Red Cross Pushing For War Crimes In Video Games To Be Punished In Video Games
from the going-to-nuremberg dept
Some time back, we covered the story of the International Red Cross looking to get makers of war simulation video games to include simulated war-crime consequences within the games themselves. Just so we're all absolutely clear, they aren't looking to punish gamers IRL for their crimes in games. That is apparently the purview of Pat Robertson. They simply were looking to make the simulation come full circle. While that didn't sound like a whole lot of fun to us, the real problem was that they were clear about not having a problem with the government getting involved to make this a reality.
One possible course of action could be to encourage game designers/producers to incorporate IHL [International Humanitarian Law] in the development and design of video games, while another could be to encourage governments to adopt laws and regulations to regulate this ever-growing industry.That's a first amendment violation. Well, the International Red Cross is back at it, though this time it seems to be looking to serve more of a realistic advisory role rather than lobbying the government to be its bully.
Sanitizing video games of such acts is not realistic. Violations occur on real battlefields and can therefore be included in video games. The ICRC believes it is useful for players to learn from rewards and punishments incorporated into the game, about what is acceptable and what is prohibited in war.I mean...sure, that might be useful. It also might make for a worse video game, which what will likely kill this idea off in the boardrooms of many a developer. But if the Red Cross wants to reach out to game developers and offer to serve as advisors in making war games all the more realistic, I guess that's okay. Still, we seem to be dealing with a fundemental misunderstanding on the part of the Red Cross: games are an escape from reality. Can I imagine a place for the rules of war and punishment in an ultra-realistic war simulation? Sure, of course, but that isn't going to apply to the vast majority of the games in question, so what's the point?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: red cross, video games, war crimes
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Really, these people need immediate psychiatric treatment if they can't distinguish fantasy from reality.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Though I don't agree with the whole lobbying congress to make it law thing, I think it could work for some games. As long as the developers are ok with it, adding war crime laws to video games could be educational and add to the realism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Madworld was just for mockery. But it would not surprise me if they were after any kind of bloody violence.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
According to the ICRC article the quote above is from. Here
Won't this make the games preachy or boring?
"Our intention is not to spoil player's enjoyment by for example, interrupting the game with pop-up messages listing legal provisions or lecturing gamers on the law of armed conflict..."
Therefore, your liking of the ICRC to the CCA is an overreaction.
Bam!
/argument
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
'Encouraging' is not a first amendment violation because encouragement can be ignored. 'Requiring', on the other hand, would be a first amendment violation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That is the first amendment violation: regulating the content of the games.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"while another could be to encourage governments to adopt laws and regulations to regulate this ever-growing industry."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
People still starving and dying in reality.
People still needing assistance.
Maybe finish what you started in reality, before worrying about the virtual world.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Objection!
The trick is that the games need to be separate, as the resources used in the two simulations are very different. Of course, if you could make a trial game that could pull (and do some filling in) data from another game, that could actually be really interesting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Objection!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Objection!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I have a better idea...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I have a better idea...
Since the punishment would be extrajudicial (it would be a war crime within the game) it would not itself be a violation of the First Amendment within the game.
Also Vladimir Putin would be punished, but only in games, for speeches he made restricting human rights in real life, as well as punishment of random countries in games that don't even exist for attacking each other for no reason in games. All of this would happen in real life or the game company would be punished in real life.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just send $10....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
/sarcasm
Face it Red Cross... a game is never gonna be realistic because too much realism sucks. This is also why that in even the most realistic games, you don't go to the virtual hospital for weeks or months when you get wounded.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Violations occur on real battlefields and can therefore be included in video games."
Yes, they can, but that's up to the people producing them. Video games can also be utterly fantastical and bear no relationship to anything in reality. That's part of their charm. A completely realistic game would be boring, and possibly useless (e.g. a totally realistic game wouldn't let you restart after you die or let you easily heal after injury). Which elements of reality find their way into the game is up to the developers, and unless their aim is to make a perfect simulation they will pick and choose which parts of reality belong.
If you seriously want such a game, fund a Kickstarter and get your own out there. Otherwise, you're just another in a long queue of morons trying to impose what you think everybody should be entertained by.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I remember reading they were. Or someone was. Heck, too many dysfunctional people that can't separate fantasy from reality. I can't tell one outfit from another :/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mortal Kombat
Babality... Pretty funny.
Crossality... Pretty lame.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
as for the 'escape from reality' bit in the article, there are too many people in positions of power that conveniently ignore this point and try to make out that what a game is, in fact, is a forerunner, a warm up to 'the real thing'. in other words, these games are being bought and played as if they were real situations, so as to find flaws when those same people actually execute the 'game play' in the real world
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yes, they do. But that's a case of believing something because they really, really, really want it to be true rather than because there's even the slightest shred of evidence that it's true.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It'll work as well as in real life
Start an illegal war with another nation under false pretenses? No problem!
