Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Digital Landscapes of Imperialism
US Intervention in Video Games
A Master’s Thesis for the Degree of Arts (Two Years) in Visual Culture
Mikko Jokela Måsbäck
Division of Art History and Visual Studies Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences Lund University KOVM12, Master’s Thesis, 30 credits Supervisor: Joacim Sprung Spring semester 2018
ii
ABSTRACT
Within the cultural imaginary of video games, armed conflicts have always occupied a central
space. Their subject material, as well as technologies and visual techniques, are often based on
historical and present-day conflicts, often involving US Armed Forces, subcontractors or
intelligence agents. US actors and interests disproportionally occupy the privileged position of
protagonist, which has contributed to creating militarised, US-centric, global interventionist
narratives across genres and titles. The dearth of US criticism within video games in turn
implicates the corporate and cultural close connections of ‘mainstream’ video game developers
and publishers to both US mass media and the actual US Armed Forces.
This thesis classifies the occurrences of US intervention-portrayals across video
games released between 2005 and 2014, through a quantitative analysis of technological, visual
and rhetorical representation. These ten years of representation come during the time of major
US military campaigns in (primarily) Afghanistan and Iraq, and loosely correspond to a
technological era, known as the 7th video game console generation. Moreover, two case studies
closely inspect the role of landscape in first-person shooters, examining the relationship between
military-industrial visualisation (e.g. crosshairs, vehicular vision, drone footage), traces of the
colonial imaginary, and the presentation of terrain as fundamentally conquerable and exploitable.
Untangling ideologies of military intervention, heroic protagonist (re-)enactments
and imperialist ideas of landscape will help pinpoint how video games (re-)create worlds, but also
how real-world political and cultural practices are upheld, subverted or redefined within the logic
of the game-world. The motives of exceptionalism and colonial morality are not just overtly
visible, but implicit in the very logic of the presentation. Landscapes are presented as accessible
and exploitable, traversable by those with the ‘right’ to intervene anywhere, anytime; a visual
rhetoric that transcends video games.
Keywords
Intervention
Video Games
Discourse
Landscape
Imperialism
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT II
TABLE OF CONTENTS III
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS V
GLOSSARY VI
INTRODUCTION 1 PURPOSE .................................................................................................................................................................... 4 EMPIRICAL MATERIAL ............................................................................................................................................ 5
Delimitation issues ................................................................................................................................................... 6 THEORY ..................................................................................................................................................................... 7
Discourse Analysis .................................................................................................................................................. 7 Visual Culture Studies ............................................................................................................................................ 8 Space, Place and Landscape .................................................................................................................................. 10
METHOD ................................................................................................................................................................ 13 Methodological framework ..................................................................................................................................... 14 Quantitative Analysis ........................................................................................................................................... 16 Qualitative analysis .............................................................................................................................................. 17 Comparative Analysis .......................................................................................................................................... 18
PREVIOUS RESEARCH .......................................................................................................................................... 19 DEFINITIONS ......................................................................................................................................................... 23 DISPOSITION ......................................................................................................................................................... 24
CHAPTER 1: QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS 25 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................... 25
Delimitation Revisited .......................................................................................................................................... 25 Categorisation ....................................................................................................................................................... 26 Coding .................................................................................................................................................................. 27
CODING RESULTS ................................................................................................................................................. 29 Interventions ......................................................................................................................................................... 29 Places ................................................................................................................................................................... 31 Spaces ................................................................................................................................................................... 33
SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................................... 34
CHAPTER 2: CASE STUDY – BATTLEFIELD: BAD COMPANY 2 37 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................... 37 PLACES .................................................................................................................................................................... 38
The Locations ....................................................................................................................................................... 39
iv
SPACES .................................................................................................................................................................... 43 The Maps ............................................................................................................................................................. 44
SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................................... 46
CHAPTER 3: CASE STUDY – ARMA 3 47 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................... 47 PLACES .................................................................................................................................................................... 48
The Campaign ...................................................................................................................................................... 49 SPACES .................................................................................................................................................................... 52
A Closer Look ..................................................................................................................................................... 53 Mods .................................................................................................................................................................... 54
SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................................... 55
CHAPTER 4: COMPARATIVE DISCOURSE ANALYSIS 57 PATTERNS .............................................................................................................................................................. 57
Place ..................................................................................................................................................................... 58 Space .................................................................................................................................................................... 59 Landscapes ........................................................................................................................................................... 60
CONTEXT ............................................................................................................................................................... 61 Intertextuality ....................................................................................................................................................... 62
CONCLUSION 65 MEANING OF PLACE ............................................................................................................................................ 65 MEANING OF SPACE ............................................................................................................................................ 66 LANDSCAPES OF US INTERVENTION ................................................................................................................ 67
Further research .................................................................................................................................................... 69
APPENDICES 71 APPENDIX 1. CONTENT ANALYSIS: FULL TABLE OF RESULTS ..................................................................... 71
REFERENCES 80 LUDOGRAPHY ....................................................................................................................................................... 80 INTERNETOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................................ 80 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...................................................................................................................................................... 81
v
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
INTRODUCTION
Table i.1 – (p. 14) Table of sites and modalities, adapted from Rose (2016).
CHAPTER 1: QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS
Table 1.1 – (p. 29) Table showing results of quantitative analysis.
Diagram 1.2 – (p. 30) Diagram showing results of quantitative analysis.
Table 1.3 – (p. 30) Table showing results of quantitative analysis.
Diagram 1.4 – (p. 31) Diagram showing results of quantitative analysis.
Table 1.5 – (p. 32) Table showing results of quantitative analysis.
Table 1.6 – (p. 32) Table showing results of quantitative analysis.
Diagram 1.7 – (p. 32) Diagram showing results of quantitative analysis.
Table 1.8 – (p. 33) Table showing results of quantitative analysis.
Table 1.9 – (p. 33) Table showing results of quantitative analysis.
Table 1.10 – (p. 33) Table showing results of quantitative analysis.
Table 1.11 – (p. 34) Table showing results of quantitative analysis.
CHAPTER 2: CASE STUDY – BATTLEFIELD: BAD COMPANY 2
Figure 2.1 – (p. 38) Screenshot from Battlefield: Bad Company 2, captured by author.
Figure 2.2 – (p. 45) Screenshot from Battlefield: Bad Company 2, captured by author.
CHAPTER 3: CASE STUDY – ARMA 3
Figure 3.1 – (p. 50) Screenshot from Arma 3, captured by author.
Figure 3.2 – (p. 53) Screenshot from Arma 3, captured by author.
CHAPTER 4: COMPARATIVE DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
Figure 4.1 – (p. 61) Screenshot from Arma 3, captured by author.
CONCLUSION
Table 5.1 – (p. 67) Table of condensed response-space in subgenres.
vi
GLOSSARY
AAA (triple-A) games – Mainstream, big budget video game.
FPS (first-person shooter) – First-person perspective games focusing on shooting.
RPG (Role-playing game) – Adventure/Action games focusing on character progression.
RTS (real-time strategy) – Strategy games occurring in real time (possibly pausable).
TBS (turn-based strategy) – Strategy games divided into clearly delineated turns for players.
TPS (third-person shooter) – Third person perspective games focusing on shooting.
1
INTRODUCTION
From abstract rules to complex physical activity, games of all forms have the potential to shape
perception, action and reasoning, as well as positing world-views that include both representation
and causality. When a player acts within a game, they are making informed decisions within the
space and context of the game’s rules and presentation, and narratives and meaning arise
simultaneously from the game’s audio-visual presentation and these rule-bound interactions. With
the increased visual fidelity and cinematic techniques evidenced in video games, this results in
situations where a player takes decisions within an environment that is often modelled to be as
indistinguishable as possible from supposedly reliable representations of the actual ‘real’ world.
It is far from easy to trace the effects of these simulations and the acts of play
within them causally to real world behaviours, but while actions taken in video games do not
necessarily, or even probably or plausibly, provoke similar actions outside the game, the
ideologies, postures and perspectives expressed remain with us, unable to be contained within the
game’s sacred space. Rather, the comparatively large amount of time spent playing individual
video games, coupled with the interactive nature of engaging with its ideas, suggests an
engagement as deep as, if not deeper, than many carefully studied and critiqued media.
