It must be their policy at this point, don't rock the boat, don't piss anyone off, deny everything we make is in any way political.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Gamespot: Ghost Recon: Breakpoint Isn't Making Political Statements, Ubisoft Insists Despite Obvious Themes
- Thread starter Eolz
- Start date
What makes drones inherently more political than guns or tanks or nukes?
What will determine if this game as some sort of political value is how these things are portrayed and what messages it will carry, not their mere presence, no?
Reading that post was like reading an OBJECTIVE GAME REVIEW™
Literally how do you not have the self awareness to realize that you shutting your brain off and thinking something's dumb and superficial does not=something is not full of political statements.
"I didn't get the point and commentary, thus it doesn't exist" is a nuclear take.
I for one don't mind what position Ubi publically take, and how contorted it is, because I don't anticipate any video game doing anything with any great insight anyway.
A reductive take, I know, but eh, it's why I don't get worked up about it. Except when people assume 'normal' is 'apolitical', cos that's on all of us to combat.
A reductive take, I know, but eh, it's why I don't get worked up about it. Except when people assume 'normal' is 'apolitical', cos that's on all of us to combat.
The fact that it involves American-made drones in a modern military setting with US military characters? Also, if it involved nukes then yes it would still be political since nukes are political. Both are not just weapons that simply exist, both are weapons that signify the political power that a superpower wields over weaker countries.
I'm so glad Ubi are here to reassure us that their games have nothing valuable or interesting to say!
Yeah there was nothing political about movies made by a guy who has willingly chose to be a russian envoy.
Yeah there was nothing political about movies made by a guy who has willingly chose to be a russian envoy.
It's not that we want them to say anything in particular. It's just that war/conflict is inherently political. It's just incredibly idiotic to make statements like "we don't want to make political statements" when your game handles topics like AI/drone usage in conflict, domestic terrorism, assassinating political figures etc.
Maybe someone can help me understand, but to me a statement implies condemnation or condoning whatever themes are being presented. Why is it not possible to have these obvious themes as just plot points? For example even if Watch Dogs 2 deals with surveillance of the populous, it doesn't mean the writers are trying to tell a cautionary tale, maybe it just makes an interesting story.
yeah, i'm equally confused. both division 2 & ghost recon: wildlands are far more loaded with real-world parallels than this. this's just semi-scifi stuff :) ...
User Warned - Thread Whining
Who cares
Edit: That wasn't thread whinning. Better things to worry about. Just stating a fact of opinion.
Edit: That wasn't thread whinning. Better things to worry about. Just stating a fact of opinion.
Last edited:
I know people always get mad at Ubisoft when they say this, but... why do their games *need* to make political statements? The Division 2 was actually docked review points from several outlets because of this, and it's like... the game is a looter shooter. No one asks Destiny to take a stand on current issues. Does the kinda-modern day setting mean it has to choose a side? I don't get it.
Because their games make political statement, like saying only the people with guns will survive is a political statement.
The problem is that the games have political statements but then Ubisoft says "nah guys, this story dealing with real life political issues isn't political".
The point is that all their games do have political statements, but Ubi is too chicken to actually openly acknowledge that.
Nobody is saying they should make political statements, that they should be good, deep or whatever.
Just that they should own the fact that their games do have and make political statements.
Or maybe it's just fleshing out it's own fictional world?
Again, people are only making these connections because the game takes place in DC and the guns look real. If that exact same statement was made in Destiny, no one would call it a "political statement".
anyone expecting them to publicly say they are making/going to make political statments in these games are honestly kidding themselves.
Or it's because most people can notice insanely obvious political statements.
I predict we'll get this one statement along with at least one but likely mutliple politically charged adverts for the game before launch, and Ubisoft won't officially comment on any of it past this initial statement.
People ate up their cynical bullshit every time so far with this playbook.
People ate up their cynical bullshit every time so far with this playbook.
Just as a short exercise:
Imagine all of the story beats in The Division 2 are exactly the same, but the game takes place on a fictional planet 1000 years in the future and the enemies are humanoid in appearance but also clearly alien. Imagine hearing the line "We only survived because we had guns".
Is this still a political statement?
Ubisoft games, for whatever reason, aren't allowed to exist within their own fictional universes. Everything they do has to be some sort of political message because the games take place in real-world locations and involve governments. I imagine the devs, who more than likely just want to make interesting scenarios for players, get real tired of hearing this stuff about their games.
Some people here are arguing with almost nobody.
The problem here isn't that the games are political or have political themes or messages that we disagree with or something.
Like most people have said, media by and large typically has some kind of message of statement, regardless of their quality or the execution.
What's hilarious is this one company that goes out of its way to say that no, they don't have those things.
"What do you want them to say?"
Pretty much anything other than "Uh, no politics here!" lol
The problem here isn't that the games are political or have political themes or messages that we disagree with or something.
Like most people have said, media by and large typically has some kind of message of statement, regardless of their quality or the execution.
What's hilarious is this one company that goes out of its way to say that no, they don't have those things.
"What do you want them to say?"
Pretty much anything other than "Uh, no politics here!" lol
Its a Tom Clancy game, it's gonna have certian themes. I don't even know why they're saying anything. Nobody is gonna get upset that a Tom Clancy game feels like a Tom Clancy game. They just look dumb by saying it's not supposed to be political
Uh, aliens and science fiction are a notorious hotbed of political storytelling. Its often a way to look at our society through a layer of abstraction, revealing its hypocrisies in starker detail or arguing for better ways we could all live together.
