Separator
Are historically-based games definable as escapism?
Default_picture
Sunday, May 24, 2009

I'm going to propose a rather odd idea to you, and it's one I've been thinking deeply about since I realised the last person to actually shoot a Nazi officer was probably my grandfather.

With videogames, as with every industry, inspiration for an original idea is something that's fairly hard to come by, when you consider that everything that could be done, has already indeed been done. We have everything from elves to spaceships to Italian plumbers chasing turtles through a kingdom of omnipresent fungi, and there is no real inspiration anymore bar what has come before.

However, with games based on real events, there doesn't need to be. You can take a small battle that lasted a few weeks in WWII, and turn it into a ten to fifteen hour campaign for someone to run, jump and shoot through until they're satisfied at the 1000 G mark. But is that really escapism? Surely one of the main reasons we play videogames is to escape, as it were, the monotony of everyday existence, to become orcs, and superheroes. But to apply an inherent aspect of verisimilitude to a videogame's narrative events and the logic in the game-world itself is a bizarre concept for a Friday night experience with a curry and a controller.

The Call of Duty titles do what they say on the back of the box - it's a war game, you're a soldier, and you're fighting the good fight against various historical antagonists from a variety of viewpoints. This all checks out, but where it stumbles is the concept that people will actually want to sit down and have a war played out for them that, in reality, cost around fifty-six million people their lives. But we don't see the concentration camps, the slavery; all the true horrors of war are gone, and we banish the reminders of the Nazi regime with a gentle squeeze of the right trigger.

It could feasibly be argued that these are wars we should draw attention to, that the developer is by no means glamorising war any more than George Lucas glamorises leather and lightsaber violence. But this is besides the point: regardless of whether or not the violence itself is presented as inherently glamorised, are the massed narrative events breaking the fourth wall? I think about history and how all of this could have been avoided while playing Call of Duty and charging into the Normandy beach landing, but at the same time, I simply enjoy the narrative based around guerilla warfare and the anti-government subtext so present throughout Final Fantasy VII. Why are they different? Because Normandy is a short EasyJet trip away, and Midgar isn't.

Sometimes it's feasible to wonder that if war is not an escapist topic, what about games like GTA IV, that glamorise the concept of theft and homicide by placing the player in the position of a protagonist who happens to be the perpetrator of said crimes? Personally, I don't feel that this works in the same way, simply because Liberty City, for all its references to New York, isn't a real place, and Niko Bellic isn't a real person.

Arguably, neither are the protagonists in COD 4: Modern Warfare. But the events are real, and for me that breaks a lot of the boundaries I need to have in place in order to immerse myself in a universe that needs to feel created and not simply copied from historical blueprints. Imagine Oblivion as a reworked Cantebury Tales, with you as Chaucer. No swords, no magic, no lizard-people. Just you, Middle England, and the world's most confusing dialogue. Certainly an engaging experience for the brilliant narratives inherent in the various poems in the Cantebury Tales themselves, but still too realistic to drag your soul out of reality and deposit it in a world where fire is something that can be shot out of the hand, not from flamethrowers.

To summarise, I don't believe in escapism in videogames when it comes to something based around an existing historical event. Sure, you could work in some narrative based around fictional characters designed to make the wheels turn and progress the story between one historical event and another, but the main bulk of the story and the key plot events are still real. I think the only historically based game you're ever going to find some degree of escapist experience in is one based in North Korea, and that's simply because developers with cameras, sketchbooks and mo-cap isn't something that'll happen there anytime soon.

 
0
BITMOB'S SPONSOR
Adsense-placeholder
Comments (12)
Default_picture
May 25, 2009
I think that any game, no matter it's time period, historical references, or characters, can still be used to escape the monotony of the real world, if only for a bit of time. While you're right that the events were real, what about the fact that it still takes you to place that you, being your current age, could never go to. Granted, it's possible for you to be put into the army now, and shipped off...but these places and things that we read about from middle school on, they take on almost a mythical quality to the people who will never know what it was like. Obviously games like COD don't give you the story as much as the action, but it's still being put into a situation that you would normally never find yourself in. At least, that's my view.
Default_picture
May 25, 2009
This is true, and I agree, we are indeed removed from the events by either age or location. But at the same time, sometimes I wonder if basing it on a real events was just simpler for the developers than actually creating original content in the way of setting and narrative.
Default_picture
May 25, 2009
I don't know your age, but I'm 22. And ever since I can remember, WWII and wars like it have always held a..."Wow I wonder what it was like there" quality with me. And apparently it has done the same with developers, at least in the beginning. I think what makes War ground-zero for a lot of games is that, there's already inherent conflict. You already have a bad guy and a good guy that everyone is familiar with. Perhaps before online gaming, the game itself wasn't much of an escape, like you're thinking now. But with being able to play with people from around the world, the fact that you can make a squad, take on other squads, and brag about how good you are is what makes games like COD something to be used as an escape. No longer are you Christos, sitting on the couch with a headset. For an hour or more, you can be XxDudemanxX, an awesome soldier trained in the art of kicking ass with sticky grenades and you're a beast with up close with a knife.
Default_picture
May 25, 2009
Personally, I'm two years your junior. Hitler is probably the only example I can think of within the war-based aspect of human history that strikes me as a globally recognisable antagonist.