It is in this context that I find it important to study the representation of the
United States of America’s (hereafter the US) intervention by force or otherwise in other
sovereign countries’ affairs within video games. The cultural imaginary of video games, its sets, its
plots and its actors, are quintessentially and inextricably suffused with US popular culture.1 While
the settings, the names, and even the places of production have diversified immensely over the
past two decades, the cultural norms, the presentation and the ideological logic has followed a US
template, appropriating outside themes to fit an established formula. It is hardly a surprise that,
when the subject matter turns to real world political and military affairs, a US centric perspective
continues to dominate.
Lack of surprise should not give way to complacency however, as these
representations are far from innocent, and could effectively be argued to be one of the largest
indirect propaganda campaigns for the normalisation of armed conflict as a solution to world
problems, and for identification with Western armed forces as arbiters of peace, justice and
stability. The affective and associative strengths of the medium have not gone unnoticed by
1 If there is, or ever was, such a thing as a video game culture, its home is the US. That is not to say there are no other nuclei of cultural production and imaginaries within the medium, but they are subsumed within the US paradigm in an increasingly global and online marketplace. The largest uniform counterpoint is Japan, but, although distinctly different from US video game culture, it has also been inexorably drawn into the orbit of US popular culture ever since their occupation after the second world war.
2
military forces, with video game developers often engaged in simulation exercises designed to
prepare actual military personnel for operations. Most prominently, America’s Army is a free-to-
play game designed and released by the US Armed Forces as a propaganda and recruitment tool,
deployed with considerable levels of success.2
Games have become an integral part of mass medial and visual culture, and often
employ a repetitiveness that can strongly normalize certain ideological logics and narratives. The
normalisation of hegemonic discourse is far from unique to the medium and the current
historical situation; rather, I argue that it is a continuation of Western political and art movements
from at least the 19th century and onwards, and that it displays both traditional modes of
persuasion, as well as new forms of engagement.3 If games allow players to make decisions within
a framework, the intentions embedded in the creation of that framework guide their actions, and
if the deliberation and emotional engagement inherent in these actions cannot be considered
hermetically sealed within the boundaries of the game, we cannot afford to leave these ideological
constructs unanalysed and uncriticised.
As I am writing this, the United States Armed Forces (US Armed Forces) have
announced the reactivation of the US Second Fleet, in a bid to control the Atlantic Ocean in
response to perceived Russian aggression, following calls from Nato’s secretary general for
increased deterrence, highlighting the need to ‘do more’ in the face of Russian hybrid tactics and
destabilisation.4 Simultaneously a highly unpredictable US administration has switched stances,
calling for military withdrawal from conflicts in Syria and Afghanistan, after having only last year
dropped the ‘mother of all bombs’ in the latter.5 Meanwhile, in the somewhat left-leaning British
newspaper the Guardian, a title to an opinion piece recently proclaimed that ‘[t]he ruins I saw in
Syria stand as a rebuke to western inaction.’6 It showcases how, in certain discourses, military
2 Explored in Allen, R., ‘The unreal enemy of America’s Army’, Games and culture, vol. 6, no. 1, 2011, pp. 38-60. 3 Purely in terms of militaristic pro-US hegemonic fare, action movies (e.g. Black Hawk Down, Flags of our Fathers, Top Gun, more recently the series begun by Olympus has Fallen), TV series (Band of Brothers, NCIS) and books (Tom Clancy’s everything) abound, but more generally, the narrative perspective has been fixed with those in power, with the oppressor, a historically strong tradition as noted, among others, by Nicholas Mirzoeff (The right to look: a counterhistory of visuality, Durham, NA, Duke University Press, 2011). 4 Associated Press, ‘“Great power competition”: Nato announces Atlantic command to counter Russia’, 5 May 2018, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/05/great-power-competition-nato-announces-atlantic-command-to-counter-russia, (accessed 6 September 2018). 5 With considerable pride, according to reports in the New Yorker (Wright, R., ‘Trump drops the mother of all bombs on Afghanistan’, The New Yorker, 14 April 2017, https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/trump-drops-the-mother-of-all-bombs-on-afghanistan, (accessed 6 September 2018), and the Independent (Sampathkumar, M., ’Donald Trump ”very proud” after dropping ”mother of all bombs” on Afghanistan’, The Independent, 13 April 2017, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/donald-trump-moab-us-bomb-afghanistan-mother-of-all-response-statement-a7683221.html, (accessed 6 September 2018)). 6 Darke, D., ‘The ruins I saw in Syria stand as a rebuke to western inaction’, The Guardian, 1 May 2018, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/01/syria-rebuke-western-inaction-military-intervention-assad, (accessed 6 September 2018).
3
intervention is now the expected response to international crises, which stands out as a clear,
natural consequence of the role US has created for itself as ‘world police.’
There hasn’t been a single year since the end of the second world war (WWII)
without more than 10 countries hosting more than 1000 billets (equivalent to one US Armed
Forces soldier per year), across the world.7 Only four years in that period (1947, 1957, 1961,
1979) were without a direct US ‘Military Intervention’ as defined by the Congressional Research
Centre in the United States.8 While most deployments have been made with consent from the
host nation (or at least one of its regimes), and in a deterrent-specified purpose,9 the fact of the
matter remains that the US Armed Forces is the largest, most technologically advanced, and
(above all) globally distributed, and mobilized military in the history of human civilisation.10 This
military might, but even more often its mere presence, has been used as deterrent, as threat, as
coercion and as leverage in political, economic and military brokering across the globe for at least
the past 73 years.11
This is the ‘real world’ background to US (military) interventions, and these do not
include the more than 50 major covert operations conducted by intelligence agents from the US
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and other US agencies.12 The same period has seen the
establishment of international communities, and an increase in international law and transnational
judicial ambition, all of which has regularly been bypassed, disregarded and completely ignored by
the US Armed Forces and administration, engaging in armed conflict as well as covert
intervention within sovereign nations at their own leisure.13
So, how are these reflected in the representative material of video games? Why is it
important? And what does it tell us? These are questions that this study aims to begin to answer,
through looking both at a broad perspective of different titles released in the near past, as well as
closer looks at a few examples, to discern the types of intervention and discourse at play.
7 According to data released by the US Department of Defence, collated in Kane, T., Global U.S. troop deployment, 1950-2005, Washington, D.C., The Heritage Center for Data Analysis, 2006. 8 Salazar Torreon, B., Instances of Use of United States Armed Forces Abroad, 1798-2017, Washington, D.C., Congressional Research Center, 2017. 9 Keane, 2006, pp. 10-11. 10 This spread of power has been summarised and criticised by Chomsky, N., (Deterring democracy, London, Verso, 1991), and the extraordinary extent of US deployment and bases are well presented in Vine, D., (Base nation: how U.S. military bases abroad harm America and the world, New York, Metropolitan books, 2015). 11 The period may be argued to stretch further backwards, beyond the end of WWII (as done in Chomsky, 1991, pp. 33-37), but that is beyond the scope of this paper. 12 Thoroughly examined in Blum, W., Killing Hope: US military and CIA interventions since World War II, London, Zed Books, 2003. The effectiveness and competence of these operations are also criticised from a more internal point of view in Weiner, T., Legacy of ashes: the history of the CIA, New York, Anchor Books, 2008. 13 Congressional as well as internal documents of the US administration and CIA are shown in both Chomsky (1991) and Weiner (2008) to depict a decision-making process far removed from humanitarian or peaceful concerns.
4
Purpose
Video games as a medium, though wholly artificial and highly technological, is very adept at
masking that very artificiality, and through its proffered utopia of player choice makes certain
consequences ‘natural’ or inevitable and posits certain responses or readings as universal or ‘true.’
It achieves this through a combination of audio-visual spectacle and rule-bound simulation,
borrowing and remedializing heavily from several older media. However, its main domain is that
of the visual, its main interface is the screen, and its meaning-creation and interaction are dictated
by images, with only very few examples premiering sound or touch over picture and gaze.14 That
is not to say these are not important, merely that they are not dominant.
