• sugar_in_your_tea
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Probably. But I think the intention is to attract customers, not to push some kind of agenda. So instead of toning it down, I think it would be better to make it explicit and make games from different perspectives.

    For example, make a WW2 game from the Soviet. Or perhaps Japan in the Russo-Japanese war of the early 1900s. Those could be as biased as they want because they’re telling the story from a certain perspective.

    • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      We know that the US Military contributes directly to Cll of Duty, both financially and through assets and non-tangibles. Whether or not the developers push an agenda purposefully, and I’m inclined to side with you that they aren’t trying to do so, that money and those assets come with strings attached that take the decisions out of the developers hands.

      Hell, they put fucking Oliver North in their game, and made him look like a good guy. You can’t get any less contrary to reality if you tried.

      • sugar_in_your_tea
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The Wikipedia article on Oliver North says he advised on the Black OPs game, so it absolutely makes sense for them to throw him in the game in a positive light.

        That said, I wonder how the US military would feel about Activision making a game set from another country’s perspective. It would probably have a similar appeal as a recruiting tool since it’s still a war game.