Are video games pushing reality and real conflicts a bit too much?

[BeerHunter]

I am all for realisms in a game. The reason I am enjoying PRM is that it is the only game I’ve come across so far that actually allows one to utilize some of the real tactics, deployments etc available if you get into the right squad.

I am, however, a little disturbed by the settings and general themes of these games.

PRM has a map in which American or British forces are attacking mosques and fighting “insurgents” which is obviously meant to refer to Muslims radicals, which disturbs me. These “Insurgents” can use the very same weapons and tactics that are being used against Coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan (ie suicide bombings, IED’s).

I know the word “insurgents” does not mean “Muslim radical” but combined with the settings, weapons, art work and mosque that must be captured, what other conclusion can one come to?

A mod (map) being developed for PRM plays Canadian forces in Afghanistan.

A recently released mod (Insurgency) places allied forces in Iraq.

Is it fair to make light of these very real situations in a video game?

Sure the majority of adult game players will see them for what they really are, simply pixels on a screen depicting various weapons/factions etc. but others outside the gaming community may not see these games as such light entertainment, especially if they have loved ones involved in these very real conflicts.

They may be wondering why we, as game players, are enjoying ourselves playing war games based on the same conflicts their loved ones are living and dieing.

[[R-DEV]bosco]

-[Just a reminder in the beginning: Keep the discussion clean and don't drag it into the typical "OMG evil US out of IRAQ NOW!!!1111" kind of thread.]-

[[R-MOD]Wasteland]

As long as people don't depict real engagements (by recreating YouTube videos for example, more on this subject here: *edited by Evilhomer* Removed the link. Dont want that topic to spill over into here *End edit by Evilhomer* I see nothing wrong with this. Video games allow the user to simulate the real. If the real is Iraq, why shouldn't Iraq be simulated?

You've correctly linked reality based games to current conflicts, but you have yet to establish an ethical argument showing the simulation of modern conflict to be amoral.

[Evilhomer]

edited

[Ghostrider]

Movies do the same thing, yet video games are the only ones that get 'attacked'..even by legistators with anti-game bills etc..

I like real-life simulations of things from infantry combat (PRM, ArmA) to air combat (LoMAC, Falcon 4.0 AF), from FPS to RTS. Its just like action movies because they're appealing to people, but better than them because they're interactive.

I've never seen someone watch the same movie (possibly every day) for over 1.5 years straight...yet most of you play PRM every night.


-Ghost

[[R-MOD]Wasteland]

Can I quote pertinent parts of my essay in that thread here?

[Evilhomer]

I would rather you wouldnt to be honest. but its a free country i guess.

[DirtyHarry88]

Well they made Half Life and that was based on real events so I don't see the problem.

[Haarek84]

well.. for me its arma thats the most realistic game for now.. VBS2 also exists, but only for military combat training :/

[Fondue]

Well they made Half Life and that was based on real events so I don't see the problem.

What, aliens taking over the world, only to be foiled by a scientist with a crowbar?