Much scholarly attention has come from self-proclaimed ‘ludologists,’ focusing on
the distinctive features of games, such as their natures as rule-bound systems, or their aesthetic
appeal to play and form.15 These were in part positioning themselves in relation to film and
literary scholars, who through narrative or world-building lenses tried to conceive of the game as
a text.16 Although the first simplified academic camps have been gradually broken up and new
perspectives allowed in, there is still a lack of approaches that treat what is at heart a visual
phenomenon as an image, however interactive. For this reason, it appears that the academic study
of games requires a deeper look at the social construction of its visuality,17 the relation between
seeing, knowing and power,18 and how information, meaning or pleasure is derived when
interacting with visual technology.19 In short, it requires visual culture studies.
In order to analyse the ideological use of representations of US foreign
interventions, I have chosen to focus on two of its primary facets: the discursive and the visio-
spatial. The aim is to highlight power relations embedded in representations of intervention, and
how these are played out within the rules of the game, and to further comprehend the way ‘land’
or ‘terrain’ is mapped in virtual space, as well as its ideological content. Accordingly, my research
questions have been formulated as follows:
14 This history is succinctly summarised in Collins, K., Game Sound: An Introduction to the History, Theory and Practice of Video Game Music and Sound, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 2008. 15 Juul, J. (Half-real: video games between real rules and fictional worlds, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 2011), and Kirkpatrick, G. (Aesthetic theory and the video game, Manchester, Manchester University Press, 2011, p.21), respectively. 16 Egenfeldt-Nielsen, S., Smith, J.H., and Tosca, S.P., (Understanding video games: the essential introduction, 2nd edn., New York, Routledge, 2013, pp. 214-216) explore the straw man nature of this argument. 17 As well as the visual construction of the social (Mitchell, W. J. T., ‘Showing seeing: a critique of visual culture’, Journal of visual culture, vol. 1, no. 2, 2002c, pp. 170). 18 Foucault, M., History of sexuality: volume 1, an introduction, trans. R. Hurley, New York, Vintage Books, 1978, p. 11. 19 Mirzoeff, N., ‘What is visual culture?’, in Nicholas Mirzoeff (ed.), The visual culture reader, 3rd ed., London, Routledge, 2013, pp. 3-13.
5
-! How are US foreign interventions portrayed and deployed within video games?
-! What roles does the concept of ‘landscape’ fill in video games featuring U.S. intervention?
-! How are a sense of place and representations of space deployed ideologically?
To answer these questions, it will be necessary to interrogate what a foreign intervention is, and
both how it has been made to look in video games, and which values and norms that are
furthered by these depictions. This interplay of power and image bears a relation to the Western
practice of depicting landscapes, and the colonial power relation contained within that logic.
Therefore, the landscapes of video games must be carefully analysed, to see how the specific
cultural connotations of places and the interactive possibilities of spaces combine to provide an
experience of landscape, and how that experience is linked to the discourse of US intervention.
Empirical Material
In order to fruitfully discuss a wider sample of games, and thus pass comment not only on
specific instances but also on prevalent visual discourses, I chose to study a ten-year period
(2005-2014) of releases, supplemented by a close reading of two selected examples (Battlefield: Bad
Company 2 and Arma 3).
The first study, conducted by means of a content analysis, has been conducted on
video games released for personal computers or home consoles between 2005 and 2014,
featuring US Armed Forces or intelligence agents engaged in foreign countries post-WWII. The
release period has been chosen as it loosely corresponds to a technological ‘generation’ of
consoles, and covers a period of intensive US military intervention, while offering a reasonable
critical distance, with neither concurrent hype for newly released titles, nor too great a difference
in technological development skewing the reading. 20 Ten years also appeared a sufficient time to
be able to trace certain possible trajectories of change. Furthermore, the focus on specific
instances where the US Armed Forces and/or the CIA, or similar, have verifiably intervened in a
foreign country narrowed the examples to a manageable size (the total number of games included
20 ‘Console generation’ is a term that includes concurrent releases of hardware from multiple companies, and although this period corresponds loosely to the 7th, there is overlap (e.g. the Xbox 360 was released by Microsoft in late 2005, with its successor the Xbox One appearing in late 2013, with games for both appearing in the material).
6
nevertheless reached a daunting 165). Lastly, the decision of only including represented time
periods after WWII further narrows the scope of both the material, as well as the type of conflict
being depicted. It also asks the question of how righteous US intervention is imagined after its
(arguably) last successful and uncomplicatedly heroic military escapade.
For the qualitative case studies, two games were chosen once the bulk of the
coding had been completed for the content analysis. The choice fell on Battlefield: Bad Company 2
and Arma 3, both being similar, yet contrasting, shooter-games, the undoubtedly predominant
type in the sample. This offered a possibility of more nuanced commentary regarding how
specific design choices impact the experience of landscape and intervention, beyond mere genre
definitions. The larger differences between genres, and some of what that entails for US
intervention depictions is covered in the discussion of the results of the content analysis.
Delimitation issues
In large numbers of video game releases, the nationalities of protagonists are not explicitly
named, and these titles have thus not been included in the sample, even though many such
protagonists merely act as fictional proxies of the US. Due to the latter point, these titles play an
important part in shaping the manifold discourses carried on through video games, and while this
discrepancy will be reflected in the final analysis, it bears noting that a wider criterion would have
enabled more comprehensive results (but would also have taken considerable more time and
resources).
The specific ten-year period is also notably arbitrary; even though it encompasses
the main period of the so-called seventh console generation, it includes releases for all of their
respective predecessors and successors, as well as for personal computers who have had no such
clearly defined technological periods. Rather, the period is one of change, from one fluctuating
state to another, in both US real-world interventionism and video game representations, and the
study aims to capture and interrogate the way that intervention discourse developed, and where it
might be going. The period does, however, complement existing research, as an Australian study
on FPS-adversaries covers a period that runs up to and including 2009.21 The categories and
results of this earlier study have been included as a minor part of the content analysis discussion
and, since the studies share a five-year span, may be of limited comparative use.
21 Hitchens, M., Patrickson, B. & Young, S., ‘Reality and terror, the first-person shooter in current day settings’, Games and culture, vol. 9, no. 1, 2014, pp. 3-29.
7
Theory
‘Visuality sutures authority to power and renders this association “natural.”’22
The concepts of place, space, and landscape form a cornerstone of the themes analysed by this
thesis. Place, indicating a culturally and geographically specific place in time and terrain, contrasts
with space as an embodiment of area or volume, and the specific sensations of borders and
movement. Landscape, in turn, is deployed in its sense as a category of representation, a type of
image produced for very specific aesthetic and economic purposes, and encompasses a
combination of both specific place and experiential space. Fundamentally, these are all tools in
defining a certain way to view and depict the world, visualities that produce a certain knowledge,
which in turn is inextricably tied to military, economic and historical power. After exploring this
discursive relation, this section will consider the specific tools and terms of Visual Culture
Studies, as they apply to video games and the central concepts of place, space, and landscape.
Discourse Analysis
‘Every game requires us to learn things.’23
These representations are not the real world, nor should they be judged as if they were. It is
important to distinguish between the real, or that which has a reasonably strong claim to be real,
and that which is depicted. However, between the real and the depicted, there is a constant
exchange, of different kinds of knowledges. Knowledge of myths, knowledge of worldviews,
knowledge of values. Video games are representations of something that has not necessarily ever
existed. The subject matter of video games can often never be presented, but merely represented.
But what is presented is the very presentation itself, the framework, subjects displayed and the
angle chosen to display them from. All of this forms a discourse, a chain of events and logical
connections that in themselves create a worldview, one that is both visual, textual and structural.
Whatever the intention, these constructs are ideological and political in nature, and guide the way
a player thinks and knows about the world, both inside and outside of the game.
22 Mirzoeff, 2011, p. 6. 23 Straightforwardly expressed in an online analysis video (The digital museum – Assassin’s Creed Origins discovery tour – Extra Credits, [online video], 9 May 2018, Extra Credits, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hp1DgRCEBDA, (accessed 6 September 2018)). I do not agree with the praise for developer-publishers Ubisoft and their Assassin’s Creed-franchise, nor the trust in having ‘AAA’ video game companies as cornerstones of education, but the enthusiasm for what is possible is an important counterpoint to my own misanthropic leanings.
8
Needless to say, this knowledge, much like any knowledge, confers immense power, and this
power in turn shapes, and has already shaped, the types of knowledge expressed. It has needed to
be said however, and it was said in a Western context with most clarity by French philosopher
Michel Foucault.
