The Soapbox provides a platform for developers to stand up and speak their mind about the games industry. The views and opinions expressed in this article are soley those of the original author. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of GameDev.net.
Why I'll Never Work on First-Person Shooters Again
Comments
However, I don't think this is article material, this is fine as a blog, or journal post. But it feels weird to be apart of the article database. Perhaps others disagree with me, and that's fine. But this is my opinion.
I too think this isn't appropriate for an Article, your self expression is interesting but I think better suited in a Journal.
It seems a bit weird to disagree with you, since I am the snobby Computer Science student, but anyways...
I don't have a Problem with military FPS games, some games are about stepping in the shoes of an other human, being something you are not. Why not a Soldier?
But what I do agree however, is the Medal of Duty series is brainlessly run and gun heroism that only serves to drain money out of the consumers hands and that it isn't very rewarding creating the next brainless shooter.
But games are a medium, in order to be taken seriously as a medium there have to be games with adult content. Let's take movies for example, you wouldn't show "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" to your child, but why should you be ashamed working on it? It is a great movie with a great story with the sole purpose to entertain (at least I couldn't see any other tone).
On the other side you have movies like V for Vendetta or Schindlers List that try to show something to the viewer, that try to teach them a concept. Shutter Island wasn't only entertaining, it showed beautifully how the mental illness has manifested itself in the protagonist. It left the audience with questions, a subject to talk and think about. And the same can be done with games.
Casual games are an important step to get this medium the respect it deserves, but it isn't the last step. In order to be taken seriously, we need to take steps further, we can't shy away from controversial concepts, we can't shy away from games you don't want to show your kids..There is no game to my knowledge, that didn't tell any WW2 conflict in the uncontroversial view of the Americans. In rare cases you stepped in the shoes of other Ally forces like the Russians or the British. But there never was a game where you walked in the shoes of an SS Soldier in a concentration camp, that shows you why the soldier can't simply not do the horrors he is commanded to. You can tell stories that simply won't work in any other medium. And that is where I want the game industry to be, games are so much more than "fun" or time killers. They can be art. They can be poetry. They can be a medium to tell stories, to teach and to learn.
That's why I can understand why you don't want to work on an other irrelevant shoot em up military flag waving heroism fantasy, but I can't understand why you turn your back on a camera position. For example Spec Ops: The Line has on the surface the same formula as the Medal of Duty games, but they use it to bring up Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, they manage to critique the whole genre ("You just wanted to be a hero"). It is a great game that shows games as a medium is growing up, it is worth the controvery, it is worth our time, it is woth our effort to push beyond the dogmatic "fun" criteria.
I do have to agree with some of the other commenters: this feels kinda weird as an article, and I wonder if it should be something else instead (also, I'm not sure what it has to do with game design, as it's more about personal moral decisions).
I don't think this is article material, this is fine as a blog, or journal post. But it feels weird to be apart of the article database. Perhaps others disagree with me, and that's fine. But this is my opinion.
Etc, etc
To keep comments focused on the topic of the article, please continue this discussion in this forum thread. Thanks!
I don't think it wise to hide this sort of stuff from kids (full disclosure, I don't have any kids but I plan to start within a year or so). If it were my daughter, I would just be honest. I would tell her its a game and isn't real. I would explain that doing this sort of stuff in a game is OK because no one is really getting hurt. Doing this stuff in real life is not OK because you are hurting people.
Your kid is going to learn about this stuff one way or another. Would you rather they stumble in the dark on their own because you don't want to explain it to them because you are afraid, or would you rather walk with them shining the light of wisdom guiding them to proper understanding?
It's time to face the facts about human nature. We LIKE violence. Violence is not necessarily evil or barbaric. A boxing match is violent but not evil. Playing airsoft or paintball is violent, but not evil.
Shooting someone is violent, but if it is to defend yourself or another from harm, that is not evil.
And you don't have to be violent to be evil. The guy that slips into someones house and steals their possessions is evil, but not violent.
The key here is context. Violence between two people who have agreed to be violent with each other by their own choice is fine. Violence between two people where one person is not agreed to it is evil.
There is a world of difference between violence and evil. Violence is a type of action. Evil is having no respect for other people.
