The High Cost of Retreating From Tyranny

There is truly nothing more frightening to the freedom-loving mind than the idea of having your country occupied by an oppressive and hostile force.

In Homefront, Kaos Games teams up with Red Dawn director John Milius to present a "what if?" scenario in which the emergence of a ruthless and competent North Korean leader intersects with a disastrous Iran-Saudi Arabia war (and accompanying oil price shock) combines to lead to the rise of a terrifying new global power: the Greater Korean Federation.

The game presents a chilling -- but historically familiar -- scenario in which North Korea, under the leadership of Kim Jong-Un reunites with South Korea and begins to annex countries around the Pacific rim, including Japan.

In the face of the rising threat, the United States has long since retreated from the Pacific rim while the western economy collapses. A bird flu endemic claims the lives of six million Americans while the Koreans slowly creep across the Pacific.

Although the threat grows on their very doorstoops, the "future history" of Homefront suggests that China and Russia do absolutely nothing to prevent it. Indeed, perhaps they make some plays of their own, using the growing power of the Greater Korean Federation as cover for their own moves (think a Chinese annexation of Taiwan, possible Russian seizures of Ukraine, Georgia and other former Soviet Republics).

If this sounds familiar one shouldn't be surprised.

During the 1930s and '40s, Adolph Hitler took advantage of a massive economic upheaval to creep across Europe entirely unopposed until it was nearly too late to stop him. When the allies finally decided to stand up to Hitler it was already too late; France fell quickly.

So humanity already knows the human cost of retreating from tyranny. It led to the costliest war in human history, one that claimed some 16,000,000 lives.

If any such threat really existed in the world today, it has become clear that President Barack Obama would not be equipped to deal with it. Like the fictional United States presented in the fictional Homefront game, Obama has made a habit of abandoning US allies, to the extent that they actually handed British nuclear secrets over to the Russians.

It's that kind of international disloyalty that contributes to the "America alone" scenarios that Milius so frequently presents. It's a rather simple and intuitive idea: when weak leadership renders the United States a liability rather than a reliable ally, its friends may decide to just stay home.

In the face of an enemy like the fictional Korean foe presented in Homefront -- one so indifferent to human rights and the laws of war that they would irradiate the Mississippi River in order to keep US forces divided -- the abandonment of one's allies can come with a steep cost:

It's the high and intolerable cost of retreating from tyranny.

Medal of Honor: Digital Dilemma

With Medal of Honor set for release in less than two months, the most recent edition of the game is becoming more and more controversial -- and for good reason.

The game is set in the ongoing war in Afghanistan. More shockingly, the game's multi-player mode allows players to assume the role of the Taliban and fight NATO troops.

It's a provocative and challenging element of the game, and has naturally elicited some strong reactions from political leaders in countries currently involved in the war.

"The men and women of the Canadian Forces, our allies, aid workers, and innocent Afghans are being shot at, and sometimes killed, by the Taliban," fumed Defence Minister Peter MacKay. "This is reality. I find it wrong to have anyone, children in particular, playing the role of the Taliban. I'm sure most Canadians are uncomfortable and angry about this."

Britain's Minsiter of Defence, Liam Fox, took an even stronger stand; he wants the game banned, or at least boycotted.

"At the hands of the Taliban, children have lost fathers and wives have lost husbands," Fox spat. "I am disgusted and angry. It's hard to believe any citizen of our country would wish to buy such a thoroughly un-British game.

"I would urge retailers to show their support for our armed forces and ban this tasteless product," he concluded.

A certain level of disgust with Medal of Honor may well be warranted.

Call of Duty: Worlds at War has already taken the nearly-unprecedented step of allowing players to play as Nazi Germany during its multi-player mode. It goes without saying, however, that it's no longer the 1940s, and that Canada is no longer at war with Nazi Germany.

(Thanks to Canada and its World War II allies, Nazi Germany no longer exists.)

In an electronic medium that has already allowed players to play as the most evil regime of the 20th century, it was only a matter of time before they had the opportunity to fill the shoes of the some of the runners-up.

Banning or boycotting Medal of Honour isn't really the answer.

For one thing, if the game presents an honest depiction of the Taliban and its tactics, the game could remind those who play it of exactly what is currently being fought in Afghanistan: theocratic tyranny at its most savage.

A suitably honest depiction of the Taliban will make it difficult for even today's tuned-out generation of video gamers to turn a blind eye to their true nature.

It's worth repeating that in the storyline mode of gameplay, the Taliban will remain the villain. Left-wing peacenik fantasies don't translate very profitably into combat-oriented video games.

Playing as the Taliban in multi-player mode wouldn't symbolize any sympathy for the Taliban or its goals. And for the prospect of turning video gamers on to the resolute evil of the Taliban, it's well worth the perversity.

In Space, No One Can Hear You... Kill Giant Jellyfish

Metroid has been capturing the imaginations of video gamers for 24 years.