Foucault posits that knowledge and power are intertwined and inseparable, as the
one needs and defines the other.24 Power has its origin in knowledge, knowledge that one party
has over another, while Knowledge, its acquisition and dissolution, is always an exercise of
power. Once you understand something, you can control it, meaning the mere (f)act of knowing
is power.25 When it comes to video games, their visual and textual presentations are shaped by
power, economic and political, but also by assumed and acquired knowledges, both cultural and
technological. Games do require its players to learn, learn rules to be able to act in the system,
understand visual techniques in order to appreciate the aesthetic experience and interpret social
dynamics to be able to actually play the game. Every one of these is an act of and in relation to
power, but beyond this the presentation of games, and especially video games, make use of
combined complexes of meaning, from cinematic emphasis to rhetorical tropes, that in
themselves are complexes of knowledge and power.
Lastly, games are also at their hearts systems and rules of interaction, and these
systems sometimes function as micro-cosmoses of societal structure, where externally defined
rules are followed by the majority of participants, and layers of informal policies of conduct are
navigated, while actors push against the limits and definitions of both rules and policies,
tempered by the level and type of discipline that transgression provokes.26 Video games are thus
highly discursive objects, with both overt representational discourse and structural instituted
forms of discourse guiding the actions and consequences within their representation, and this
thesis investigates that cluster of discourses, and their relation to the historical, political and
postcolonial discourses that surround them.
Visual Culture Studies
Visual culture is at its heart about looking and seeing, about gazes and perspectives, and these
form the core of the questions that will be asked of the material in this thesis. Who is (presumed
to be) looking, and how does their position (in the broadest sense), experience and intention
24 Foucault, 1978, pp. 92-98. 25 Foucault, 1978, pp. 98-102. 26 Cf. the role of Discipline as envisioned as a governmental form of control by Foucault, M., Discipline and punish: the birth of the prison, trans. A. Sheridan, London, Penguin, 1977, pp. 192-194.
9
inform what they see? What gazes are permitted, encouraged or enforced through the games, and
what choices of perspective are we as players given? For there are many ways to approach an
interactive medium, but all of the ways of seeing, be it through disinterested glancing, engaged
scouring or terrified peeking, are defined and conditioned by the structure and presentation of
the game. Video games are engaged in the construction of certain visualities, but only part of that
construction takes place inside the computer. Using visual culture studies, I will engage the role
of perspective, symbolism and ‘scopic regimes,’ as it could be applied to video games.
‘Scopic regime,’ in the sense of a visual model, or series of techniques and norms
forming a visual practice, was a term originally used by film scholar Christian Metz to distinguish,
by means of psychoanalysis, film as a medium opposed to theatre.27 Historian Martin Jay has
since employed it in defining dominant forms of visual discourse within art historical periods,
while discussing the fractured and parallel existence of scopic regimes in modern visuality.28 I will
use the term as a way of defining specific ways of seeing, given by the presentation and rules of
specific video games. Thereby, I will also somewhat follow in the footsteps of both Metz and Jay,
in highlighting some of the unique qualities evident in video games vis-à-vis e.g. film, while also
charting some of the many different ‘subcultures’ present in modern video games.29 The
dominant forms of visual representations within video games are descendants and proponents of
linear Cartesian (and Albertian) perspective, showing that the ideals of rationalism and
‘scientism,’ despite some of Jay’s fears, reign supreme in at least one modern visual medium.30 As
video games employ their scopic regimes to guide expectations as to what it is possible to see,
envision, know and ultimately enact within the game itself, I shall seek to highlight what
ideological positions and power relations are expressed through this practice.
Inside the framing of perspective and scopic regimes, video games also engage
different visual discourses that are used as symbolical logics that are simply taken for granted.
The French linguist and philosopher Roland Barthes terms these kinds of efforts to present a
depoliticised, naturalised picture of the world as ‘myths.’ Myths are conceptualised as a ‘second-
order semiological system,’ which encompasses several signs to create a self-evident, and thus
27 Metz, C., ‘From the Imaginary Signifier’, in L. Braudy & M. Cohen (eds.), Film theory and criticism: introductory readings, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2009, pp. 703-705. 28 Jay, M., ‘Scopic regimes of modernity’, in H. Foster (ed.), Vision and Visuality, Seattle, Bay Press, 1988, pp. 3-23. 29 Similar to Jay’s (1988) subcultures present in modern visuality, subcultures have also started to increasingly be heard and seen in writing, such as in Anthropy, A., Rise of the videogame zinesters: how freaks, normals, amateurs, artists, dreamers, dropouts, queers, housewives, and people like you are taking back an art form, New York, Seven Stories Press, 2012. 30 Although Jay finishes the article in a fairly pluralist and anti-hierarchical fashion, his lament for the ‘dethroning of Cartesian perspectivalism’ manages to include some distressing observations tying the lack of such regimes to the ‘lack’ of indigenous scientific revolutions in ‘Eastern cultures.’ (1988, pp. 19-20) This is not only spuriously speculative, but also incredibly dismissive of the rich culture of invention and discovery outside of the ‘West.’ This lamentable attitude sadly remains unaddressed, even when Jay revisits his text two decades later (‘Scopic regimes of modernity revisited’, in I. Heywood & B. Sandwell (eds.), The handbook of visual culture, London, Bloomsbury, 2011, pp. 103-114).
10
unexplained, symbolic world, a collection of assumptions regarding meaning that tries to make a
certain power relation so obvious that it in effect becomes invisible.31 These myths are prevalent
in all forms of media, but in video games texts, audio-visuals and rule systems can work together
to further enforce the assumed actions and perspectives of any given myth.
Video games include the aspect of acting within a representation, defining not just
who can look, but who can act and how, which introduces a crucial element of agency and
control. Foucault’s ideas of control through discipline in turn emphasizes the importance of seeing
in defining and dominating discourse, but also how being seen directly and indirectly controls a
subject’s freedom of movement and action.32 Video games’ different forms of control can be
seen as a furthering of the all-seeing eye of the ‘panopticon’ extending its grasp beyond
surveillance into the realm of puppetry.33 But power is also expressed in restrictions on looking,
and restrictions on what is looked at critically. Perspectives imply direction and interest, and the
shadowland where the eye does not focus its attention remains uninspected, and ultimately
accepted as unproblematic, or natural.
Visual scholar Nicholas Mirzoeff has highlighted how colonial power constantly
seeks to control perspectives and gazes.34 Video games, as didactic tools that exert immense
effort in grabbing the player’s attention and directing their gaze are prime examples of presenting
hegemonic ways of looking at the world and its landscapes, and they have many layers of
signification, only some of which I will be able to unravel here. The hope is to hereby, at least in
part, follow visual scholar Mieke Bal’s call for visual culture studies to critically analyse ‘the
master narratives, that are presented as natural, universal, true and inevitable, and dislodge them
so that alternate narratives can become visible.’35 This naturalisation of specific discourses and
power relations is endemic of cultural objects, and seldom is the colonial heritage of Western
culture more evident than in landscapes and their depictions.
Space, Place and Landscape
There are multiple power relations embedded within the practice of looking, from perspective
and signifiers employed, to the choice of what is represented to begin with. Visual scholar W.J.T.
Mitchell emphasises how certain visualities are a necessary complement to the use of force 31 Barthes, R., Mythologies, trans. A. Lavers, London, Vintage Classics, 2009 (1957), pp. 114-115. 32 Foucault, M., 1977, pp 195-200. 33 The Panopticon, Jeremy Bentham’s prison based on constant threat of surveillance through architecture, was theorized by Foucault (1977, pp. 200-228) as a model for governmental behavioural control through surveillance. 34 Mirzoeff, 2011, pp. 10-13. 35 Bal, M., ‘Visual essentialism and the object of visual culture’, Journal of visual culture, vol. 2, no. 1, 2003, pp. 5-23.
11
employed by coloniality. In the genre of landscape, as visual representation of terrain, space and
nature are combined to form a discourse of hegemony. As a medium, landscape is concerned
with the exchange between the human and the natural, the self and the other, and has been since
the inception of its current tradition.36 Mitchell continues: [Landscape] is an instrument of cultural power, perhaps even an agent of power that is (or
frequently represents itself as) independent of human intentions. Landscape as a cultural
medium thus has a double role with respect to something like ideology: it naturalizes a cultural
social construction, representing an artificial world as if it were simply given and inevitable, and
it also makes that representation operational by interpellating its beholder in some more or less
determinate relation to its givenness as sight and site.37
It is this tendency to present something as given, as the natural order of things that is both
insidious, and important to highlight, as it serves to normalize a certain worldview, a certain
relation of power. A related visuality is present most clearly in video games, especially within
certain genres, and it is just as implicitly and explicitly tied to cultural and military dominance as
any of the media preceding it.