And even putting aside the fact that ALL storytelling is political (especially any storytelling pointed to as being apolitical) the problem here is that most of the popular franchises ubisoft has explicitly deal with politics. Waging war against despots, government missions to kill terrorists, inspiring the people to rise up and help you assassinate their oppressors. Their assertions of apoliticism are absurd and made in bad faith.
There is a difference between political themes/settings and political statements/messages. Of course Tom Clancy-branded games include political themes.
Ubisoft is saying that the games aren't meant to convey statements about real-world politics, which a lot of people here and in the media are having trouble separating from story themes. The games and universes are still fictional, and if the creator specifically says "we aren't taking any political stances with this creation", maybe people should listen to them instead of saying "nuh-uh, lol".
Wildlands is literally about the War on Drugs.
What they're saying is that there will be no progressive politics on the game. Which is fine I guess, but then then dont say that pandering to conservative fantasies isnt politics for some reason.
This is what I'm talking about. People are unable to separate the setting/theme from messages. As if the game is automatically making a statement about the real world in some way because it loosely mirrors things that happen in the real world. It's not allowed to just be a video game about 4 spec ops guys shooting dudes in a jungle.
I mean... remember when Rainbow 6: Patriots got cancelled? Based on what I had read about the game, it sure seemed like it would have been easy to identify with the "bad guys."
I dont mind people expressing opinions in videogames or any form of media. I dont mind being cool with and hearing someone with different views.
I dont expect people to turn off part of themselves when theyre expressing themselves
I dont expect people to turn off part of themselves when theyre expressing themselves
By setting the game on an actual, sovereign country being effectively invaded by an United States murder squad, they're pretty much taking a stance.
SCI-FI is one of the most politically charged genres in fiction because sci-fi is often directly inspired by real world politics. JFC.
Do you know what the plot of Ghost Recon Wildlands is?
.............Are you being sarcastic?
Do you know what the plot of Ghost Recon Wildlands is?
Sure do. Completed it 100%. But it's just that - a plot. A story that drives gameplay. It literally does not need to be anything more than that.
That's basically what I'm getting from the comments. Wildlands most definitely had its flaws but it's not like it was made for "political masterbation" just to satisfy alt right skin heads to get off on murdering POC.
These operations happen and have been happening since the war on drugs started. They could have abandoned the real country of Bolivia and went with a made up country but to each their own I guess.
I thought Wildlands was one of the best coop tactical games since the original Ghost Recon or even the old Delta Force games with voxels from the late 90s.
On topic for Breakpoint, I'm not a fan of the direction their going tbh. They could have stuck with the drug war theme and had the same scenario. There are many references or accounts of CIA/DEA/etc. operators engaging actual US military forces in South America and they didn't know they were fighting fellow Americans. Each had their own objectives and were out of the loop with one other.
I've read a lot of Clancy's original work and this doesn't honestly fit the bill. Wildlands yes to an extent but the Division and this no.
Rainbow Six and Without Remorse were my favorites.
I assume you've not seen Iron Man 1, Iron Man 3, captain america first avenger, Captain america winter soldier, captain america civil war, or captain marvel. All films that have political themes and messages. I assume you're gonna argue star wars and final fantasy 7 don't have political messages too.
The statement of "we don't want to lose the sales of the alt right white boys who buy these games at face value". Ubisoft would make a gundam game and say it was not a political statement.
"Breakpoint's story focuses on a silicon valley genius who develops advanced AI and drones to help humanity and save American lives. The tech giant and its drone army are hijacked by a group of rogue US soldiers, and the game's reveal stream states the drones assassinate an election candidate."
I'm seriously having a hard time seeing how this plot relates to anything going on in current U.S. politics or on the world scene. It just sounds like a sc-fi plot, like you might find in any movie or book. Please enlighten me.
I'm seriously having a hard time seeing how this plot relates to anything going on in current U.S. politics or on the world scene. It just sounds like a sc-fi plot, like you might find in any movie or book. Please enlighten me.
That has political messages in it including a direct commentary on whether or not it'd be a good idea to eliminate a warlord who committed atrocities vs not executing him and torturing him for information before he gets out and the cycle starts again. It includes things like political pardons for the sake of gaining useful intel. It's absolutely a politically charged game top to bottom. Just because the game is also fun doesn't mean it isn't rife with political messages. Their creatives aren't braindead, I'm sure they wouldn't be even able to create an apolitical game tackling this subject matter if they tried and even if marketing says otherwise.
Lemme translate this into gamer speak:
Devs arguing that their game about drone warfare isn't political is about as genuine as them arguing that 30fps actually makes a game more cinematic.
Godzilla for some might be just a giant lizard, but that doesnt deny the fact that he is an allegory for nuclear weapons.
Slightly passive-aggressive ad hominem attack aside, this still doesn't qualify as sending a real-world political statement. These are story beats in a politically-themed game. I don't know why so many people seem unable to disconnect their brains for this stuff.
This is akin to saying Showtime is pro-capital punishment because they aired Dexter, a show about a serial killer murdering people who escaped the justice system. It doesn't make sense.
These are works of fiction.
They do know that Clancy was a right wing nut who really pushed that viewpoint beyond the military worship of his early books, and once he needed new foes after the USSR fell, went headlong off the right wing cliff, right?
Entire narratives would come to a halt so President Jack Ryan could talk about how cool flat taxes are.
One book had a subplot of his Doctor wife working at a hospital in England and decrying how terrible the NHS is.
You say that as if that refutes the point.
Works of fiction can make political statements, my dude.