Send in unmanned drones and air crafts to bomb bad guys in foreign nations, often without their permission? No problem, even if you 'accidentally' miss and blow up over 100 people at a wedding party! (I include 'accidentally' with quotes because come on, who doesn't at least have a bit of fun blowing things up in video games even if that's not the goal)
Start killing your own people with chemical weapons while promising a stronger ally lots of oil if they look the other way? No problem, no war crimes here!
After all, war crime laws are for the little people/nations, and for dictators who have already been overthrown in real life.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It'll work as well as in real life
Video games already do work like real life in that whoever loses gets punished for war crimes and whoever wins doesn't.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It'll work as well as in real life
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I miss secret courts with secret interpretations of secret laws.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Oddly, when a game creates secret rules for itself that doesn't apply to those on the other side, it's called cheating.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Alas...
Really caused havok in the local Army Barracks.
OH IF ONLY I HADNT PLAYED COMPUTER GAMES LAST NIGHT!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
canny valley
Why are there no good violent revolution sims?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This feature is already widely deployed in multi-player games.
Granted, the process is somewhat informal and arbitrary. Transgressions are not handled by a court, but rather by an omnipotent entity known only as "Administrator", or "Admin" for short.
Depending on the whims of the "Administrator", such heinous war crimes as "cheating" and "hacking" are dealt harsh punishment ranging from kicking the offender to a full blown permanent ban. Lesser crimes against humanity, such as murder of the English language generally don't invite the full wrath of the "Administrator". A stern verbal warning is often enough to enforce compliance.
There's also no Geneva convention, though servers generally lay down the rules of war in something called a MOTD. Combatants are expected to abide by those rules, or they will face the fury of the Administrator. Nevertheless, combatants are expected to be familiar with the unwritten rules of combat, such as being polite and not ruining the war for everyone else even when you are losing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I could see the Red Cross' viewpoint if I knew of any truly realistic war games - but I haven't found a game yet that wouldn't let you play again after you die, and it probably wouldn't be very popular if it existed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I can see it now...
Yah... THAT'LL go over well.
Don't they have enough to do with REAL crimes in the REAL world that they need to stick their noses into video games? What's next... a book burning of any book that doesn't have war crime punishments?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If the game let me (as different characters) arrest, prosecute, and punish Bush, Cheney and their ilk for their crimes, I'd certainly back it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
America straight-up refuses to even acknowledge it when we're accused of war crimes these days. That's fucked up. The Red Cross is completely barking up the wrong tree here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I see no problem
Your supplies have been slowed down by 10% because the UN is stopping some of your supplies or your supplies cost 10% more because the black-market is trying to make more money from you or you have fewer support people because the rest of the world doesn't support you.
Just random ideas that won't hurt anything, but makes you think before you act... Do I really want a 10% increase in ammo gun cost because I want to blow up that civilian house.
Not saying makers should have to implement this, but it is an interesting concept.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Blacklist's 2nd mission, for example, has a 'don't kill civilians' objective. In fact, I think all the levels that are populated w/ civilians include that objective.
Same usually goes for civilian hostages.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And seriously, games do need to cut back on gratuitous violence and sex, it makes games boring, except for 15 year olds...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Onion
http://www.theonion.com/video/ultrarealistic-modern-warfare-game-features-awaiti,14382/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think it would be fun having a war game where you have to consider your actions carefully and be careful how close you get to crossing the line.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Getting right with Jesus
What are we talking? Twenty five infinity to thirty five infinity in hell?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It penalized you for playing the game in the first place.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And religious texts such as the Bible detail some atrocious crimes against humanity. I don't recall anyone being penalised for them though - in fact God is generally the cheerleader.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Realistic: Careful what you wish for
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What about leadership of Starways Congress who sent fleet with MD to Lusitania and ordered it actual usage.
Earth's military leadership must be punished for using child soldiers (hey, they even built big space station JUST for training of said child soldiers)
Shepard in Mass Effect must be court-martialed for at least some endings?
What about... Warcraft series? Almost all heroes should be court-martialed
What about Star Craft 2? Stellar converter is very usuful thing in end-game
What about EVE Online MMORPG?
Main punishment for doing something that major empires don't think is ok to do (attacking civilian ships which doesn't even armed) that attacker will die and loose your ship
(you can sometimes workaround even this).
(after fixing several exploits CCP declared that if you didn't die - it's exploit by definition).
This is not particulary harsh punishment for many immortal capsuleers.
And civilians (or capsuleers in civilian ships) doesn't have even this protection if they go to less secure space.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]