When we think about violence in video games, we conjure different images in our minds. We think of the gory first person shooters like the DOOM series. We think of the arbitrary crimes committed in the Grand Theft Auto series. We think of the generals ordering legions of soldiers to crash into each other in real time strategy games like the StarCraft series. We think of warriors, criminals, zombies and monsters acting viciously.
But we enjoy violence in our society. We have no qualms watching a hero detective killing a criminal in self defense. We enjoy seeing survivors of the zombie apocalypse putting the undead back in their graves. Since the beginnings of literature, we have enjoyed reading about the exploits of violent heroes like Beowulf or Samson. Our society has an inherent fascination with violence. I will not try to condemn it because that would be hypocritical of me. I believe violence in media and art can be a deep expression of human emotions and a great plot device if used to advance a story. I do believe we can say that overt violence in video games, and in the media in general, is at the very least, a reflection of our society’s interest in or indifference towards aggression and war.
When considering violence in video games as a reflection of our society, we rarely consider games that lack the blood and explosions that have come to define the concept. Today, I would like to discuss two games developed by independent British studio Introversion. DEFCON is a real-time strategy game based on a Cold War nuclear scenario and Multiwinia another real-time strategy game based on a digital world of competing tribes of colorful units called, “Multiwinians.” The games are colorful and atmospheric, which conceal how violent both games are. The type of abstract violence which the two Introversion games exhibit are rich in symbolism and meaning.
DEFCON is a real time strategy game that uses simple, bright vector graphics overlaid on a map of the world in the style of movies such as Dr. Strangelove and WarGames. There are multiple game modes, but generally speaking, the player’s goal is to use conventional and nuclear weaponry to destroy opposing nations’ populations while protecting his or her own. This description sounds horrible. The goal is to destroy massive civilian populations. The game is even more horrible once you start playing it. Wars between opponents of similar skill devolve into wars of attrition, with both sides taking tremendous losses.
The trouble with the violence in DEFCON is that while you play the game, you see few indications of what you are doing. There is no blood or screaming. The background sounds are a somber dirge punctuated by the sound of coughing echoing in a large room (or bunker). Nuclear warheads flying across the map are vector graphics of blue and red missiles. All units are portrayed with simple symbols. When warheads hit their targets, there is a small flash and a text display of the damage done.
The display says it all:
More than anything else, DEFCON is a deep strategy game with multiple variables requiring the player’s attention. Where do I put my navy? Are my submarines close enough to the enemy’s coastal cities? Do I launch early and expose myself or launch late and hope the enemy doesn’t discover my lack of radar coverage in the north? While the player is answering all of these questions, he forgets the implications of what he is doing. By sacrificing his fleet, thousands of sailors will die. By moving submarines close to shore for a lunch, millions of opposing civilians will die in nuclear fires. By attacking later, the player hopes to fire upon defenseless cities with impunity.
DEFCON is a game that distills violence into an abstract form. By having bright vector graphics represent men, the player cannot feel empathy for the destruction he brings upon the world. In my eyes, concealing the nature of war is sometimes more terrible than war itself. It is not a comforting thought that generals can become mass murders if the reality of their actions is obscured by symbols.
Multiwinia is a bit less abstract than DEFCON. The gameplay consists of the player directing armies of soldiers called Multiwinians to complete various objectives. Regardless of the objective, the player is expected to use his colorful, pixilated army to assault and destroy other armies. The concept of Multiwinia is similar to most real time strategy titles. Lead your army to victory over opposing forces. Sacrifice some men for an overall win condition. This is not a particularly shocking revelation. Indeed, a necessary component of war is sacrifice and death. What sets Multiwinia apart from the herd is a function of contrast.
The world of Multiwinia is beautiful. Glowing trees grow from a lush earth. The Multiwinians themselves are colorful mosaics. They are constructed to be simple representations of man. They are so simple, lacking language and unique qualities. The only thing which sets the Multiwinians apart is their color. Red Multiwinians fight against green Multiwinians. Why? Because it’s their nature. The colorful armies fight against each other simply because they have different hues.
In addition to its indirect statements on racial harmony, Multiwinia also suggests that armies fighting against each other do so blindly, without any sense of self-preservation. The hordes of Multiwinians clash against each and scream as they die, but hundreds and thousands of more Multiwinians regularly spawn onto the battlefield to take their place.
Multiwinia is the most colorful representation of war I have ever seen, and because of the contrast between color and death, it is also a stark representation of aggression and war.
As I played DEFCON and Multiwinia, I could not help but think of an experimental board game called Train. I do not wish to cover the ground others have, so I recommend you read this article from Destructoid about the game. What the game shows is that abstract violence can be a more emotionally impactful than overt violence.
Abstract violence is frightening because it renders the screams of pain and buckets of blood as palatable. It removes the human element of a human condition.
DEFCON and Multiwinia are games which reflect the darkest possible state of humanity.
The state in which we forget our enemies are human too.
* * *
Stay tuned for another article next week.
Note: I want to mention that in DEFCON, Australia is not a competing faction. In other words, nothing can be built on the continent, nor gained from attacking it. This makes sense from a gameplay point of view since it would create a small separate faction with a significant disadvantage when surrounded by opposing navies. I, however, like to think about Australia’s exclusion from the game as a nod to the book On the Beach, by Nevil Shute which is about Australia surviving the initial nuclear holocaust and waiting for a wave of radioactivity to completely swallow up the country. I think that book may have been based on the outcome to a typical DEFCON match!