so later that I had caught wind of the latest venture to make money from the attacks; never mind the baseball caps, gaudily emblazoned with FDNY or NYPD, or bumper stickers bearing insipid motto's of freedom, pasted on our cars and hanging on racks in our convenience stores. This was a video game that would feature as one of it's levels an escape from one of the towers between the moment it was hit and the time it collapsed. Other levels were to include escaping from other infamous disasters (earthquakes, riots, and the like). I haven't heard anything about the game recently, although it stands to reason that if a company was willing to design, manufacture, and distribute such a game, then there must have been a focus group or poll given that gave them the impression that enough of the gaming public would want to buy this game.
My initial reaction was not shock at a disgusting example of capitalism gone wrong; there have been hundreds of phony agendas, fake charities, or on a much larger scale, a war, which were all predicated on the attacks. Why should a video game incur the wrath of an angry citizen when there have been so many other atrocities committed in the name of freedom? What harm can a video game do to people after such an attack?
That said, there is something to be said for discretion. Should there be a video game where one must escape the flaming towers we all saw on that Tuesday morning? The answer is unclear, but only as unclear as whether there should be a game where the object is to fly a plane into one of the towers. If that sounds just plain wrong, then maybe the entire idea should be scrapped. This argument could never be brought to the center of video games based in historical events, because one day a gamer might ask, "Should there be/Is there/Where can I buy a game where I can play as the Germans/Japanese/Vietnamese/Iraqis?".
Video game creators should have the freedom to design any game they like. It is taking advantage of that freedom which calls into question just how careful we should be, and have to be. Just because something can be made does not presume it is in good taste; likewise, good taste is neither evident nor lacking in a gamer who decides to sit down and play such a game, and ends up liking it a lot.
Gaming is escapist entertainment to a tee, more so than books and movies and music, because unlike those three, video games have the potential to fully immerse, as you take control of the world, fictitious as it may be. It is a road that seems to be fraught with peril, to attempt to handle serious issues that still resonate with millions in an alternate world as contained as a video game.
Comments
I don't know if theturk reads his comments but...
"likewise, good taste is neither evident nor lacking in a gamer who decides to sit down and play such a game, and ends up liking it a lot."
I gotta ask what you mean by that sentence? As in, what are you trying to say to the contrary or even relevance to your opinion. It seems to be a dichotomy, or even a silent disclaimer to be diplomatic in some way, considering that the article has a candy coat of opinion. Help me understand your point in regards to this sentence.
Propz on the last paragraph.
Thanks for the comments, Mackuss. Nice to be noticed. :)
It meant that it's no indication of being a good or bad person to like something that may be considered obscene, like a video game about the World Trade Center.
Can you explain your phrase 'a candy coat of opinion'? I ask because well, it smacks of superiority. These articles aren't really meant to be an indictment of any aspect of video game culture, hence the 'diplomatic' appearance. All I'm trying to do is bring up some things that people might have an opinion on. This particular concept is a bit inflammatory though, which may be why I brought it up. Thank you again for the comments.
I dont know what other people think, but a game made to recreate the events of 9/11 seems like a bad idea. For all the people who died that day and their families, its just ubsurd. I knew people that died and trying to make money off an idea like that sickens me. Sorry I dont mean to be so angry. The movies that have been made have told of bravery and courage of the people who saved lives and died that day. Not an interactive game. thats what these poeple are trying to make, a game. Maybe its just me or its too soon, but please who ever had this idea, dont make this game. It may be a Free country, but there is also a thing called right and wrong. A bumbpersticker may be to show patriotism. But a game, is just not rite.
The fact is there is no call or reason for a game about September 11th, Iraq or any tragedy for that matter. The problem is, if people are willing to play the game, developers are going to design them. It is completely unjustifiable that any game manufacturer would profit from the misery and tragedy of others, but I have a feeling that people who have lost loved ones to carjacking may hold that Grand Theft Auto is crossing the line. Sadly, you have to hope that businesses would have more sense than to try to capitalize on these events, but you can't ask for regulation or control, because then you get into censorship.
I'm not up for even reading reviews on that game but I will say this. If they really wanna make a game about the events that took place on 9/11 then they should wait about 50 years. A lot of people I know have no problem with World War II games. That's more than likely because they never lived through or during that war. World War II happened so many years ago and no one my generation remembers it so they have no problem but if they were to play a game where they are to live through the events of 9/11 then a lot of teens may even question the game. They won't want a part of it because it occured during their lifetime and I doubt they'll want to relive the scenes again. Especially if the game contains gorey images of the people that died in the attack.
Well I'm sorry if "candy coat" came off as pretentious, I was simply saying that, basically, the entire second paragraph pretty much states your opinion on the matter, especially your use of the word insipid and what it's describing. So my confusion is basically, how do you want to portay that WHILE coming off with a "diplomatic" approach. It's just clashing. So my next question is....what IS your opinion on such a game? Where do YOU really draw that line between good taste and the lack there of? You gotta have one. Everyone has their values. Don't be diplomatic, : )
I love good conversations.