Is it too soon for a realistic Iraq War game?
Updated at 9:30 a.m. PDT Wednesday to add comment from Konami.
Reports surfaced on Monday that video game company Konami won't be publishing a title from Atomic Games called Six Days in Fallujah.
According to a report by Japanese newspaper Asahi, which cited an unnamed public-relations representative, the negative reaction to the game compelled Konami to drop it. (Editors' note: the report is now missing from the Asahi Web site. Konami spokeswoman Marisa Gross confirms that "Konami will not be publishing Six Days in Fallujah," and the game title is missing from Konami's listed lineup.)
"After seeing the reaction to the video game in the United States, and hearing opinions sent through phone calls and e-mail, we decided several days ago not to sell it," the unnamed source told Asahi. "We had intended to convey the reality of the battles to players so that they could feel what it was like to be there."
Six Days in Fallujah takes players to the infamous battle waged in Iraq in 2004. The game is based on documentation, including videos, photographs, and diary entries, taken from veterans of the battle.
The battle for Fallujah claimed the lives of 38 U.S. troops and approximately 1,500 Iraqis. But whether or not Six Days in Fallujah is really appropriate is up for debate. After the game was first announced, outcry erupted all over the U.S. Konami and Atomic Games were facing off against veterans and those who lost loved ones in the battle.
Gold Star families speak out
In a press release sent to reporters three weeks ago, an organization for Americans who lost loved ones in battle called Gold Star Families Speak Out "expressed outrage" over the possible release of Six Days in Fallujah.
"Gold Star families continue to live with the horrors of war every day, as we mourn the loss of our loved ones," the organization said in a statement. "We question how anyone can trivialize a war that continues to kill and maim members of the military and Iraqi civilians to this day."
Joanna Polisena, sister of Army Staff Sergeant Edward Carman, who was killed in action in 2004, said that "when our loved one's 'health meter' dropped to '0', they didn't get to 'retry' the mission. When they took a bullet, they didn't just get to pick up a health pack and keep 'playing.' They suffered, they cried, they died. We, their parents, siblings, spouses, children, and friends, absolutely find it disgusting and repulsive that those so far detached (and clinging to denial of reality) find it so easy to poke fun at such a thing."
Atomic Games expected that reaction. The company's creative director, Juan Benito, told Joystiq in a recent interview that "there will be a broad range of reactions and opinions on the experience...For some, they may have fun. We are recreating and presenting these events, and people, I think, will have their own individual reactions to it, and those will be across the board. And that's what we want."
The annals of history
But for many, hoping to spur individual reactions isn't acceptable.
Reg Keys, a man who lost his son in the battle for Fallujah, told the United Kingdom's Daily Mail that "glorifying it in a video game demonstrates very poor judgment and bad taste. These horrific events should be confined to the annals of history, not trivialized and rendered for thrill seekers to play out, over and over again, forevermore."
Tim Collins, a former colonel in the Royal Irish Regiment who fought in Fallujah, was equally disturbed by the game. Collins claims that "it's much too soon to start making video games about a war that's still going on, and an extremely flippant response to one of the most important events in modern history. It's particularly insensitive, given what happened in Fallujah, and I will certainly oppose the release of this game."
Veteran support
Although Collins has strong feelings about the game, there are some veterans who support its release.
G4 Media sat down with some veterans from the battle, who said Six Days in Fallujah should be published. They didn't see any issues with its content.
"As a combat veteran and as a gamer, I have no problem whatsoever with the game," Sergeant Casey J. McGeorge told the network. "As long as it's made as realistically as possible, I believe that this could be a good thing for both combat veterans and for the war in general."
Former Sergeant Kevin Smith told the network that he hopes the game will "bolster support for military veterans by giving civilians insight into what this war was actually like for them." He went on to say that he hopes the game "receives positive press and encourages more empathy towards veterans after gamers have experienced what they have gone through."
