LogFAQs > #950950067

Spec Ops: The Line put players into a fictional scenario that confronted the very real, human consequences of the atrocities committed in wars like that in Iraq (including personally bombing an area with white phosphorous and then walking through the aftermath, which is one of the most memorable scenes I've ever experienced in a game). This one is putting players into a historic scenario, but steering clear of confronting players with any of the consequences of what actually happened. Don't want to get too political, after all, because there's nothing political about the War in Iraq.

I will say that it is possible for a game to tackle difficult political subjects without explicitly stating a political opinion, and instead just presenting events and their consequences and letting people form their own thoughts and feelings on the matter. The aforementioned Spec Ops generally didn't tell the player to feel bad about what they were doing. It just lead them to do it, then gave them a chance to think about it. But there's a world of difference between "we're not going to state an opinion because the impact will be greater if the player figures it out for themselves" and "we're not going to try to inform players about the reality of the situations they're playing in because we might offend somebody and make less money." By the sounds of things, this game is just being spineless, though there's a part of me that hopes I'm wrong and they're actually just trying to avoid spoiling all the war crimes to make them more impactful.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.