Fallujah, Art, and Ebert

I wanted to add some of my own thoughts in addition to Geoff’s excellent post on the game 6 Days in Fallujah.

I generally agree with what Geoff has to say, but I think the “controversy” arises from a feeling that maybe you shouldn’t be having “fun” with something that’s actually happening now (or in the past, I suppose), where people are actually dying. In the brief Joystiq impressions they mention the developers seemingly want to emphasize the “realism” and note that buildings are modeled down to the “brick” level, so that when they’re destroyed you can destroy them brick by brick.  At the same time, though, they mention that your teammates can seemingly absorb an infinite amount of bullets without flinching, and you will also magically regain your own health if you just wait a few seconds in cover (like most FPS games on the market now).  Do these “gamey” enhancements that ultimately make the experience more “fun” disrespect those actually fighting (or who have fought) in the war?  And if this doesn’t constitute disrespect, is there a point at which the “gamey enhancements” do?

Movies and TV have been portraying wars for quite a long time and rather than attracting a lot of criticism for being disrespectful they often win awards.  Saving Private Ryan and Band of Brothers, for instance, are often commended for their realistic depictions of war even as they are, at the same time, enjoyable, entertaining, and, dare I say, “fun” experiences.  They’re also, of course, quite emotionally affecting in other ways than just the visceral “thrill” of the fire fights, and this is probably what saves them, and indeed, elevates them in many ways to the accolades that they end up receiving.

And herein is where, I think, we reach the nut of why this bothers some people: games just haven’t quite reached the level of other forms of entertainment yet as far as being an emotionally engaging “artistic” experience (yes, this is basically the “Ebert” argument), at least not on a consistent and culturally accepted basis.  The “Ebert” argument would probably contend (among other things) that adding these “gamey” enhancements prohibits the game from ever being “art”, though to be honest, movies and TV can do the same thing (people don’t necessarily have infinite life, but they can dodge quite a few bullets).  I’m not convinced that these enhancements prohibit a “serious” take on the material, but for many, the “games as art” threshold hasn’t quite been crossed yet for them to accept the gaming medium as a “serious” one.

I think this little conflict shows both that gaming has a ways to go before it can command “respect” in the same way that books, movies, and TV sometimes do. At the same time, even if 6 Days in Fallujah isn’t exactly a masterpiece, I think the “controversy” is probably an encouraging sign that the medium is still continuing to mature.