Tobold's Blog
Friday, August 31, 2007
 
Lore or political correctness?

The Witch-king of Angmar in Tolkien's Lord of the Ring trilogy was thought to be unkillable, because of a prophecy stating that “not by the hand of man shall he fall”. He was eventually killed during the battle on the Pelennor Fields by Eowyn, who by being a woman deftly sidestepped the prophecy. Nobody had thought of that, because women weren't a regular feature on Middle-Earth's battlefields. Eowyn was a big exception and only got only the battlefield in disguise. What *was* a regular feature of Lord of the Ring battles is that they were racially motivated. Except for the humans, who fought on both sides, you could tell on which side a character was fighting by simply looking at his race: Elves, dwarves, and hobbits on the good side, orcs and goblins on the evil side. By modern standards the world of Middle-Earth is definitely sexist as well as racist. The online version of LotRO is still racist, but as you can't play an evil race except temporarily most people don't notice. And LotRO isn't sexist at all, there is absolutely no difference between male and female characters in this game. Same with World of Warcraft, race determines which side you are fighting on, while sex is irrelevant.

Now a discussion has broken out about Age of Conan, which is more sexist than WoW or LotRO, having female characters start as sex slaves. And thus Age of Conan also deals with the subject of slavery, which other games tend to avoid. Although slaves were historically a dominant feature of ancient Rome, as well as one of the more frequent "cargos" during the age of sail, you won't see any slaves in Gods & Heroes, or any of the many pirate MMORPGs like Pirates of the Burning Sea. Age of Conan also is mentioned in the news because it contains sex (apparently not graphically depicted, but with a buff as consequence). Most other MMORPGs are sex-less. Yes, people can do pretend cyber-sex. But that is something that mainly happens in the head of the people pretending to do those sexual acts. If you look at it you'll notice that in a game like WoW it isn't even technically possible to get nude, nor to show a nipple.

Fact is that most MMORPGs adhere strictly to a 21st century set of values, most frequently based on US moral standards. Thus showing a swastika is okay, but showing a tit or a slave is not. In European countries the swastika would be more problematic, but nudity or slavery less so. And of course these moral standards have evolved very much during history of mankind. Voting rights for women are not yet a century old, the civil rights movement less than 50 years. Homosexuality was considered acceptable in ancient Greece, was punishable by death during some periods of history, and has by now landed in some uncomfortable position somewhere between legal and morally acceptable.

All this is a problem for the lore of MMORPGs. These games often play in other worlds, or other regions of this world, and often in pre-industrial settings. As far as they have historic or literary sources, in the source material the environment is often not conform to modern political correctness standards. Thus you have to choose between staying true to the lore, or staying true to 21st century moral standards. Turbine seriously discussed not to put pipe-weed into LotRO, because some overly correct people didn't want to encourage smoking; they ended with putting it in but having no game effect. For the same reason alcohol in MMORPGs is either not present at all, or has only negative effects. So I don't blame Funcom for making Age of Conan more controversial. Do we really want a Conan the not-so-barbarian who is a teetotaller and always polite to women? Yes, the mature rating is going to hurt their sales with children and women. But not all games need to have a Toontown-like degree of being wholesome for all the family.

It is even worse with historical games. I have the greates respect for the civil rights movement, but is erasing all mention of slave trade from a game playing in the Caribbean in the 18th century or ancient Rome really the best way to treat history? It somehow reminds me of George Orwell's 1984, where the history is constantly rewritten to reflect current thinking. Me, I would think that rewriting history to not mention the slave trade is equivalent to holocaust denial, which happens to still be a crime in several European countries. It is the wrongs of the past that lead to the moral values of today, and forgetting about these wrongs makes today's values less self-evident. It is better to include these wrongs in historic games, and show them as wrong, than to pretend they never happened.
Comments:
Lets take into account though...by having this "sexual" moniker placed upon it...the games sales may actually skyrocket...but due to teens trying to whittle their way in by hopefully buying a copy where the clerk is not always adamant about checking that ID.
Another train of thought is...usually an MMO has a downloadable client available. AoC may have to take a new approach to this, by forcing age verification tools...like a license, etc....which in turn may hurt sales.

