Debate: Six Days in Falljuah
You’ve likely been following the controversy around Six Days in Fallujah over the past few days/weeks. If not, here’s a brief recap: The title, an Atomic Games project that has been in the works since 2005, was scheduled to be published by Konami. It has been labeled as a “game-umentary,” referring to the fact the game takes place during the second Battle of Fallujah. Trademarks were filed, and time went by.
Eventually Konami announced the game to the public, and opposition started almost immediately. It got revealed that American enemies were brought in as consultants, and the recency of the whole situation caused a lot of backlash and quibbling. Konami backed out because things were looking grim, and the game has been left without a publisher. Not only that, but it has been left without a publisher in the midst of much negativity towards the title, making it risky business for any other publisher to pick it up and move forward.
Reports went out that the game was possibly never going to be published.
Destineer, a sister company of developer Atomic Games, is determined to make it happen, one way or another.
One of the big issues about the whole thing is whether or not insurgents who fought against Americans were paid for their consulting with the project. Atomic Games did issue a statment to Kotaku saying they were in no way compensated. If that’s the case, then that puts that issue to rest.
So, dear Addicted Gamers, we encourage you to debate this subject. Should this game be made? Does the recency of the events make it more or less appropriate for people to be playing? Does recency really change anything, or is this no different than any of the hundreds of WWII titles out there? Do we need realistic adaptations to be floundered in fiction and not presented “game-umentary” style? Do you see this as insensitive towards those involved in real life? Please tell us what you think.
I will chime in with your responses, but I don’t want to color the argument by putting my personal opinion in the article. See you in the comments.
I think it should be made. In the past there have been movies, documentaries and books that have been eye opening because of how honest they were.
I don’t know the whole situation with regards to the Battle of Fallujah but if the game is about education not exploitation or discrimination then it deserves its voice.
As long as the game stays true to the events, then I’m all for it being released.
Would anyone really want a war game that “stays true to the events”? Crying women huddled over their dead children in the middle of the street? Breaking down doors of houses and indiscriminately spraying everyone inside with machine gun fire? I think there’s a reason there aren’t many war games that take place in the middle of crowded residential areas.
This is the most perfect situation in history in which to use the phrase “too soon”.
To elaborate, the only reason I think this is “too soon” is because I’m sure there are literally hundreds of gamers whose lives have been irrevocably impacted by these particular events. I’m talking about children and young teenagers, whose friends will inevitably play the game and talk about the game inside their social circles. I don’t think THAT is how a kid should be educated about an event with that level of personal depth.
Don’t get me wrong: I think the should certainly be allowed to be developed and published and sold; I’m not supporting any argument endorsing censorship or boycotts or any of that thinly veiled childishness. I merely question the judgment of the people behind the project.
I do find it darkly comical, however, to think about some kid in school going on about how stupid the U.S. Army AI is, “those fuckin dudes keep stepping on all these landmines and gettin their legs blown off and shit, and I’m like ’stop, you fuckin idiot!’”, while being overheard by a kid, four feet away, whose dad had his leg blown off by a landmine in Fallujah. But that’s probably one of those things that’s funnier if it’s NOT true.
You make some valid points but they are just as valid when talking about Documentaries.
It might help if I knew more about what happened during this event. But I guess my point is that if this game is used as a way to educate people in exactly how war is ugly. A way to open the eyes of someone who may not know just how bad it can be. In this case I think it’s a good thing.
But of course, everything has a flip side as well. You are right, a game like could end forcing people to relive memories they may not want to relive.
I just think that a video game — in particular, a SHOOTER — is a poor choice of medium if education is really the goal. What is the point of putting gamers behind the trigger of an M-4 carbine rifle, and telling them to simulate the relatively recent, real-life killing of foreign combatants on their home soil? Is the sort of person who WANTS to do that their target audience here? In my opinion, the game would mostly serve to further desensitize people, rather than instill any sort of gravity about the situation. Admittedly, though, I say that while knowing very little about the specifics of the game’s development. But what I’m getting at is, for example, when I play Fallout 3, I actually get chills at the prospect of such a nuclear catastrophe, but most people I know just like watching the heads pop off gigantic rats like so many champagne corks. So, in short, it’s a mixed bag, at. best.
There’s an editorial up on IGN (http://pc.ign.com/articles/977/977537p1.html) that explains my point of view for more succinctly that I can.
For those of you interested in this topic – I wanted to add another IGN editorial that came out today, which was written as a counter-point to others found on IGN:
http://pc.ign.com/articles/977/977882p1.html
I feel the truth should never be put on back burner any way you can educate people
on the horrors of war can’t be a bad thing and should be available to people that seek it .Information can be found anywhere internet news media news mouth to mouth conversation and hot news will always be a good topic so the idea that your protecting people by not allowing a truthfull version of a video game mock up of battles is false parents should be using parental control and no one would be forced to play and one is always free to get up and walk away if they dont like what there hearing . Violence and anger are frustration based reactions by people who don’t properly know how to controll or cope with there situation it is not learned by watching it violence ia also a normal part of our universe at this moment and should not be denied or brushed under the carpet but fully aknowledged
Ooh dang i just wrote a huge comment and as soon as i hit post it come up blank! Please please tell me it worked properly? I dont want to sumit it again if i dont have to! Either the blog bugged out or i am just stuipd, the latter doesnt surprise me lol.