Landscape painting can, according to Mitchell, be understood ‘as a representation
of something that is already a representation in its own right;’ but also a ‘marketable commodity’
that adds tangible value (the view from an apartment, the tourism of a region). Video games trade
in these representations, whether or not their inspirational representations are based on physical
terrain or people, or on some variation of specific or cultural myths (in Barthes’ sense).
Simultaneously, landscape can (following Marx) represent itself as of invaluable, ‘inexhaustible
spiritual value.’ Landscape becomes the antithesis of Land, the ideal estate versus the real estate
(that is the mineral, vegetative, water and habitation resources; i.e. finite, exhaustible assets).38
Video games offer a multiple viewing of landscape as both, extracting its ‘real’ value of
exploitable resources, and engaging in almost sublime spectatorship of the ideal estate.
Landscape’s position is therefore crucial in mediating the natural to the cultural, in making a
‘natural’ representation of ‘nature’ seem fundamentally ‘natural,’ as it has always played on the
idea of the Real and the Imaginary, making claims of representing a reality that is ‘natural.’
But landscape can also frequently tell us about the presumed spectator. British
geographer Jay Appleton compares ways of looking at a landscape to animal behaviours,
36 Mitchell, W. J. T., ‘Imperial Landscape’, in W. J. T. Mitchell (ed.), Landscape and power, 2nd ed., Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2002a, p. 7, meaning landscape as the ‘pure,’ modern, western European phenomenon that emerged in the 17th century, peaked in the late 19th, and can be said to have a certain resurgence in the current era. It originated as an aspect of the medium of painting, but has arguably defined new ways of seeing, and since travelled to many other media. 37 Mitchell, W. J. T., ‘Introduction’, in W. J. T. Mitchell (ed.), Landscape and power, 2nd ed., Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2002b, p. 2. 38 Mitchell, 2002a, pp. 14-16.
12
comparing the dominant gaze to the eye of a predator, seeking to identify dangers, shelters and
potential targets.39 Appleton’s spectator, placed in a privileged protected space, is made safe by
the frame of the picture, but also becomes removed, and assumed as universal. They are made
complicit in the creation of a universality that accepts the hegemonic, imperial discourse.
The semiological features of a landscape are often implicated in the discourse of
imperialism, painting the space where an empire, in the words of Mitchell, can move ‘outward in
space as a way of moving forward in time.’40 This expansionist practice is modelled in video
games to a very practical extent, as evidenced in several explicitly colonial games that form part
of the material. Game scholar Soraya Murray has further observed how video game landscapes
can lay the ground, both physically and metaphorically, for colonial fantasies and power
structures to be played out through both time and space.41
The Chinese-American human geographer Yi-Fu Tuan puts it perhaps most
concisely when he states that landscape simultaneously combines the concepts of ‘domain’ and
‘scenery.’ It combines the politico-economic discourse with that of aesthetics, fusing perspectives
and enriching and confusing the imagination by combining the objective and the subjective.42 As
Murray points out, much video game activity revolves around controlling a domain, and the way
in which that domain is presented, the details of the scenery, creates a visual space of power
relations.43
These power relations define what activities and interactivities are possible in these
spaces, the formal aspects of which have been theorised thoroughly by game and architecture
scholar Michael Nitsche. He points out that, in virtual worlds, there is no ‘natural’ or ‘given’
perspective, instead conventions have been borrowed from art history, architecture and cinema,
and often necessarily introduce the body as a grounding element.44 These spaces are thus
consciously constructed using familiar tools and techniques, and this mediated space becomes the
playground for the discursive pull between text, image and action.
Nitsche further points to how myth and symbolism are engaged to create a sense
of specific, and oftentimes sacred, place, within the larger representation of video games. This
definition of place focuses on both the idea of virtual presence and virtual signification, and in
this thesis, I will primarily focus on the latter type, exemplified in Nitsche’s text by efforts to 39 The Experience of Landscape by Jay Appleton (p. 31), as summarised by Mitchell (2002a, p. 16). 40 Mitchell, 2002a, p. 17. 41 Murray, S., On video games: the visual politics of race, gender and space, London, I.B. Tauris, 2018, pp. 141-182. 42 Tuan, Y.-F., ‘Sign and Metaphor’, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, vol. 68, no. 3, 1978, p. 366: ‘Take the word “landscape.” It is a diaphor in the sense that it derives its tensive meaning through combining to similar entities, “domain” and “scenery.” Domain belongs to the vocabulary of political and economic discourse. A domain or an estate can be surveyed and mapped; it can be viewed objectively from a theoretical point high above. Scenery, on the other hand, is an aesthetic term.’ 43 Murray, 2018, pp. 180-181. 44 Nitsche, M., Video game spaces: image, play, and structure in 3D worlds, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 2008, pp. 77-78.
13
create specific sacred spaces, or recreations of highly symbolic monuments, such as the third
temple in Jerusalem.45
To conclude, I’d like to both agree and disagree with literary and games scholar
Clara Fernández-Vara when she points out that games’ ‘nature as performative, interactive,
participatory media makes them different from a film or a novel,’ as they define and affect the
way we play or act more directly than their peers.46 While broadly true, and at the core of what
makes games interesting, their heavy borrowing from both cinematic and literary tropes also
places them in a continuum together with films and novels, making it necessary to reflect
carefully on their interrelations. In the context of this thesis, this means that once we have looked
at how specific places are connoted, how spaces define the visual and interactive possibilities, and
how the experience of these landscapes is framed within particular scopic regimes, we will have to
carefully consider how these relate to other examples both within and outside the medium.
Method
To properly get an overview of the different visual, spatial and political discourses present in
video games during the period, it is necessary to employ several methods. First, a broader
understanding of the games of the chosen period is sought through quantifying formal and
aesthetic elements through quantitative analysis. As game scholar Miguel Sicart points out, this
allows us to speculate about the potentialities of the games, but to get deeper, into the actuality of
the games’ discourse, the games have to be experienced first-hand.47 After such a close reading,
both quantitative and qualitative analyses can be combined to gain a richer picture of the whole
material. The research has thus been separated into three segments; a quantitative content
analysis categorising and analysing US foreign intervention-representations in video games, two
qualitative compositional close-readings of Battlefield: Bad Company 2 and ARMA 3 respectively,
and a tripartite comparative evaluation of the three preceding analyses.
Before digging into the meat of the methodology proper, there is a final framework
that needs exploring. As an approach to analysing a visual phenomenon, I have enjoyed great
assistance from the simple model of ‘four sites of an image’ coined by British feminist geographer
and visual scholar Gillian Rose; these four sites offer a prism through which one can examine the
different facets of an image, and how they contribute to defining its meaning.
45 Nitsche, 2008, pp. 191-195. 46 Fernández-Vara, C., Introduction to game analysis, New York, Routledge, 2015, p.201. 47 Sicart, M., The ethics of computer games, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 2009, pp. 54-56.
14
Methodological framework
The conceptual ‘sites’ of the image are the production (1) of the image, the image (2) itself, its
distribution (3) and the context of its audiencing (4). These sites can then be further subdivided
into three different modalities; technological, compositional and social. All in all, the schema
suggested by Rose can be summarised as seen in table i.1.48 While the analysis will primarily focus
on the site of the image itself, it is important to note what constitutes the sites of production,
distribution and audiencing for video games, and their role (however small) in the quantitative
and qualitative studies respectively.
Sites and Modalities Modalities
Technological Compositional Social
Sites
Production Technologies used,
Limits/Possibilities
Medial context,
Genre
Why? By who, when,
where, for whom?
Image Visual effects Formal properties Visual meanings,
signification
Distribution Requirements,
Availability Format Marketing, Publicity
Audiencing Limitations
Forms of
audiencing,
Intertextuality
Reception,
Interpretation
Table i.1. Summary of the sites and modalities presented by Rose (2016, p. 20).