Unexpected revelation
But what about those who were on the other side of the battle? In an interview with Joystiq, Six Days in Fallujah's developer let slip a revelation that has infuriated some: Atomic Games consulted insurgents to create an ultrarealistic rendition of the battlefield.
"It's important for us to say, you know, that there are actually three communities that are very affected by the battle for Fallujah," Atomic Games President, Peter Tamte told Joystiq. "Certainly the Marines. Certainly the Iraqi civilians within Fallujah, and the insurgents as well. We are actually getting contributions from all three of those communities so that we can get the kind of insight we're trying to get."
He went on to say that insurgents are "involved in the creation of the game. The game--the influences for the game--came from the Marines that returned from Fallujah. But quite frankly, in talking with them, many people would just like this to be a re-creation, and we can't re-create that without getting the perspectives of all the people who were involved."
As you might expect, not everyone was pleased to hear that insurgents played a role in the development of the title.
Dan Rosenthal, a veteran of the Iraq War, told GamePolitics that it's "absolutely unbelievable" that Atomic Games is "soliciting advice and input on how to best kill Marines in a game, from people who have worked to kill Marines in real life."
What's the verdict?
There's no shortage of controversy surrounding Six Days in Fallujah. But which side makes the most compelling argument? Is it too soon for a realistic Iraq War game that takes input from all sides? Is Six Days in Fallujah just plain wrong?
Let's hear what you think in the comments below.
Check out Don's Digital Home podcast, Twitter stream, and FriendFeed.
Don Reisinger is a technology columnist who has written about everything from HDTVs to computers to Flowbee Haircut Systems. Don is a member of the CNET Blog Network, and posts at The Digital Home. He is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.
No one plays Vietnam War themed games, probably because the US lost that war.
I would love to play an Iraq War based game, as long as they make the M16 and M4 realistic where they keep jamming because of the dusty conditions.
Arrest the Iraqi cop that shot up a market full of innocent people (including a 12 year old girl) because his brother was gutted and filled with explosives that killed your cousins when they came to recover the body. He'll be released a couple weeks later and you have to work along side him. Realism in video games is BS. Realism is boredom for hours and days on end until some action picks up which flashes by and time doesn't even matter. You want realism, go do a push up kid. They make games people want to play and call it realistic cause they have pretty graphics and weapons that have the same properties as the real ones.
Oh, and my M4 never once jammed in a year of combat. You want to play a game based on Iraq, join the army. I have too many friends that are ready for a break after their 4th combat tour
A-friggin'-men. I hear those kinds of stories all the time with my buddies who have deployed. Waiting for my turn to play that game in the sandbox...
Face it, our culture is one where people profit from current events by trivializing them in the form of movies and video games. If you don't like premise of the game, don't buy it. I'm sure there will be plenty of media zombies out there who will make up for you.
Clearly the people who gave their diaries and journals didnt have a problem with it, so everyone else really shouldnt. It reminds me of the outrage that people have over movies about certain events in history. As long as things are handled realistically then there shouldnt be a problem.
Hopefully the game still gets released, seems like a large waste of money to not sell it, today!
people need to "forget" the horrors of a war before they can enjoy it as a fantasy .... I say a whole generation needs to pass before a war can be made into a game!!
Another case, I noticed that there hadn't been a hell of a lot of Vietnam games until the late 90s early 2000s. My dad is a Vietnam Vet and when these games started coming out I began to wonder myself if this wasn't to soon? I mean I've heard his stories, my friends dad's were all vets, it almost seemed to close to home you know? I had a hard time imagining that I'd be playing online while someone in the Viet Cong was shooting at me, it was all to easy to imagine it was my dad or friend's dads being shot at. Worse, I'm not sure I could even play as the Viet Cong, the role of the people shooting at my father/acquaintances etc. But I guess for most, enough time had passed and those games came out to relative success and quiet. I however, could not bring myself to play them although I hold nothing against those who did.