The reason to watch AoC may have NOTHING to do with gameplay, and EVERYTHING to do with controversy...
 
Playing it safe is a direct result of capitalism and I applaud AoC for staying true to the IP and not compromising it just to earn additional sales. If companies cared less about their profit margins and more about their product then we'd more interesting and innovative products.
 
Turbine is just trying to position AoC as the "edgy" mmorpg. It's more about marketing than anything else. If AoC can take DAOC and add to it, it should do well - assuming it's polished and balanced. Even if female characters could go topless, I doubt that would impact subscriber numbers. Times have changed. Teenagers have easy access to internet porn that puts to shame the stuff I was watching in the 80s )

And would it kill you to post something this weekend - Sundays are boring )
 
There's a fair amount of controversy going down in the WOW forums at the moment on a similar topic.

A future caverns of time instance see's you helping Arthas, in some form, burning old Stratholme to the ground with its inhabitants. While this of course conforms to lore, a bunch of people take exception at setting fire to the place with its not yet undead occupants.
 
Well said.
 
As I recall, Eve Online has slave trading, too. If so, that's laudable. I agree with you about historical revisionism.
 
Good post.

I don't think Turbine's really trying to make it edgy as much as they simply realized that the Conan mythology is a popular setting and they're staying true to what makes it Conan.

In the case of MMOG races, I don't see it as racism. The different "races" are generally treated like separate species. And those sort of settings are more about simplifying the divide between Good and Evil than anything else. Tolkien used races to represent cultures, not peoples. The visual differences help to make the divisions clear and aid the story's function as a myth... an allegory meant to reveal truth.

There are millions of gamers, including Americans, who would like to see political correctness thrown out the window. But the games industry is an entertainment industry, which means its dominant culture believes strongly in political correctness. So a lot of gamers -- in America, particularly people of the traditional South and Midwest -- are ignored.

I'm glad AoC is taking the apolitical route and staying true to Conan. But, hopefullly, we'll eventually see developers who can reject political correctness while also remaining thoughtful and reasonably considerate. Too often, art that's apolitical is also obnoxious and myopic.
 
My favorite artist drew the covers of the Conan series. To make a Conan game playskoolized would be a mishap.

From the media I get in emails about the progress of Conan they are really trying to step in a different direction than the WoW mmo standard. Being a pvp game with a more violent theme is going to be marketting struggle unless they can find the niche for it.

I have been very excited about this game and even tho I havent been able to get into any of the beta's will definatly be playing this or warhammer instead of the vanilla mmorpgs that are out currently.

A game like conan, probably wouldnt be terribly hard to put a content filter/option to make the game even pg-13 or w/e esrb game rating equivalent.
 
Turbine = Lord of the Rings Online
Funcom = Age of Conan

beyond that I think it depends on the nature of the game - if it's supposed to be a licensed piece of intellectual property that had something like slavery in it, then it should remain so. The author included it to add a level of realism.
 
Slave-trading in EVE:

Slaves are another kind of cargo.

Supply & demand varies from sector to sector, depending on government. Some governments frown on them enough to impound them & give you negative reputation if you're caught with them by a customs fleet. They occasionally show up as loot when you attack pirates / other outlaws.

But in my experience they mostly serve as a fun excuse for war between the PvP RPers. The Amarr empire believes slavery is the natural and proper place of unbelievers, the Minmatar Republic is a bunch of ex-slaves of the Amarr, and they can always have slavetaking/slavefreeing as an excuse for another war (== fun).
 
The absence of slavery and the slave trade from various games is not a matter of political correctness, I think. Rather, it comes from the fact that games, and computer games especially, are a form of escapist entertainment at heart. Players don’t want to be confronted with the horrors of the 17th and 18th century slave trade, they want to act out the old pirate fantasy. Ever noticed how little the slave trade is touched upon in pirate movies, even in the days before political correctness?