Games’ Site of Production quite often has a relatively high emphasis on the technological modality
compared to many other media,.49 When playing, it is easy to become aware of the programming,
processing and graphical limitations of both the hardware (the actual machines, computers or
consoles) and the software (the ‘game engine’ and different tools available to the developers),
dictating what level of detail and scope of visual fidelity and interactive possibility can be
offered.50 But the solutions to problems are often borrowed or copied between different
developers at both a theoretical and more direct level, leading to threads and currents running
through development, where innovations often build on existing models and quickly get
incorporated into their mesh. The formulas and models used are tied tightly to the genre the 48 Rose, G., Visual methodologies: an introduction to researching with visual materials, 4th ed., London, SAGE, 2016, p. 20. 49 Fernández-Vara compares how fans have a vocabulary to discuss the text of a novel, but mostly the techniques when discussing video games (2015, pp. 1-2). 50 These elements form a key part in the definition of the medium put forth in Skaff Elias, G., Garfield, R. & Gutschera, K. R., Characteristics of games, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 2012.
15
game aims to emulate, meaning that while there are doubtless myriads of interesting design
decisions taken on a technological, mechanical level, much of the framework and thus final
formal elements of the game get dictated in the compositional modality of the production.51 The
highly economically driven video game industry also emphasises trends with comparison and
competition in a time-sensitive and crowded market central to many studios.52 The result, at least
within the mainstream, are products with specified target demographics, trying to capture both a
zeitgeist and a moderate level of innovation. It is not hard to see how this social modality of the
production can hold the key to understanding ideology, context and intention behind a given
game. In my study, I will include a thorough examination of genre as a defining element of the
quantitative analysis, while the case studies will not go into detail about the production, other
than to give a basic context, and some tentative hypotheses regarding influences.
The Site of the Image is the game itself, and is the core of the analyses carried out in
the thesis. From the technological, visual spectacle, through the formal elements of both
representation and rules, through the wider context of signification and discourse, the object
itself takes centre stage. The quantitative study takes into account a superficial level, looking at
the most common formal (visual) elements, as well as how US symbolism is employed and
encoded. Conversely, the case studies will focus closely on the composition of the game space
and landscape, theorizing about signification both as a playing field and as ideological spectacle.
The Site of Distribution of games has seen important change within the period studied
in the increased viability of mobile and online gaming. The advent of smartphones, and services
like the Steam client, as well as dedicated online stores for consoles have shifted the focus away
from the distribution of physical discs markedly. Additionally, these developments, being both
technological and compositional in nature, have sparked social change both within and outside
the act of gaming itself, and also begin to intersect increasingly with the site of production
through open beta testing, user-created content and the rise of video game live-streaming. In the
quantitative part of this study, distribution will not be covered other than for which system any
given game was made available, while the case studies will discuss some of the repercussions of
different strategies of distribution, while not going into great detail.
Which brings us to the Site of Audiencing. In definitions of the medium, above all
those which try to emphasize its inherent uniqueness, interactivity recurs noticeably. The player is
seen as fundamentally different to the viewer, listener or reader, as they need to exert non-trivial
51 Salen, K. & Zimmerman, E. provide deep discussion of game design, and how this process is played out through production (Rule of play: game design fundamentals, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 2004). 52 The intrinsic relation to capitalism and commercial interests is interestingly explored in Dyer-Witheford, N. & de Peuter, G., Games of empire: global capitalism and video games, Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, 2009.
16
effort to be able to traverse the experience.53 Any review of the audiencing of video games needs
to take into account the often parallel activities of learning, applying and mastering of rules that
take place, in addition to the interpretative and affective exchange present in books and other
audio-visual media. Further understanding of a game through its audiencing includes studies of
the technological limitations for any given user, the composition of different ways a player may
engage with the game (including as ‘merely’ a spectator), and the wider social discussion and
reception of the game. The latter, social, modality is increasingly intertwined with the experience
of playing the game itself, with both external and internal communication channels being
available in many games to rate, discuss and share game experiences. The compositional modality
of audiencing is the only one that will be discussed in the case studies, with a focus on the
different game modes and associated (presumed) audience positions, as well as the intertextual
properties of each game, the latter also being noted in the comparative analysis.
While the analyses will touch upon several of Rose’s sites and modalities, the
central focus will rest on the image (or game) itself, with contextual references to the site of
production, and considerable reflections on audiencing as a player, especially in the second and
third chapters. There is unfortunately not enough time to thoroughly explore the site of
distribution; although its impact on the other three sites is significant, especially as the
technologies and customs of distribution have evolved over the time period; it will have to be
covered in some future research project.
Quantitative Analysis
The survey of games released between 2005 and 2014 has been undertaken using content
analysis, following media and communications scholar Philip Bell’s model of visual content
analysis through categorising and coding examples. This entails clearly defining the material that
will form part of the study, as well as declaring the motivation behind the selection. Furthermore,
it includes clearly defining categories (‘variables’) to be used when categorising (or coding) the
material, as well as the specific subcategories (‘values) identified, as well as precise criteria and
distinctions. Finally, it entails carefully discussing the statistical methods used to collate the data,
and discussing the possible bias, corruption and obstruction achieved thereby, all of which will be
done in detail in the chapter on the quantitative analysis.54
53 Aarseth, E. J., Cybertext: perspectives on ergodic literature, Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997, p. 1. 54 Bell, P., ‘Content analysis of visual images’, in T. van Leeuwen, & C. Jewitt (eds.), Handbook of visual analysis, London, SAGE, 2001, pp. 92-118.
17
The aim is to get an overview of the large sample of games, 165 in total, and to as part of the
exercise, help define, refine and redefine the ideas behind the original categories, such as types of
intervention, game genres and the prevalence of certain geopolitical regions. The process of
gathering the material, defining the variables and coding the values has been repeated three times,
each time refining the definitions of the categories, in order to get as precise and dependable
values as possible.
That said, the statistical material that results from this content analysis is still prone
to significant margins of error, primarily since the main method of identifying a game’s values has
been through watching video footage and reading professional, enthusiast and commercial
descriptions of the games, rather than playing the games themselves. All in all, the material was
coded according to ten variables, with most including four to seven discreet values, with
additional publication information (year of release, developer company) added for context.
Qualitative analysis
‘Video games that render land make claims about space, place and landscape. As the many forms of landscape that came before them, games are tools of power, and particularly
in relation to lived spaces, may be thought of as connected to imperialist expansion.’ 55
The qualitative aspect of this research will consist of close readings of two games with a focus on
game spaces and landscape. It will examine the central claim of the above quote from Murray, i.e.
the relation of power and imperialism to the rendering of place, space and landscape within the
games.
Place is the experience of everything that connotes and denotes a certain ideological
cluster, or myth. It includes everything that symbolizes specific locations, or explicit cultural or
geographic experiences or situations, but also common everyday details, such as bushes, trees,
rocks and off-road space buggies.56 Space, in turn, posits the position of the player and player
character within the terrain, and interrogates the experience of spatiality itself, as well as how the
player can act and interact within the space. Murray’s ‘predatory vision,’ surveying the landscape,
is here potentially put into practice, as the ‘activated’ seeing of the player guides them as to what
55 Murray, 2018, p. 180. 56 Place includes both connotation, as cultural associations, and denotation, as the first layer of ‘obvious’ signification of the image (as explained in Barthes, R., Image Music Text, trans. S. Heath, London, Fontana Press, 1977, pp. 33-46). It thus summarises most of that which contributes to the sense of the ‘real,’ but by including denotation and connotation as equal levels of signification, I also question Erwin Panofsky’s separation of the two, and the concept of universal signs contained therein (Meaning in the Visual Arts, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1982).
18
they can actually ‘do’ in this place.57 Finally, landscape forms the frame, the dominant visual
perspective that harks back to earlier forms of representation. Central questions to be answered
here of the visual perspective of the player, as well as the compositional connotations of mise en
scene, line of sight and aesthetic presentation.58
Close readings, as the considered study, description and analysis of visual
phenomena, are premiered within visual culture studies due to the high level of interpretation and
deeper understanding of the object that it entails.59 This departs from an understanding that the
individual experience of visual phenomena subjectively affects the understanding and meaning
creation taking place through audiencing. It is therefore important to be open about how the
phenomena was experienced, and to describe both the visual details perceived, as well as the
subjective experience itself. Within game studies however, there are some very real structural
differences to how you choose to go about a close reading, or playing, of a game, and following
the example of Fernández-Vara, this approach should be clearly outlined.60 So, Arma 3 and
Battlefield: Bad Company 2 have been played approximately 20 hours each by me, the researcher,
playing through the respective single-player campaigns at regular difficulty, with the last act, Win,
of Arma 3 played on ‘Recruit’ difficulty. In both games, I have tested most multiplayer modes
included in the base game, but have not played them more than three hours in total. Lastly, when
confirming details of the description and dialogue I have made liberal use of video footage
available online, as well as walkthroughs and fan-maintained wiki-pages, of which the main ones
are summarised in the references as part of the internetography.