Now, as the franchise prepares to celebrate its 25th anniversary, Nintendo is promoting their upcoming title, Metroid: Other M, with a video (partial) retrospective of the series to date.

Within the video, it proves remarkable the complexity of the ideas that can be hidden amongst ideas that are remarkably simplistic.

Even as the video explains it, Samus fights alien Space Pirates in order to prevent them from exploiting an alien species known as the Metroids in order to dominate the galaxy. The Metroid species has remarkable properties that can be used to produce biological weapons.

Using a cybernetic lifeform known as Mother Brain -- the last remnants of a race known as the Chozo -- the Space Pirates plan to complete this foul act.

The only solution for Samus is to destroy not only Mother Brain, but also all the Metroids.

Ultimately, the only way to prevent the galaxy from suffering the scourge of a devastating biological weapon is to commit genocide against an entire species.

Yet even after believing she had exterminated the very last of the Metroids, Samus discovers that she can still become emotionally attached to one -- as she seems to become attached to the last survivor of the species, a baby that has mistaken her for its mother.

The plot of the Metroid series is uniquely mature for one born of an era in which the game's nearest contemporaries were the Super Mario Brothers. Like The legend of Zelda, Metroid would further grow in complexity as video games themselves became ever-more complex.

In fact, the dilemma posed by Metroid is one that remains valid in the real world today, where biological weapons of horrifying nature continue to exist.

ATTN: Jack Thompson, Please Sue Me

Make My Day

Jack Thompson. These two words alone should be enough to make anyone within the video game industry cringe. Frankly, it should be enough to make anyone outside the video game industry, or even Thompson himself cringe. But I digress.

This little joker has been pretty busy lately, what with his threatening lawsuits and trying to have online comic arrested for “harassment” (more on this later), so it’s a little challenging to keep up with his escapades. However, here at the Nexus of Assholery, we rarely shy away from challenges, whether it’s a challenge to finish that entire case of shitty Pilsner beer, or a challenge to run through freeway traffic while dressed in a chicken suit, or even a challenge to round up an army of crackwhores with which to invade a small Baltic country – so here we go.

The latest chapter in the chronicles of J.T., as they were, began with a similar challenge. Jack Thompson issued a challenge to the video game community to produce an anti-video game video-game, and said that, if someone who do so, he would donate $10,000 to charity on their behalf. Of course, when someone actually did so, Jack declined to donate the money, saying that his offer was satirical (apparently Jackie boy has, not only a name that I can make fun of in infinite ways, but also a really fucked up sense of satire).

Enter those delightful scamps at Penny-Arcade. When Jacko didn’t pony up the dough as promised, they took it upon themselves to pony up the dough on his behalf, presenting a cheque for the aforementioned $10,000 to the Entertainment Software Association, which was marked as “For Jack Thompson because Jack Thompson won’t.”
The result was rather astounding and confusing. In a self-orchestrated series of events, Thompson has repeatedly threatened to sue Penny-Arcade, and even sent a letter to the Seattle, Washington Police Department, in which he wrote: “I look forward to working with your fine police department to shut down this little extortion factory and/or arrest some of its employees.”

Yes, because it is truly criminal to criticize Jack Thompson. In fact, I can hear his Jack-booted (no pun intended… or is it?) storm troopers approaching now, so I have to finish this little libel-fest (as Jackio would call it) up rather quickly. Which will be another challenge.

From here on out, things have gotten worse for Jacky. The National Institute on Media and the Family has distanced itself from Jack and his Gestapo-like attitude. Jack, for his part, has been using the NIMF (funny how that works out) as a sort of shield behind which he can hide, claiming he has their utmost support in everything that he has doing. NIMF, for its part, has kicked Jack to the curb faster than a toothless ‘ho, and that has made Jack mad.

Jack retaliated by claiming that companies like Target (who profit by selling the video games that this Jackass abhors) essentially bought off NIMF president David Walsh (which is, technically, a slanderous statement, but hey, who’s counting?).
But then again, maybe Jack’s trying to cover his tracks because he’s embarrassed. You see, the video game that he suggested be made (and offered a reward for) was to be based around the idea of murdering thinly-veiled caricatures of individuals who work in the video-game industry. Some would think this is ironic coming from an alleged anti-violence activist.

But Jack Thompson isn’t an anti-violence activist. He’s a law suit profiteer who is currently creaming in his own pants because he now has so many people he can now sue (and profit from) that he doesn’t know where to start.

But I know where you can start Jack. Sue me. Sue me, Jack, sue me. I dare you.

Video Game Controversy... AGAIN...

Bring On the Douchebags!!!

Remember Mortal Kombat?

Way back when Mortal Kombat first hit arcades, it sparked almost instant controversy. If you’re anywhere near as old as I am, you (like me) surely delighted in liquidating your weekly allowance in quarters, heading straight for your local mall and spending hours laying the uber-brutal smackdown on the likes of Sub-Zero, Liu Kang and Kano.

