|
ColinWright -> RE: SS (11/25/2007 1:00:54 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ike99
quote:
First, I'd point out that many people don't see war as a moral activity in the first place, and so they might well feel even a wargame proper was in 'bad taste.'
This is very true. I personally don´t see war as a moral activity as all war is immoral in my opinion to one degree or another.
One might accept dropping a bomb on a bridge knowing full well civilians may be on that bridge as long as it furthers the military objective and another one might not. Still yet, to another it may depend on how many civilians may be on that bridge when they drop their bomb. Others stand by ready to launch nuclear missiles capable of destroying entire cities and millions of people and would do so if called upon to do it. In any case certainly not activities I would consider ¨moral¨
Perhaps necessary, but not something moral or something good. If one is sensitive in this way though they´d never make a good soldier in my opinion.
There are those that consider wargames in general, bad taste. I think this is extreme as no one is really killed. Except maybe a lot of 1´s & 0´s with a computer wargame.[:D]
That reminds me of the wargame of ¨Risk¨, called ¨Teg¨ here, slightly different as Teg has ships in it but basicaly the same game. Normally this game is advertised as ¨Conquer the World¨ or something like that.
When released in Germany this slogan was changed to something like ¨Liberate the World¨
Same game, same premise but made ¨politically acceptable¨ by changing the advertising slogan. Doesn´t make a lot of sense to me but extreme political correctness doesn´t make a lot of sense to me in general anyways.
If anything, that makes it worse. I'd much rather deal with people who are frankly trying to conquer me than people who have decided that they're 'liberating' me.
quote:
quote:
In Daniel McBride's scenario covering the German 1942 campaign in Russia, he has a forced withdrawal of the Luftwaffe to 'bomb Stalingrad.' Now, that was a pure terror-bombing exercise that killed around 40,000 civilians. I've objected to the feature -- but never on the grounds of its 'bad taste.' Now that you mention it, though, I suppose I could....So is it in bad taste to cover these campaigns?
For me it´s not bad taste. But I´m sure the objective of this scenario is not to see how many civilians you can kill in Stalingrad. If someone made a bombing campaign game, that as an objective was to see how many civilians you can kill in Dresden, London and Tokyo.....that would seem a bit odd to me. I wouldn´t ¨ban¨ such a game, but it would seem...odd.
quote:
You are -- essentially -- taking the position that portraying some forms of mayhem and slaughter is okay, but portraying others is not. Well, others might feel differently, one way or the other.
I think my position is a common sense one. Certainly Colin you can see the difference between a game piece representing an SS unit as a combat unit attempting to capture Minsk being different from an SS game piece for rounding up Poles. Wargames focus on the military aspects of campaigns and wars, not the politics or ideology behind them. As such the symbology in wargames is politically valueless.
I don't think symbology is ever completely valueless. Let's face it: those SS runes just carry a lot more 'kick' than the 7th Cavalry's horse head icon -- and the reason is precisely because of the continued 'value' -- for good or ill -- of that particular symbol.
Anyway, my main point is that where one draws the line in what one can permit oneself to simulate is more or less a matter of individual taste. You have decided that representing one form of violence is okay, but that representing another is not. Others might feel that neither form should be represented. Still others would feel quite comfortable representing either form.quote:
But all this doesn´t matter as you said you don´t agree with banning historically accurate symbols from wargames...same as me.[;)]
No...I merely don't support banning the symbols here. If others feel the need to ban them there, I think that maybe they know themselves what's best for them.
|
|
|
|