I think World of War's prediliction for Nazi Zombies have really gone a long way to exemplify the issue some players face: when surrounded by a war that took its toll on a world outside the television, it's nice to kick back and shoot some undead in uniform.

The military aspect is great, I think they've dealt with a lot of sensitive issues very well, but personally I was focusing more on the single player campaign than online. I think the online play is fantastic and very immersive because the gameplay is so intense, but at the same time, I'm far more aware it's a game in multiplayer because of the presence of other sentient minds. With single player, immersion is a key game mechanic, and I think basing things too heavily around history sometimes hinders it a little.
Default_picture
May 25, 2009
You make a good point about being online, and maybe I think that way because I've been lucky enough to find a group that, while they can screw off every now and then, they are fantastic when it comes to working together. I suppose because I am an avid online player, our views would never really mesh well when it comes to the fact of whether or not war games can be escapes from ordinary life.
Default_picture
May 25, 2009
I'm fairly happy about online play, I used to play WoW to a scary degree (read: one of those "main-tank" nuts you read about occasionally), and I play a ton of TF2, though to be fair that's not really a game with any single-player aspect.

I also pay Battlefield Heroes, and if you've played that, the teams are basically parodies of WWII American and German troops. Sometimes a little "errrm..." moment, but generally a good laugh. I'm all for online play, and I think COD games are actually more enjoyable and immersive online than they are offline, but to me that sometimes seems a little backwards.
Brett_new_profile
May 25, 2009
But at the same time, sometimes I wonder if basing it on a real events was just simpler for the developers than actually creating original content in the way of setting and narrative.


I'm confused, Christos. Are you saying that developers have turned to historically-based games because they're lazy?

People have fictionalized history since the Odyssey. You say that it's strange to spend a Friday night with curry and a controller killing Nazis, but is that so different from sitting down with popcorn and a soda to watch Schindler's List or Saving Private Ryan? Or powdering your wig to go see a performance of Richard III at the Globe theatre? History is nothing but a muddle of events that only begins to resemble a coherent narrative after historians have taken a stab at it. Even then, it's often impersonal, so we turn to fiction to help us empathize, to help us understand -- and yes, to escape. Just because we can fly to Normandy doesn't mean that upon arriving we'd instantly know what it was like to be there on June 6, 1944; that it's not escapism to put yourself in the shoes of a grunt struggling onto Omaha Beach.

Game developers realize this as much as writers and filmmakers do. They're also interested in making a buck. You may be right about developers being lazy, but for a different reason than you state. Developers churn out WWII games and the like for one simple reason: they're profitable. And they're profitable because we are constantly craving to understand history -- even if it's the funhouse-mirror view of history found in games and movies.
Default_picture
May 25, 2009
I'm not saying they're being lazy, I just think WWII is a seriously tired setting for a video game in 2009, where there have already been more than I can name. I find the concept of basing games around the conflict in Iraq slightly more relevant.

These films you mention are intended to make the viewer think about war, about the suffering and the hardship that go along with it, not just for refugees and residents of concentration camps, but for the soldiers, men and women who are fighting for their lives in a more voluntary way. If those films did nothing to provoke your thoughts then that's a personal thing, and just opinion, but I reckon there's more depth to them than an explosive action-adventure romp.

WWII is indeed a profitable medium, and I think one of the reasons Too Human was popular was because it was essentially a retelling of various tidbits of Norse Mythology. I just think that personally, for me, playing war games makes me think about war. I don't claim, by any means, that it's the same for everyone, but for me? Yes.
Brett_new_profile
May 26, 2009
To be clear, are you saying that a historically based game/movie/book/etc. can't be escapism because it makes you think about the actual events? Why can't something be both entertaining and escapist and mentally stimulating?
Brett_new_profile
May 26, 2009
By the way, great post. Plenty to mentally spar over.
Default_picture
May 26, 2009
For me, it's not so much I think they're not forms of escapism, just not as viable as something I can sink into compared to Oblivion and games with a more fantastical setting. I suppose it depends on taste, but I was more pondering if anyone ever plays COD and thinks about the actual conflict it's based on.

Many thanks for the compliment, I shall attempt to post a couple of times a week :).
Brett_new_profile
May 26, 2009
Fair enough. I think whether or not someone's going to think about the actual conflict depends on the particular set of circumstances that person brings to the table. Are they in the military? Do they have relatives in the military? Are they history buffs? Are they Jewish? And so on.

For me, WWII-based games have never really resonated, but wow, Modern Warfare was powerful stuff.
You must log in to post a comment. Please register or Connect with Facebook if you do not have an account yet.