This misses the point of spec ops the line
Comment on Why People Don’t Catch The Politics In Their Favorite Games
Kaboom@reddthat.com 5 months ago
Has anyone actually seen anyone actually complain about having politics in games, and not just obnoxious politics, like Specs Ops where they force you to kill civilians and then act like your the bad guy because you wanted to see the content you paid for? If you dont give us a choice to be good, and if you’re super preachy about it, then its just bad writing.
Look at New Vegas, plenty of politics, but you get to make choices, and its not preachy at all. Then look at the Last of Us 2, where they force you to kill a dog the other character petted, and it comes off as blatant emotional manipulation. Which game is widely considered a masterpeice?
squid_slime@lemm.ee 5 months ago
Kaboom@reddthat.com 5 months ago
What, war is bad and glorifying war is bad? The point has been made, no one missed it. Its just wasnt worth mentioning.
Aqarius@lemmy.world 5 months ago
You’re doing the thing in the post.
otp@sh.itjust.works 5 months ago
Has anyone actually seen anyone actually complain about having politics in games
Yes. Under this post, too.
I even remember people complaining about re-releases that had disclaimers that the game has racially insensitive enemies.
People will complain about anything.
Kaboom@reddthat.com 5 months ago
Where under this post? Cuz I dont see it.
otp@sh.itjust.works 5 months ago
Gotta look for the downvoted ones, lol
One example…
People play games for escapism, not to be reminded of politics. Not every story needs deep political roots, people just want to have fun and forget about real world bullshit.
Kaboom@reddthat.com 5 months ago
Tbh, I can see that. I hop in CS and its political, but I play it for escapism.
Quetzalcutlass@lemmy.world 5 months ago
Spec Ops actually did have choices where you could be good, but ironically people missed them because they didn’t think it’d work.
For example, at one point you’re being harassed by an angry mob of locals. A lot of players simply shot them because a lifetime of experience with shooters told them that no other input would be recognized. But in actuality, if you fired warning shots at the ground or over their heads, the civilians would flee without incident.
Kaboom@reddthat.com 5 months ago
I didnt know that. After the forced willie pete bit, I thought all the other bits were forced too. Specs op unintentionally set a rule “if theres a choice, youll be forced to take the evil one” which made the entire thing feel obnoxious.
naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 months ago
I think you’re actually engaging with it a bit shallowly. You are the one who invented the rule and a different framing is exploring how, if games seem to put us in situations where we must do horrible things to advance even a couple of times, we take that as a rule instead of risking losing to find other ways.
Which is a fairly glaring indictment of the whole military shooter genre which is all about “hard men and hard choices” that completely dehumanise the factions you’re in opposition to.
Kaboom@reddthat.com 5 months ago
A lot of gamers thought it was forced. Its just bad communication with the player.