Facing Controversy - How to Stand Up for Games as a Medium - Extra Credits

Hey folks, in light of recent events, I think it's time to revisit an old topic, standing up for our medium. Now, video games are no stranger to controversy by any means. Like most new media, games have experienced their share of growing pains. We've had them all. Video games cause violent behavior, video games encourage crime, video games cause addiction, video games socially corrupt children, video games cause obesity, this game's a porn simulator, that game's a murder simulator, games cause this or that school shooting. Ugh, good times. It's not fun, but it's all part of a medium's journey to respectability. Now, controversy is bound to keep flaring up as games grow, and there's nothing we can really do to prevent that. That's not what I'm here to talk about. What I'm going to talk about is what we can do. We can make a difference with the way we react to that controversy when it arises, and frankly, that's an area where we need to improve. The sad truth is that game makers aren't weighed on the merits of their work.

They're judged by the name of their medium. When controversy arises, our opposers don't look at a game studio and see a team of artists. They see a team of toy makers who have gone too far, like a branch of Mattel gone rogue. That the industry is viewed this way is pretty shameful, but perhaps even more shameful is how rarely we stand up for the work we do. Let me give you an example. If you keep up with game news, you probably heard about Six Days in Fallujah and the huge fuss surrounding it last year. For everyone else, here's the skinny. Six Days in Fallujah was a third-person combat simulation about the Second Battle of Fallujah. It was being developed by Atomic Games, who intended the game as a sort of documentary. The story goes that Atomic was doing some side work helping the US Marine Corps develop training tools when the battalion they were working with was called away to Iraq. When the men returned, they started telling the Atomic dev team all about their experiences in Fallujah. Now, many of these Marines were young guys, some guys who played games, who probably considered games to be one of their comforts out there in the desert. These guys came back and told the developers at Atomic that they wanted people to understand what they had experienced, even just a small part of it. They asked Atomic to make a game about what they had lived through. Now, for those of you

who don't know, green lighting a project like this is a big risk. It's not something you do unless you really, really believe in the project. And to their credit, Atomic went for it. The project was slated to be published by Konami, but after the game was announced, it was met with a hail storm of criticism. Various groups argued that making a game about the second battle of Fallujah would disrespect those that died there, that making a game of such a recent battle was in bad taste. In response to this controversy, Konami decided to bail, and Atomic was left without a publisher. They never found a new one, and the struggling studio pretty much folded soon after. Now, if I may briefly address Konami, you guys are great. I love many of your games, and I know the pressure you're under as a business to maintain your brand. But some things are just more important than that. Now, if you really, really believed from the beginning that Six Days in Fallujah was in poor taste, you would never have given this game the go-ahead in the first place. I mean, you're not dumb. You don't go around publishing games without thinking about it. And you had to know this game would probably stir a little controversy, so why run for cover at the first sign of dissent? By caving in, you validate all of the accusations. You legitimize

slander founded in ignorance, and you guarantee a larger outcry the next time you consider a project like this. Don't believe me? Watch this. Well, there's a lot of controversy over this new video game called Six Days in Fallujah. Critics are calling the game, which is based on one of the deadliest battles in Iraq, too realistic. For a fair and balanced discussion, I'm joined by the game developer, Peter Tamte, Captain Reed Almontaser, and he led a Marine company in Fallujah and lost 13 men there. He's now an advisor on the game. And Tracy Miller, who's against the game because she lost her son in that battle. Good morning to all three of you. A lot of people see these video games and such that uh basically, you know, have war involved in them, real-life experiences that happened, and sometimes they get kind of a a sad reaction to the fact that we would relive this. Why make it into a game? Well, you know, about uh half or so, only half or so of the young adults that we've surveyed are familiar with the Battle for Fallujah. And here it we have one of the most historic battles in the history of the country, and most young

adults aren't familiar with it. Captain, are you actually saying, cuz I know you advised on this project, but are you actually going to say that this is a way to honor the men who died that day? Well, I wouldn't necessarily say it's a way to honor the men that died that day. What I would say it's more of an honor for the people that fought there. Tracey, my condolences to you. You lost your son. You lost your son in this battle. I can never put myself in your position. But ex- explain to me whether or not you think that this game is an honor to your son. You know, it's complicated. I don't I think that if I were to see it and actually see my son being killed, it would be terrible. On the other hand, if this is a realistic game, I think all of us who have lost children want most for them to be remembered. And so, if he's not included, then that would be bothersome, also.

