I had a post being written where I was going to be discussing Robert Kotick [Activision's CEO] who received significant criticism for stating, "We have a real culture of thrift. The goal that I had in bringing a lot of the packaged goods folks into Activision about 10 years ago was to take all the fun out of making video games." Kotick later stated he tries to promote an atmosphere of "skepticism, pessimism, and fear" in his company and, "We are very good at keeping people focused on the deep depression." Obviously this is not a position I, or many people in the industry of just gamers in general agree with... but really, enough has been said about him, and it's old news by now.
But I had to comment on two things I heard about today.
First is the inclusion of potential same-sex or transgender relationships in Bioware's new game Dragon Age: Origins due out very soon for PS3, Xbox360, and PC. I have seen some peopel applauding the move, and other calling it a step back for gaming, making the gaming industry more like Hollwood.
I have always wanted to see the stigma of "games are for kids" wiped from the mainstream consciousness, and I do believe that having sexual encounters in a game pushes us towards that. Some people have heard me say how much I am a proponent of choice in videogames. I have even lamented that my male Shepard in Mass Effect couldn't have a romance with Kaiden (not that I wanted to, but I felt the option should have been there).
Being the open-minded individual I am I find it very annoying that some people have canceled their pre-orders for this game based on the fact that it has a homosexual sex scene one some obscure branch of the game probability map. Especially when the game so far has been getting glowing impressions and seems to be a very very solid game all around.
Even if the animation is bad, the acting forced, the storyline not the best (not saying any of these are necessarily true of DA:O), these perceived boundaries and taboos have to be pushed for the medium to move forward and grow.
The idea of sex in any media has always been a touchy subject here in the US, much less so other western countries where it's violence that is frowned upon. On that note, we move on to another bit of controversy:
Obviously we're not worried about Epic Mickey, an amazing hold in one, or ZOE3, but the CoD: Modern Warfare 2 footage.
Do I think the footage is disturbing? No, I don't. I have grown too accustomed to the idea of digital characters that violence in games doesn't affect me so much. gore would, but even form that aspect this CoD installment is less gory than it's predecessor CoD: World at War. However I also didn't find the footage of the WTC falling down on 9/11 disturbing until almost 5 years later when I first heard the sound of the towers falling without anything else being audible.
I don't believe the controversy here is over the depiction of the terrorists shooting people in an airport, but more that the player is put into the role of one of those terrorists. I can already hear people saying that this is a simulator to teach terrorists (which is complete BS). Again, I think it is a good thematic device to have the player play the good and bad guy and see a resolution to the struggle from both points.
It's strange that this is a controversy about this at all in my opinion. At least it's strange for gamers to be arguing it, as in games like GTA and such killing people is semi-encouraged, but like this game it is a choice. It's not like the gun in the bad guys hands will automatically fire if the player isn't pressing the trigger, and if the player doesn't... will that change the game?
I say wait to hear if this is even in the game or was it an idea that was tinkered with and then dropped? After all, Hot Coffee was never in the retail version of the game (as much as certain news outlets claimed it was), and Mass Effect wasn't a intergalactic sex simulator (as much as FOX news claimed it was).
The only thing is, games have grown up, maybe it's time the mainstream figured that out.
Posts