Comparative Analysis
To really bring out the potential underlying themes and contrasts found in the preceding
chapters, the results will be cross-compared through discourse analysis. Beginning with
Foucault’s observations regarding the relationship between Knowledge and Power, and how
these result in structures and institutions of both, I will focus on identifying patterns in the
material, discussing exceptions, and finally exploring some of the context regarding these
examples. This approach follows that outlined by psychology professors Linda A. Wood and Rolf
57 Murray, 2018, pp. 169-172, like Mitchell, referring to Appleton’s eye of the predator. 58 According to Nitsche, the experience of space in video games can be seen to work in five analytical planes: rule-based, mediated, fictional, play and social (2008, pp. 15-17). 59 As presented, discussed and critiqued in Elkins, J., Visual studies: a sceptical introduction, New York, Routledge, 2003, pp. 37-42. 60 Fernández-Vara, 2015, pp. 27-40.
19
O. Kroger, but necessarily adapted to primarily visual material.61 As such, the patterns discussed
will be both of visual perceptions, narrative themes and rules structures in the games themselves.
The visual elements will be interrogated through compositional analysis, borrowing
terms from both film scholar James Monaco regarding framing, editing and mise-en-scène, and
Nitsche when it comes to the specifics of video game spaces and visual structures.62 Meanwhile,
the narrative themes will mostly be using straightforward discourse analysis, focusing on what
concepts are employed to strengthen or undermine ideas of Power in the narrative. Lastly,
reflections on the rule structures primarily depart from the understanding of games as moral
objects, imbued with implicit ethical stances offered to players, both through strict rules and
through the presentation itself, as posited by Sicart.63 Through these multiple perspectives, we can
hopefully see the interconnectedness of the different elements of play experience, and how they
combine with external context to engage in more or less explicit discourses through word, action
and image.
Previous Research
Video game scholarship has been concerned with its nature as an interdisciplinary field of study
since its inception, from the definition of ‘ludology’ and its constituting opposition to
‘narratology,’ perceived as an appropriation of an independent medium by more established
cultural sciences.64 However, since its fractious first years, the field has diversified and grown in
depth, both from within and from ‘without,’ albeit with limited input from a visual culture studies
perspective. Most recently, Murray has argued for video games as a complex form of visual
culture, and consequently for the need for interdisciplinary expertise in untangling the meanings
and power dynamics contained therein, which is what this thesis is aiming to do.65
The ongoing debate on defining the distinguishing features of games, and the
meaning and impact of them, has been conducted simultaneously from an academic, design and
61 Wood, L. A., Kroger, R. O., Doing discourse analysis: methods for studying action in talk and text, London, SAGE, 2000, pp. 117-142. 62 Monaco, J., (How to read a film: movies, media, multimedia, 3rd ed., Oxford, Oxford university press, 2000) and Nitsche (2008) respectively. 63 Sicart, 2009. 64 Some key perceived fractures laid out in Frasca, G., ‘Lugology meets narratology: similitudes and differences between (video)games and narrative’, originally published in Finnish in Parnasso, vol. 3, 1999, pp. 365-371, http://www.ludology.org/articles/ludology.htm, (accessed 6 September 2018), and somewhat debunked in Egenfeldt-Nielsen et al., 2013, pp. 214-216. 65 Murray, 2018, pp. 42-46.
20
journalistic point of view, providing many contradictory models.66 One succinct model was put
forward by Robin Hunicke, Marc LeBlanc and Robert Zubek when they proposed their MDA
(Mechanics-Dynamic-Aesthetics) model for formal game design. It primarily separates games’
formal elements between mechanics (hard-wired rules), dynamics (the resulting interaction
between players and the rules system) and aesthetics (emotional and synesthetic experience and
response of players). Media scholar Henry Jenkins further discusses narrative typologies as
presented in video games, summarising them as either evoked, enacted, embedded or emergent.
He focuses primarily on the player relation to the narrative, i.e. whether it relies on external
references, the player participating in acting it out, through exploration of the simulation or as an
unscripted interaction between the rules of the game itself.67 Whilst this is a useful distinction, it
doesn’t delve deeper into the affective interaction possible between player and game, as well as
the game and its wider cultural context.
The aesthetics and the visual design of video games may be different to other
media, but they still borrow heavily from established conventions, especially visual ones. Study
into the ideological dimensions of (primarily) conflict-based video games has gone in several
directions, concerning itself with many facets of both the experiential and theoretical. Research
has ranged from the politicized debate on the effects of viscerally violent games, through
investigations into ties between propagandistic narratives and economic, political and military
interests, and more recently an increased focus on postcolonial readings of a hitherto ‘West’-
centric discourse. As pertains to this thesis, the following concepts have been broached in
previous research.
The recurring debate in mass media coverage regards violence; with much discussion
focusing on measurable increases in aggression, while ignoring the larger ideological and affective
consequences. Media and communication scholars Ruth Festl, Michael Scharkow and Thorsten
Quandt conducted a study in Germany, suggesting a lack of correlation between gaming (or even
war gaming) and militaristic attitudes.68 Meanwhile, political scientist Marcus Schulzke questions
the empirical foundation for criticizing military games, meaning that simple statements regarding
structural and institutional links between video games and military are not enough, but that the
66 These models depend a lot on what is considered part of the games studies, from board-game centric cultural historical summaries (Parlett, D., The oxford history of board games, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1999 and Woods, S., Eurogames: the design, culture and play of modern European board games, Jefferson, McFarland & Company, 2012), to technologically minded histories of video game development, to theoretical frameworks for designing games (Salen & Zimmerman, 2004) or understanding the cultural and social stances and processes taking place within. 67 Jenkins uses the improvised repetition of known archetypes and narratives seen in commedia dell’arte as an external example of the structured playfulness of enacted narratives. (Jenkins, H., ‘Game design as narrative architecture’, in N. Wardrip-Fruin & P. Harrigan (eds.), First person: new media as story, performance and game, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 2004, pp. 123-129). 68 Festl, R., Scharkow, M. & Quandt, T., ‘Militaristic attitudes and the use of digital games’, Games and culture, vol. 8, no. 6, 2013, pp. 392-407.
21
ideological content should be examined.69 While I disagree with the perceived limitations with
stating biases, both ideological and economical, the ideological content, or perhaps more fittingly,
the discourse (visual or otherwise) of video games merits great attention. In studying representations
of Arabs in video games before 2005, media scholar Vít Šisler emphasises the three facets that
contribute to a flattening of people into stereotypes: game mechanics, narrative and visual
signifiers.70 Furthermore, it has been shown that stereotypical depictions, in admittedly simplistic
tests, can prime negative attitudes, and that there’s a link between terrorists and Arabs, even
though Arabs need not necessarily be depicted in the actual game.71 While these kind of
immediate impact studies have their limits in terms of measuring long term effects, not to
mention levels of exposure on a daily basis,72 it illustrates some of the inherent complexities of
charting causes and effects.
