Let’s Get Serious: Depicting War in Video Games: East Vs. West

War is a common foundation for fictional works, spanning a number of media.  Everyone loves a little life and death struggle and what is more recognizable to the masses than war?  The genre has certainly made its mark on the video game industry, defining an ever growing number of titles.  Recently I discovered a glaring divide in how war is depicted in games developed in the West and the East.

When looking at Western games depicting war, the largest exporter is easily America.  Medal of Honor, Call of Duty and other such patriotic sounding titles lead the pack, at least in popularity.  I even consider sci-fi war games such as Gears of War to offer some insight for my purposes, since they too reflect somewhat on war mentality.

Name that World War II game!

A trend many complain about is the visual monotony of enemies in such games.  They often wear masks or bear features that are ambiguous enough to replicate throughout the entire course of a game.  Another, more important source of repetition comes from who the enemy is.  They nearly always fall into these three categories:

• Terrorists
• Aliens
• Foreigners (generally this would be true for Cold War, World War, and World War II games.  It’s important to note that these are foreigners of countries that actually exist, not of fictional worlds or countries.)

You may notice here that the definition of an enemy is very clear: you are white and they are black.  The difference is both inherent and perceivable.  Aliens are repulsive with claws and dripping tentacles, terrorists and foreigners usually dress differently and have annoying accents.

When it comes to reasons for fighting your enemy, again this can be clearly derived from who they are with little to no thought.  Terrorists inflict terror and thus must be stopped.  We all know what the German army of 1939 did and why they need to be stopped.  Surprisingly I often find the most creativity goes into fighting aliens, however this is usually boiled down to us being invaded.  Hey, it’s better than nothing.

Sci-Fi war games may be as creative as it gets

Now let’s start to compare these themes to the Eastern game industry, primarily Japanese titles depicting war.  Before beginning I should note that Japan has published far less titles in the genre.  Considering Japan was one of the key countries involved in World War II, one would think they would have developed more titles in the ever growing list of World War II games.

A series that frequently explores the definition of what an enemy is Metal Gear Solid.  Here the lines are blurred as people and countries double-cross one another on a massive scale.  By the end of most Metal Gear Solid titles, it’s clear that nearly everyone profits from war but the soldier, regardless of the side they are fighting on.

Speaking of profit, the 4^th installment in the Metal Gear Solid Series does a great job depicting how much of a role money plays in modern warfare.  The overwhelming abundance of PMCs, or private military companies on both sides of the conflicts show a world and a war very much driven by money rather than ideals.  If you scoff at the thought that PMCs will ever be a reality, you have scoffed too late.

Another Japanese title that focuses on war is Valkyria Chronicles.  This game is set in a fictional world with warring sides.  Unlike any Western title that I am aware of, Valkyria Chronicles does a great job humanizing the enemy.  The first example that comes to mind is when the game’s protagonists attempt to save a wounded member of the opposing forces (here at 8:13).  They are unable to do so, and the following video shows their reasoning when questioned by the enemy (2:00 on):

As you can see, despite the fact that the protagonists are enmeshed in a heated war, they still don’t lose sight of the fact that their enemy is not a faceless terror, but like them: human beings.  The game further explores the enemy with DLC, putting the player in the shoes of the enemy and one of their key officials, showing a side of her one would not expect from an enemy.

So to summarize, here is how each country spins the player’s role in war-themed games:

• America: You always assume the role of the party who is doing the “right thing” in whatever conflict.  You have no reason to question this since everything is extraordinarily simple, and often based on history.  The goal is victory, which is of course defined as  defeating your enemy who is different and “wrong”.
• Japan: You assume the role of one side of a conflict, but consideration is generally taken for other side when possible.  War is confusing: definitions become blurred and the duality of winning and losing, right and wrong, us and them, all fall away.  Meanwhile money and power are the overriding forces, often at the expense of the soldier.

Now in your opinion, which country or region is better representing what war is?  Is it the country with no standing military, or is it the one who has probably been in at least two wars in your lifetime?

I don’t mean to get up on a pedestal and start declaring propaganda or brain washing – or that you should avoid Western war games entirely.  I simply believe that such an increasingly popular medium should attempt to more closely represent that which it is based on.  Continuing to portray  war in such a simple and immature way may have an adverse effect on a player’s sense of reality and will surely make the genre – and even the entire games industry – look foolish and unworthy of being considered an important form of media.

Related Entries:
Let’s Get Serious: Video Games and Weather

Share this!

Hide Sites