Now I don't know anyone who fought in Iraq, but considering it's still going on, I can imagine the hurt families would feel (on both sides) about the roles people take in this game. All of a sudden "sniping" as an insurgent isn't as fun when in real life, a few years ago, that sniper killed your brother. Likewise as an Iraqi, what if one of those errant tank shells you fire in the game was like the one that killed your whole family? Tough pill to swallow and I can understand how it all feels so trivialized.
Who's to say when it's ok to make these games? Is it 10 years, 30 years later? Certainly there were no video games after WWII, Korea or Vietnam (well if pong counts for Vietnam, but not what I mean) so this issue didn't arise. Somehow I feel ok playing on either side of WWII shooter, yeah some of my grandparents were there, but it's now taken the role of a far removed historical event I've studied in college and on my own. It's distant, we have a full understanding of the tragedies that occurred, that there were good and bad individuals and events on both sides, although we know the overall allied cause was a just one. Most of all, we've made peace with it, if you can call it that. We have not made peace with Iraq, it's still happening and I think for many, there is still no peace for the Vietnam war either, to soon, to raw and people are still being effected by them emotionally, psychologically and in the case of Iraq, physically.
The perpetraters were also boasting about their feats to their 'buddies'.
So it is OK to consult with US Marines (whose members regularly commit attrocities) but not with members of the resistance movement of the country they illegally invaded. When you talk about them killing "men who helped the US" they are killing people who are collaborating with the enemy, which is a capital offense in war time in many countries.
I think the general rule here is that it is not OK to make games about wars that the US lost or is losing.
I also suppose that Call of Duty 4 didn't upset anyone with war in its desert environments (during the Marine campaign). Or that Command and Conquer: Generals didn't upset the depiction of the U.S. against the GLA - an opponent very much like the insurgents that we're up against.
Let's face it. People die in wars. If you don't like it, don't send your sons/daughters to a war. Their sacrifice is greatly appreciated, but gaming is a medium that we can teach our kids about the reality of wars. Sure, there's no respawn, and you cannot replay a real war, but to say that games that teaches history and awards players for not getting killed and not getting his/her squad-mates killed are bad is more controversial in my opinion. So let the memories of our soldiers fade away!
Ridiculous!
I was not in the war, but like many people, I have lost family and friends to military operations before. I have no personal experience of what actually happened, so I have no say about the retelling of those events. If someone were to make a game about how my younger brother died in a helicopter crash, I would probably still play the damn game. Not out of lack of respect for my brother or those others who died in the crash, but out of a thirst for experience, knowledge, and respect for those whose story is being told.
The only people who get upset about WWII games are the Germans, because it has become a social stigma (and hey, when you lose a war and society changes around you because of it, you'd be pissed too.) attached to it. My grandfather was killed in France while serving the Nazi army in the early '40s, yet I don't feel victimized every time a brand-new WWII game with Nazi bad-guys comes out.
I don't see my paratrooper uncle complaining about how his time in Afghanistan is being disrespected in the game Call of Duty 4. How about people stop caring so much about how you are being "wronged" or "victimized" and focus on educating the public about actual events, facts, and the experiences of those who were actually there, should they choose to share those experiences?
Why is marijuana illegal? Because people are afraid of it. Why won't this Iraq War game be made? Because people are afraid of it. Why do we kill Nazis with reckless abandon and glee? Because it's "not culturally relevant" any more.
Then use the money for your employees to attend Foo Camp so they can learn to lie better by playing Werewolf so they can make more money for you? The western computing culture is becoming a cancer.
Want images of war? Try this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9E5PboAQ20
- by rayzoredge April 29, 2009 8:57 AM PDT
- I suppose no one is outraged or affected by WWII anymore. Or the Gulf War. Or even the conflicts that the military faces all over the world, day by day, represented in games like America's Army.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (43 Comments)I also suppose that Call of Duty 4 didn't upset anyone with war in its desert environments (during the Marine campaign). Or that Command and Conquer: Generals didn't upset the depiction of the U.S. against the GLA - an opponent very much like the insurgents that we're up against.