More Nazis! I Mean, Japanese.
June 9th, 2008, 2:02pm by GeoffCall of Duty 5 details have come out, and it looks like we’re returning to World War II. This has of course prompted a whole host of complaints from sites like Destructoid, who argue that WW2 is played out and that we should be looking at other conflicts for inspiration. I’d agree that there are plenty of games like this out there, but this complaint strikes me as largely unfounded.
First off, why are there so many WW2 games? For one, it’s because the war was one of the few with undeniably, unambiguously ”good” and “bad” guys. You’d be hard-pressed to find anyone - Pat Buchanan aside - willing to argue that this wasn’t a “good war.” As a result, you can mow down hordes of other human beings without feeling too terrible about yourself. And you get a nice warm glow inside when you accomplish your objectives. Second, it’s epic: there just aren’t any other wars out there in the modern era with the same kind of epic scope and scale that World War 2 has… even WW1 was relatively uninteresting trench warfare for a significant portion of its duration. As a result, there is a lot of ground to mine. Third, it’s got neat gadgets. WW2 was where many of the tools of modern warfare, like the tank and air combat, first came into their own. Therefore, designers can make a fairly diverse and interesting experience out of combat. And finally, it’s got a happy ending: the right people won. Good gameplay scenarios in an epic battle between good and evil: sounds like it should get a lot of attention.
Additionally, there just aren’t that many other attractive scenarios. The most obvious US battles of the last 150 years or so would probably include the US Civil War, World War I, Korea, and Vietnam. Yet the first has quite a few games of its own. And the latter three just aren’t very inspiring: Korea had an ambiguous outcome, and it’s not nearly as widely known as most other fights. And Vietnam is such a cultural touchstone, with so many political connotations, that it’s tough to come up with a real game that isn’t also a political statement.
Also consider the fact that even now, companies are able to advance the WW2 game in any number of ways - from CoD’s original European-focused titles, to RTS’s like Close Combat and Company of Heroes, there are plenty of recent games that do more than simply parrot their forebearers. If the genre is stagnant, let’s hear complaints. But “no more WW2″ is reflexively negative without due reason.
And lastly, it would be remiss to note that the Pacific theater is one that hasn’t been touched on in nearly the same detail as Europe. The fact that CoD 5 is targeting this area seems like a great reason to consider it optimistically. The CoD series hasn’t let us down yet.
Posted in Wii, Geoff, PC, Xbox 360, PS3 |
June 9th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Most of the consternation about CoD5 comes from the hardcore market and is based on developer. Treyarch’s last CoD game (#3) wasn’t well-regarded, and they’re doing CoD5. Infinity Ward’s entries have been the best in the series, so it’s always a bit disappointing when they aren’t tapped for the games.
June 9th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
These games are on a 2-year development cycle, but in order for Activision to, in their own words, “exploit” the franchise each year, they need to have two developers. Treyarch was probably already working on CoD5 before CoD4 even came out, and Infinity Ward is probably already working on CoD6 as well.
June 9th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
This is why they hate the internet. WW2 shooters come out and everyone loves them. So companies make more…now WW2 games like COD3 are stale and played out…so they wnat more modern games like COD4…but then they will be played out and we’ll haveto go back to wwII again….
June 9th, 2008 at 6:55 pm
WW2 shooters set in Europe might be played out, but I think a Pacific theater game has potential. It’s definitely less explored than Europe, and opens up some interesting Far Cry-esque island possibilities…
June 9th, 2008 at 10:26 pm
I agree with Geoff’s Post 4, except more forcefully: developers are scared of touching the Pacific scene, because negatively portraying the Japanese is politically incorrect…because of their presence in the VG industry, no doubt. And that is disappointing. I mean, the closest that we have ever come to WW2 Pacific game in a console [correct me if i’m wrong] is 1942….from Capcom!!! And not from Western dev! And it’s a shmup, not a FPS.
[Which is unfortunate, because there was not one Holocaust, there were two HOlocaust, it’s just that it’s more “safe” to negatively portray Germans and Nazis, because Japan is our ally, and they make our cars and our electronics
]
That said: Geoff’s original article is mistaken! Continuing to regurgitate the WW2 scene [i.e. the European scene] would be a shame. Do the Korean War, do the vietnam war. CoD4 is the best CoD because of its setting, and the awesome military technologies that create new gameplay [ex: seeing the battlefield top-down trhough infrared sensors]. Afraid that you would offend people? Then, do an imaginary war, like Resistance FoM.
Stop. Sucking. on General Patton.
June 10th, 2008 at 12:55 am
The Japanese theater hasn’t been explored as MUCH, but it’s been done I think a couple times before… for instance, Medal of Honor: Pacific Assault. This may be new for the CoD series, however.
I do have a feeling that it’s, overall, probably a touchier subject. While the Japanese were allied with the Axis, they weren’t “Nazis”. Nazis are pretty much an automatic known evil, whereas the “Japanese soldier” is at least slightly more ambiguous. Certainly, within the context of a war game it’d be acceptable to portray, but it is perhaps one of the reasons why it hasn’t been done quite as much.
I wonder whether the environments won’t be as interesting, at least to a Western gaming audience. It’s possible that running around through jungles could get more boring than bombed out towns and European countryside… on the other hand, I suppose in the right hands, any environment could probably be made to work.
June 10th, 2008 at 8:51 am
@ Jeff -
I don’t really disagree, although incidents like the Rape of Nanjing or various south Pacific death marches indicates that the Japanese soldiers may have been, at the level of the individual soldier, even more sadistic than the Germans. (Naturally, I’m distinguishing between the average German soldier and the Nazis themselves, since it’s pretty much impossible to argue with the concentration camps.)
The jungles can indeed get boring (see Far Cry). But since there’s not too much interesting about landscapes in any game, hopefully the missions will make up for it.
June 10th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
“since it’s pretty much impossible to argue with the concentration camps.”
Since when is trying to destroy entire languages and cultures and superimpose their ’superior’ Japanese ones, any less criminal than what Nazis did? Since when is shooting babies and children in front of their parents’ very eyes to “set an example” any less “bad” than gassing 6 million Jews and 6 million Nonjews? Since when is raping literaelly and figuratively countless cities and nations any less than raping the entirety of Eastern Europe?
I think the “Nazi” mark and the “German stereotype” is many times stronger in the US’s mindset than the Toyota-crunching, VG-making Japanese ally of the Cold War. And it shows: when you ask “When did WW2 start?” People will answer: 1939, when Germany invaded Poland.
LOL
[PS: this is not a swipe at you, Geff, just a general comment
]
June 10th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
Paz,
I think it’s a question of scale rather than severity. The Japanese committed atrocities, but those atrocities were not systematic or institutionalized, nor were they inflicted on as many people. Obviously, these are debater’s points, but I don’t think the Japanese lend them to a Manicheaen narrative quite as easily.
June 10th, 2008 at 11:22 pm
^ this post above me is completely inaccurate and shows US bias