I fought in a real war and killed a bunch of people in real life so doing it in video games isn't a big deal for me. Unlike real life, I can start the level over and the "people" I killed will be back again ready to be killed all over again.
Yes, video games should be rife with heavy moral lessons and character building. That's escapism right there.
I don't understand why people play video games and get ideas to become criminals. If that's the case, no one should be able to play them unless they pass some sort of sociopath test. I play GTAIV a lot these days, which is basically a criminal simulator.... yet in reality I've never ever had the urge to steal a sportscar and drive around the sidewalks capping people out the window and ramming hot dog stands. It used to be in fashion to go on a rampage and blame GTA for it, but it's fallen out of favor these days.
. . . and wantonly destroy homes and buildings.
It seems odd that this constitutes a war crime, particularly given the abhorrent nature of the other crimes listed. Are soldiers considered less worth protecting than inanimate structures?
The problem isn't so much the buildings but rather the people (read: civilians) contained within them. Civilian lives are worth more than soldiers. That comes with the territory of being a soldier--you are there to lay down your life so a non-combatant doesn't have to, if it comes to that.
When I play war games, I go to war so that my enemies may live in burnt hacked up pieces surrounded by the rubble of their destroyed civilization.
The whole airport scene in COD:MW2 got me thinking about this very topic in connection to strategy games. Had the same thought as Robert Maxwell that it would be an interesting addition to give these actions real in-game consequences.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.