Your kid is going to learn about this stuff one way or another. Would you rather they stumble in the dark on their own because you don't want to explain it to them because you are afraid, or would you rather walk with them shining the light of wisdom guiding them to proper understanding?
perhaps the articles section needs a "perspectives" category.
there was another recent "article" that like this was more perspective than technical in nature.
i believe it got pulled.
there really should be a place for these things.
one can never have too wide a perspective on things.
I think its good this article is posted, its easy to get caught up on the technical aspects of our jobs and forget there even is a moral aspect to everything we do, including our jobs.
Having said this, I don't think shooters represent the moral evil this article shapes them to be and I don't think the actions of Superdad were actually necessary, though he is completely in his right to protect his child from what he deems harmful. I just feel this case is an overreaction.
I play (and enjoy) games of all kinds, puzzles, graphic adventures, strategy, shooters, rolegames... I do believe we need non violence centered games to be more prominent in our industry, but I don't agree with the notion that the violent ones need to go away.
Most games, even the non violent ones, are about conflict, a puzzle is a broken situation that the player needs to fix, a sim makes the player weigh the satisfaction of needs against the availability of resources... Violence is another kind of conflict, a more obvious one, an easier one, but there are great statements to be made through violent settings, take The Walkind Dead for instance, its a moving, amazing story about parenting, in an incredibly violent setting.
I also believe its dangerous for a person to be shielded from all forms of violence as long as possible, how will they face it once it inevitably breaks through the shields?
The title is wrong. This should be called "Why I will morally preen in public over my personal decision to not make a specific type of game anymore."
Disclamer...I'm not a professional developer, nor do I work in the game industry. This is a hobby for me. And for that matter I don't usually play FPS games (I'm one of those PC strategy guys you mentioned)
So first off let me say...good for you, taking a stand for what you beleive is right. If more people in the world did that, I think we'd all be in a better place.
Secondly let me say...I happen to disagree that working on FPS games is morally wrong.
I agree with Bluefirehawk that games need to be able to address adult themes and it needs to be possible to target games specifically for them. Granted as was pointed out there are plenty of "mindless shooters" and honestly there should probably be a place for them too.
I wonder, is your moral concern about the possiblity of increasing violence in the real world? I can't find the link now but on a blog I was reading just last week they had an interesting chart about the decline of gun violence world-wide since the introduction of the first FPS games. Now that author was talking about something entirely different and not making a case that FPS games increase or decrease the rate of violence in the real world, but I thought the chart to be interesting in that regards none the less. I'd like to get the source data since people can make a chart say anything.
Or was it more the corcern over exposing children to virtual violence too soon? Personnally (as a parent of 3 girls) I think thats more the parents problem than the industry. If more parents actually did their job of monitoring what their kids did and (heaven forbid) actually TALKING to them about what they see/hear/do, then this wouldn't be a problem for the industry to work out anyway. I agree strongly with Azaral...you have to be honest with kids. They are smarter than you think...and they see/hear WAY more than you think. For example my kids are 9, 5, and 2. We had a frank discussion with the 9 year old about the Boston Marathon. She was going to hear about it anyway, and I'd rather her hear from me. (did to a lessor extent with the 5 year old too...once they go to school you never know what they will hear each day)
I think I've rambled too much here and as someone not in the industry you probably didn't care about my thoughts anyway :) but just wanted to say "good for you", but I don't think you should have felt bad in the first place.
Having been in the games business for a decade, and having worked on six shooter titles, I'm sure of one thing: we can do better.
Good article. I like the honesty. This is actually why I'm not going into the game industry (professionally). Making games is what got me into programming, and it's something that I always plan on keeping as a fun hobby. But I decided to not make it a profession because I didn't want to work on a project that would make me feel uncomfortable if my young (future) kids were playing it. I want to be able to show my (future) kids the things I make, and hopefully inspire them.
And I've enjoyed playing shooters just as much as anyone else out there.
edit: I do have to agree with some of the other commenters: this feels kinda weird as an article, and I wonder if it should be something else instead (also, I'm not sure what it has to do with game design, as it's more about personal moral decisions).