The game was incredibly violent for its time, and inspired its fair share of protest from pro-censorsip groups. But today, even those were the good ol’ days.
Yes, kids, today video games are more violent than ever. The first time I played Def Jam Vendetta: Fight for New York, I thought it was off the hook, violence-wise. Then I watched some of my friends playing Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. Now, some people may think that there’s nothing wrong with walking into a Pizza restaurant and killing its occupants execution-style… but then again, some people also think the Earth is flat.

The point is, that video games these days have reached new heights of violence and controversy. From smashing people’s heads in car doors, (in Def Jam Vendetta), to ripping people’s innards out (in God of War), to taking part in riots (State of Emergency), modern video games have eclipsed their predecessors in terms of violence.
Despite the fact that strong evidence suggests that violent crimes amongst youths (those who pro-censorship advocates claim are influenced to violence by video games) have decreased year-by-year since as video games become more and more violent, many continue to decry the escalating violence.

And to tell you the truth, I can’t entirely blame them. I’ve never been pro-censorship, some of the violence contained in video games (which have consistently expanded their appeal across age groups ever since their inception) borders on extremely disturbing. I can honestly say that if I had children I would not allow them to play most of these video games being released today.

Of course, that aside, none of the tragedies that are allegedly caused by videogame violence (the idea of which, of course, defies that little thing we all have called “free will”) doesn’t stop people from trying to profit from it.

Take, for example, anti-violent-video-game activist (alleged) Jack Thompson. In a February, 2005 interview with CBS news, Thompson referred to ESA president Doug Lowenstein as the “Goebbels of the video game industry”. Thompson also maintains www.Stopkill.com, a site whose self-described purpose is to “is to give you the means to contact Miami attorney Jack Thompson if you know of someone harmed as a result of violent entertainment, including violent video games.”

The site also urges people to encourage their kids to “shoot hoops, not humans” (good advice, actually).

Thompson, himself, however, has been involved with lawsuits against Wal-Mart, Sony and Rockstar Games. The lawsuits concern the popular aforementioned Grand Theft Auto series, as well as Manhunter (which is fairly demented in its own right). Fortunately, he has yet to win a single one. But that doesn’t change the fact that he’s been trying like the dickens. As a point of reference, he was also involved in the lawsuit regarding Body Count’s classic song “Cop Killer”.

To Thompson (among others), the “M” video game label that the video game industry consented to being placed on violent video games – which is meant to restrict the sales of these games to adults -- doesn’t mean much.

The current hot-topic controversy is over a hidden sex mini-game in the aforementioned GTA : San Andreas. Here’s how it works: when equipped with a “hot cup of coffee” code modification, the game allows the player to cruise looking for women who will share a “hot cup of coffee” with them. Guess what that’s a euphamism for? Mmmm-hm.

U.S. Senators Hillary Rodham-Clinton (whose husband, bill, you may recall, helped cast the finger of blame at Eminem and Marilyn Manson in the post-Columbine scrum) and Joe Lieberman have raised a ruckus over the feature, referring to it as “pornographic”. Rockstar games has asserted that the controversial mini-game is actually the work of “modders” – hard-core gamers/programmers who have learned how to produce modifications for games.

On that note, cue your next video-game controversy profiteer: a New York woman who claims she bought the game for her 14-year-old son without being aware of the controversy – or, apparently, the game’s rating. The rating on the game has since been changed to “AO” (Adults Only), but that changes little.

Follow me if you will: son – 14 years old. Game rated – Mature (for players 17 and older). Of course, in a lawsuit-happy land where you can sue CBS and Janet Jackson for an “accidental” breast exposure, this is business-as-usual.

Scott Ramsoomair (creator of the delightful www.VGCats.com) somewhat agrees with the concerns regarding video game sex and violence: “I’d say roughly 80% of video games contain violence, but only a very small amount of that is intense violence. Your Grand Theft Autos and Mortal Kombats,” he says. However, he strongly disagrees with assertations that video game violence inspires real-life violence: “Psychos will always be psychos; they don’t need video games to help them. Though this one time my brother punched me in the arm when I beat him in Mario Kart. Does that count?”
He also notes that often the outrage is over inflated: “Take BMXXX, a horrible game, but not for its content. It was just a very bad game. But people hear nudity and everyone is up in arms.”

While creating legislation that penalizes retailers for selling video games in defiance of their rating may not be a bad idea, one needs to be very careful when considering this. It’s actually just one step away from censorship.

Because while I can personally agree that games like GTA: San Andreas should not be in the hands of children, censorship is always a dangerous path to walk down. If the backlash over Ms. Jackson’s “wardrobe malfunction” shows us anything, it’s that once one gets too far down that path, it can be hard to find the way back again.