I I think I read somewhere in the notes that you've lost your funding to actually put this game out to the public. Is that true? Yeah, no, that's true. Obviously, you knew though that you might get some blowback on it because some people lost their children in that battle. Uh Peter Tamte, uh Captain O'Mahondro, and Tracey Miller, I'm unfortunately out of time this morning. You see that? The instant she asks that last question, all of his credibility vanishes. To the Fox News audience, even the game industry had agreed this game should not be made. Now, look, I'm not trying to say that the controversy over this game was stupid. Six Days was a controversial game, and there were a lot of valid opinions on both sides. But whatever your personal feelings are about the game, you have to agree those soldiers returning from Fallujah deserve better than that. This isn't the only time this sort of thing has happened, either. You remember Luke Bernard? No? Maybe? He's the guy who made Eternity's Child. Well, he's been working on another title called Imagination is the only escape, a story set in World War II about a Jewish boy, meant as an educational title to teach children about the Holocaust. But, due to its dark setting and subject

matter, Nintendo of America has stated that it doesn't intend to release the game here. And now, most recently, that whole Medal of Honor thing. Don't get me wrong, it's not that I think calling one of the multiplayer teams Taliban was going to lend any artistic weight or significance to EA's game. That they used the name in the first place seems like little more than a cheap controversial marketing ploy, which we know EA isn't above doing. But, to decide on that name, knowing that people were going to make a fuss about it, and then cave on it later when people do make a fuss, thanks, EA. You set us back even further. These games are not being judged because of their content. They're judged because they are games. Countless filmmakers, novelists, and artists have tackled difficult subjects before and been celebrated for it. Topics like war, genocide, sexuality, hatred. Many of these pieces are critically acclaimed, and rightfully so. They dare to explore humanity's dark side, the ugly realities of the human condition. They venture into uncomfortable territory and find the truth hidden within. This is the stuff art is made of. What is it about games that disqualifies them from exploring this harsh territory?

I've heard it argued that we need a rebranding, that we need to take on a new title for this medium. Kind of like how comic books had to take on the name graphic novel before they started getting the respect they deserved. And maybe we do. Interactive experiences? No. Simulations? No, that doesn't sound right either. Well, while we're at it, we also need to expand the scope of what we do to include more of the human experience and address a broader set of ideas. But, before any of that is going to happen, we need to learn to stand up without fear and embrace what our medium has become and what it has the potential to be. We can't keep marginalizing ourselves by pretending we only craft products for children. We are not toy makers. Our work can mean so much more than that. Now, I'm going to quote James word for word here because this is good stuff. This will take real from within our industry. It will take the bravery to face critique and the fortitude to weather outcry. It will ask that we expose ourselves to short-term financial risk and that we don't back down from early losses, firm in the knowledge that we are doing right. We will have to be steadfast under the scrutiny of the world and resolute when we are asked to justify

ourselves in the court of public opinion. It will ask that for the moment we give up ease. But if we can do this, we can do good, real good with our medium. If we do this, we can expand the industry and bring whole new genres within the purview of games. If we do this, we can turn a greater profit while providing more meaningful experiences and reach audiences hitherto unthinkable. If we do this, we can perhaps elevate some small portion of our labor to an art. But if we do this, we will no longer be able to pretend as if what we do doesn't matter. If we do this, we can never go back to the way it was before. Damn, James. Nice. What I'm saying is this. We can't run at every controversy or hide behind the mantra we're just making games anymore. If we are to grow as a medium and evolve into something with the social, artistic and commercial reach of other mass media, we must be willing to stand up as an industry and defend works of merit rather than meekly abandon them whenever objections are raised. In the words of the ex-ESA president Doug Lowenstein, "Push the envelope and don't duck and cover when the [ __ ] hits the fan. Stand up and defend what you

make." Whatever you may think about Six Days in Fallujah, you have to give the guys at Atomic credit. They took a risk and stuck to their guns when the going got tough. I hope there are more game developers out there who have the guts to follow that example. And I speak for James, Allison and myself when I say to everyone at Atomic, wherever you guys are, we salute you. Woo!