http://www.geektown.ca

« Toughen up your phone - avoiding scratches | Main | Harper vs Obama: Who's more tech savvy? »

11/13/2009

Is Call of Duty's release ill-timed?

It's been a busy few weeks for gamers.Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, heralded as the biggest war-based videogame of all time, hit the shelves on Nov. 10. People were queueing from midnight to get a copy. The title, based on the original, groundbreaking Call of Duty title, features controversial scenes of modern battle -- including, apparently, an optional scene in which you play someone who has infiltrated a terrorist group and happily shoots civilians. But, amid all the hype and celebration, did anyone remember the date?


My little boy went to kindergarten the day before the release, where they held a Remembrance Day ceremony. A lone soldier was there, and talked sombrely about what it was like to fight, and why people have to do it. It's difficult for a five-year-old to understand that -- the notion that people might have to do horrible things to each other in the name of peace, or democracy, or oil. By the time he got to school, I had just about persuaded him not to be scared of the soldier, and explained that he wouldn't be carrying a gun or want to hurt anyone.

On what was meant to be a sombre day of remembrance and grieving, why were people going so crazy for this game? Sure, it's a tour de force of superb graphics, amazing gameplay, new cooperative modes, hidden special ops features, and all the other stuff that you'd expect from a flagship videogame in 2009. But when I watched the video interview with Infinity Ward, which developed the game, there was nary a mention of the underlying ethics of game publishing, of the social relevance of the subject matter, or of anything, indeed, other than the relentless drive for veracity, graphics, and better game controllers.

Modern day console gaming is largely about realism. How realistic can you make the experience? How juicy does the simulated blood look from inside your virtual visor? But, isn't this veracity at odds with what veterans were trying to explain to us that week? Remembrance Day isn't about calling to mind what it looks and feels like to pump a round of 40 calibre ammo into your nearest enemy. It's about remembering how horrific war can be, and trying not to do it again. Or celebrate it.

Activision-Blizzard, which publishes the game, will no doubt protest that it is making a $1 million donation to unemployed military veterans through the Call of Duty Endowment (CODE), a Charity Foundation of the Veterans. Surely, then, it must care about its vets? Except that, let's be frank, Call of Duty 4 sold 7 million units, and was heralded as the world's best-selling game of 2007. Not, you know, that I want to be cynical, or anything.

Call me overly moralistic if you like, but I don't want my five-year-old growing up playing this dehumanizing brain candy. I want him to be scared of war when he's older, and to understand that the people his great-grandfather had to bomb in Europe were living, breathing sons and daughters, and not just exquisitely animated pixels.

You'd think that when we are trying to honour the people that died for our freedoms, they'd give it a rest, and truly honour the dead, rather than trying to turn it into a media event to sell a product which celebrates, rather than mourns. Me? I'll take a silent moment and read some Wilfred Owen instead. And when I look at my children over lunch, I'll pray for a peaceful world in which they never have to fight, and never want to revel in the joys of hyper-realistic, simulated killing.

Danny Bradbury, MSN Tech and Gadgets

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Post a comment

advertisement

Danny BradburyDanny Bradbury

Danny Bradbury is a technology journalist with 20 years' experience. He writes regularly for publications including the Guardian, the Financial Times, the Financial Post, and Backbone magazine. Danny also writes and directs documentaries.