Games vs. Reality: Ethics question

[InCreator]

I find modern world quite interesting. Whenever you turn on news channel, you'll always find something to watch.
War in Iraq, terrorism, etc all over the globe. People are crazy.

Now, I find that turning a similar happening into a game may result something interesting. And I'm not the only one, game companies have figured out that long ago. Like Delta Force: Black Hawk Down, which is entirely about war in Somalia in 90's. Or all these WWII games. Vietnam war games. Almost half of the first-person-shooters use some real theme. The real-world-story is often much more interesting that abandoned space stations in far future or ancient lands of the wizards and dragons.

Adventure games seem to have much unconquered land here, especially since in other genres, story is there just to back up the action, but adventure games are the story and how player uncovers and advances it.

Then again, the question of ethics come into way.
Imagine an adventure game where - for example, you play as MI5 agent, investigating London bombings. Would such game result high popularity, or anger of people instead?
But wouldn't it be interesting concept?

[Kweepa]

There are some strange ethics at play here.
For example Wolfenstein/Battlefield 1942 allows you to play as Axis forces killing Allies, and nobody bats an eyelid (well, except in Germany). The player is lauded for his kill count.
But release a Kennedy assassination simulator and your company is reviled as exploitative scum, despite the known outcome.
I think you'd probably have to wait a while before the public would accept your game about recent terrorist attacks. You'd have to write it pretty carefully...


It's odd that in real life, I condemn the Guantanamo Bay detention centre, but when watching 24, I'm shouting at the tv for Jack to keep torturing them! THEY MUST KNOW SOMETHING!

[PsychicHeart]

Well, in MS Flight Sim 2001, to prevent anger over the 9/11 incident, when you crashed, rather than show your plane go up in flames, it just had a small message saying you had crashed. And events like 9/11 have not only sparked war games with a similar plot, but comedy games. If you have ever played America's Ten Most Wanted you know what i mean.

[HillBilly]

For example Wolfenstein/Battlefield 1942 allows you to play as Axis forces killing Allies, and nobody bats an eyelid (well, except in Germany). The player is lauded for his kill count.
But release a Kennedy assassination simulator and your company is reviled as exploitative scum, despite the known outcome.

I'm guessing that's because you're killing one person specifically. In Battlefield and such, you just kill random people with random names. You don't HAVE to kill one person in specific, aslong as it's a nazi/alley. Most of what you're doing in Battlefield didn't happen historically correct, but the point in the JFK game is to do it as accurate to history as possible.

Atleast, that's just my guess. I could of course be terribly wrong.

[CoffeeBob]

Well, in MS Flight Sim 2001, to prevent anger over the 9/11 incident, when you crashed, rather than show your plane go up in flames, it just had a small message saying you had crashed.

That's just stupid, IMO. Why people would go mad over a virtual plane crashing into a virtual building I don't understand. After all, It's just a game.

[Helm]

Personally I wouldn't mind if someone made a game where you eat fresh raw babies. Most people would, and will be upset if a theme they feel strongly about is TAKEN LIGHTLY in a game. The kennedy game, although I haven't played it, it just that - a gimmick, KILL KENNEDY YOURSELF. If it was a well thought-out murder mystery, with extensive backround material, rounded characters etc etc up to the day where you control the sniper rifle(s) nobody would mind. In fact, they'd be pleasantly surpised to see a topic such as this be treated with due seriousness and respect instead of VIETNAM - KILL AS MANY CHARLIE AS YOU CAN YOU ARE THE HERO levels of game-design we usually get.

So, if you approach real life in your game, do you research, portray things evenly, so even if someone gets angry, your position is fortified.

[Blitzerland]

That's just stupid, IMO. Why people would go mad over a virtual plane crashing into a virtual building I don't understand. After all, It's just a game.

You'd hate Half-Life 2, then. There's no friendly fire, and you can't kill your squadmates.

Of course, there's a reason for it, namely, it would break the plot. Not showing an aircraft exploding, though...that's just stupid. If you're going to play the game for six hours only to crash, you should at least get to see yourself burst into flames.