As for ancient Rome…how many people would want to play in the world depicted by HBO’s Rome (which, for all its historical mistakes, did a nice job of depicting ancient Rome as a society very different from ours, when it comes to attitudes to violence, sex and slavery)? Quite a few roleplayers, I suspect, but the broader gaming appeal would be much more limited. In typical fantasy worlds, the oppressed masses are usually remarkably (if not wholly) absent, and that’s for a reason. Reality sucks; it can also be intriguing and highly immersive, but only for a strongly realism-minded and immersion-seeking minority.
 
Re: Slave trading in EVE.

The same mechanics, with slaves being a form of cargo and certain systems allowing trade and others making it illegal, cropped up all the way back in Elite.
 
In the case of MMOG races, I don't see it as racism. The different "races" are generally treated like separate species. And those sort of settings are more about simplifying the divide between Good and Evil than anything else.

Okay, so it's not racism because they are different species, but that just makes it speciesism, and that doesn't make it potentially any less wrong.

However, games like WoW that allow players to play both sides are arguably not showing speciesism. After all, it's not like Orgrimmar is full of orcs beating each other around the head fighting for food and humans in Stormwind are supping on some mulled wine and discussing literature.

Personally, I think everyone should make a character of the opposing faction and play them occasionally, so that you can see that the other side is just as human as you are.
 
Me, I would think that rewriting history to not mention the slave trade is equivalent to holocaust denial

That would be a fair point if the main aim of the Nazi games was to liberate Jews, but it strikes me that the Nazis are just a convenient enemy from the recent past that everyone hates and is acceptable to hate, and the aim of the games is to run around killing Nazis. Putting Nazis in your game gives an easy setting for an FPS or flight combat game, concepts that have proved to be popular and fun for many people.

I wouldn't say that it is rewriting history to deny slavery if other fantasy settings don't dwell on the subject or make it a focus for gameplay. Still, it's good to make the point you did to raise awareness of such issues, and maybe make some people realise that the historic times depicted in some games were far from the glamorous life that is often depicted.
 
Remember Elite, the old space game on the Spectrum?
If you destroyed an enemy ship, sometimes the pilot would eject in his escape pod. If you then picked that pod up in your cargo scoop, you could then sell the unfortunate pilot as a slave at the next unlawful planet you stopped at.

I don't think slavery per se is the issue; it is mixing real life slavery into a game as opposed to fantasy salvery.
 
oopsie, typo. Delete salvery and insert slavery, please : )
 
"I would think that rewriting history to not mention the slave trade is equivalent to holocaust denial"

To continue with Elf's point, how many World War II games *do* mention the holocaust? (Or, indeed, any of the other wide range of atrocities of varying scales available committed by most countries involved). Not mentioning something isn't the same as denying it; if a game set in the Caribbean in the 18th century prominently featured happy plantations of smiling workers of many races, pausing now and again for a nice cocktail and a rendition of Paul McCartney and Stevie Wonder's "Ebony and Ivory" that's one thing, but glossing over historical accuracy for the sake of gameplay is, perhaps regrettable, but pretty much mandatory (I don't think there'd be much of a market for a WWII FPS where you spent most of your time digging holes, marching somewhere else, digging more holes, being shelled, marching somewhere else etc.)
 
since when should games be historically correct?

games == fun != correct

Rewriting history isn't new and is actually pretty obvious to do so.
The romans did it on purpose to be better than others.

however, it doesn't change the fact that at the moment you are writing 'history' down at that same moment it is rewritten and changed. words are ambigious in itself so you always have a point of view of the writer and later on the views of the reader who are trying to understand what the writer meant. that doesn't mean it is right or wrong.

but back to games. Games are normally designed from one point of view with a certain goal. Even if it tries to be historically correct, it's always a model of the real world at that time and there are some stuff that is left out.

But why stop at slavery? women were treated as childeren-producing machines with no right what so-ever in ancient greece/rome.
but is that worth to put ingame?
it's totally wrong and useless to stuff it in a game (unless it's made by rockstar) but historically correct.

i think in the end it stays a game for fun and should be treated that way.
 
They could add a few new paragraphs of legal circlespeak to their EULA about historical innaccuracy and that you agree to not QQ about it.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home
Newer›  ‹Older

  Powered by Blogger   Free Page Rank Tool