Film scholar Matthew Thomas Payne points to the multifaceted rhetoric employed
in video game marketing, having to take on the problems of selling a war game based on its
‘realism,’ yet simultaneously safeguarding its non-political status. These games try to be
considered innocent, time-wasting, ultimately meaningless forms of fun, in order to repel serious
questions about their ideological content. At the same time much of their jockeying for attention
in an oversaturated, competitive market often centres on the visceral nature of its experiences,
and their realistic renditions of both their settings and these acts of violence (this primarily
applies to the ‘AAA’ FPS-market). This is done partially by some levels of anonymity, and cries
of ‘it’s just a game,’ but also through tongue-in-cheek pre-emptive mocking of moralising
standpoints.73 This inherent contradiction is touched upon by an Australian study, asking how
simultaneous claims of ‘innocence’ or harmlessness of games rhyme with ideologies of
gamification and training (including military).74
Communication scholars David Machin and Theo van Leeuwen’s description of
the predominance of a special forces discourse, shared between military movies and games, highlights
how conventions of genre can have a defining effect. Focusing on a small unit of highly 69 Schulzke, M., ‘Rethinking military gaming: America’s Army and its critics’, Games and culture, vol. 8, no. 2, 2013, p. 72. 70 Šisler, V., ‘Digital Arabs: representation in video games’, European journal of cultural studies, vol. 11, no. 2, 2008, pp. 215-216. 71More specifically, a study has traced an increase in hostility towards Arabs when playing games with ‘terrorist’ characters, regardless if the representation itself uses signifiers for Arabic or other cultural heritages (Saleem, M. & Anderson, C. A., ‘Arabs as terrorists: effects of stereotypes within vioent contexts on attitudes, perceptions, and affect’, Psychology of violence, vol. 13, no. 1, 2013, pp. 84-99). 72 Festl et al. (2013) tried to take both of these into account, but the self-selectiveness of their test group, as well as the fairly straightforward nature of the questionnaire used introduces high levels of conscious subjective variability on the parts of the test subjects. 73 Payne, M. T., ‘Marketing military realism in Call of Duty 4: modern warfare’, Games and culture, vol. 7, no. 4, 2012, pp. 305-327. 74 Sparrow, R., Harrison, R., Oakley, J. & Keogh, B., ‘Playing for fun, training for war: can popular claims about recreational video gaming and military simulations be reconciled?’, Games and culture, vol. 13, no. 2, 2018, pp. 174-192.
22
specialised operatives ‘doing what is necessary’ to protect an innocent civilian population,75 this
discourse forms part of military-themed and -sponsored uses of media, such as America’s Army,
which expresses and perpetuates a pervasive militarization of popular culture in the US cultural
sphere. Anthropologist Robertson Allen notes the way that the multimedial nature of modern
video games blur the lines between war’s fighting, war’s imagining, and war’s mobilization.76
In this anxious discursive dreamwork, the perceived adversary often takes centre
stage. According to a study conducted by Australian games and media scholars Michael Hitchens,
Bronwin Patrickson and Sherman Young, the favoured opponent of first-person shooters shifts
from supernatural, alien or criminal organisations towards political and terrorist enemies between
1992 and 2009. They also note that less than a week after the assassination of Osama bin Laden
in 2011, a mission recreating the mission was released for the first-person shooter game
Kuma/War, illustrating the interests from (some) players to engage with the enemy du jour
through their favoured ‘escapist’ medium.77 This engagement can be seen as a new militarising
form of postcolonial scholar Edward Said’s orientalism, and it is rife in these depictions.78
However, not all games have a culturally specific antagonist; perhaps most notably
the US Armed Forces’ own recruitment tool, the aforementioned America’s Army, has traditionally
employed indistinct or generic enemies in their simulations. Allen notes how the ‘unreal’ enemy
used is an enemy with minimal cultural, linguistic, or ethnic indicators and therefore one which is
simultaneously anonymous yet potentially anyone. Engagement, empathy and ultimately
enrolment with the US Armed Forces is encouraged by anecdotes where the virtual training (such
as basic medical training) provided by the game helped players enact life-saving assistance in the
real world.79 The arsenal of this neo-colonial imaginary is seemingly two-pronged, it engages both
culturally and geographically situated situations, playing out specific fears in the public arena,
while also stereotyping and universalising the enemy, strengthening the idea that the enemy might
come from anywhere, and hence anywhere and everywhere is precisely where the US Armed
Forces are allowed to penetrate.
Discussion and research on intervention has thus mainly been focused either on the violence
itself, evaluations of direct ties to industrial-military complexes, and the conception of the
75 Machin, D. & van Leeuwen, T., ‘Computer games as political discourse: the case of Black hawk down’, Journal of language and politics, vol. 4, no. 1, 2005, pp. 119-141, pp. 123-125. 76 Allen, R., 2011. 77 Hitchens et al., 2014, p. 13 and p. 4, respectively. Their analysis turns surprisingly toothless when referencing the military connections; they posit (in comparison with sports games), that in comparison to ideas of conspiracy, it seems more likely to be ‘an effective commercial arrangement between the parties involved,’ as if this would somehow make it harmless (p.7). 78 From Höglund, J., ‘Electronic empire: orientalism revisited in the military shooter’, Game studies, vol. 8, no. 1, 2008, http://gamestudies.org/0801/articles/hoeglund, (accessed 6 September 2018), and Said, E. W., Culture and imperialism, London, Chatto & Windus, 1993, respectively. 79 Allen, 2011, pp. 53-56.
23
adversaries presented. This has been supplemented by new postcolonial readings of both the
overtly colonial aspects of many games set previous to the world wars, but also the hegemonic
discourses of the West, whiteness and masculinity that pervades the medium emphasized by
Murray.80 My aim is to add to these perspectives, following Murray’s example, especially her
chapter on the depiction of Afghanistan in Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain, while hopefully
adding some new readings of landscape that can also assist in the postcolonial reading of video
games conducted by literature scholar Souvik Mukherjee.81 Recent years has seen an expansion of
perspectives, from both academics, creators, writers, and any kind of game player, immensely
enriching the discussion,82 and my aim is to contribute a Foucaultian visual analysis of the role of
US power and authority abroad.
Definitions
The terms below have mostly been further elaborated on throughout this introduction, but I
present here the definitions that will be used of the most central terms in this thesis. They are
presented here in alphabetical order, for easier perusal.
Diegetic is a term borrowed from film and game music studies to designate those
parts of an aesthetic experience that are meant to be experienced as taking place within the
(diegesis) of the story being told (i.e. music being played on a saxophone by a character within a
film, vis-à-vis a soundtrack apparently emanating from a disembodied orchestra). Used in
conjunction with its counterpart, non-diegetic, i.e. outside of the fiction.
Discourse is employed here to encompass any form of communication in text or
through signs imbued with meaning, and is primarily used to define larger ideological power as
expressed and seen at play in utterings, works, genres and media.
Landscape encompasses both the wider impression of represented terrain as
experienced by a more detached spectator, and the symbolism implied therein, as well as the
translation of that experience to the traversal through that same representation.
Narrative is used in a very wide sense to include any series of events, presented
visually, aurally or haptically, that are, or can be, imbued with meaning by the game or the player.
Any collection of such events, be they sequential or not, that are experienced to have some level
of connection may be described as a narrative. Further, a meta-narrative is used to refer to
80 Murray (2018, pp. 96-109). 81 Mukherjee, S., Videogames and postcolonialism: empire plays back, London, Palgrave Macmillan, 2017. 82 Anthropy, 2012, being a diverse and engaging example publication.
24
recurring themes and causal logics that can be observed throughout an entire work, including
parts of the experience that are not strictly part of the diegesis.
Place, when used outside occasional colloquial phrasing, is deployed as the cultural
or geographic denotation of a represented location or region, i.e., how a representation creates a
sense of a specific place through associated visual symbols and myths.
Space is used, in the analysis, to designate a visual configuration which implies or
dictates the boundaries (or lack thereof) to movement, action and sight within the representation.
Space is taken to mean both the delimitation itself, as well as the embodied experience of the
inside as well as the outside of that delimitation.
Disposition
Following this introduction, the research will be presented in four chapters. The first will go into
greater detail about the delimitation, categorisation and results of the quantitative study. It will
begin with a run-through of the different coding categories, followed by a presentation of the
results according to the main groupings; interventions, places and spaces. Its final segment will
focus on synthesizing the results of the different groups, and analysing some of the trends and
themes thus uncovered.
The second and third chapters look into the qualitative case studies of Battlefield:
Bad Company 2 and Arma 3 respectively. They follow a parallel pattern, where the games are first
introduced within their general context, including their genres and type of intervention displayed.
The next section focuses on the sense of place given by (primarily) the games’ main story and
single-player campaign, followed by a summary of the different spaces envisioned by both terrain
depictions and game modes. Lastly, a detailed look at one mission from Arma 3, and the variety
of the maps in Battlefield: Bad Company 2 will highlight both sense of place and space, and how
these interact with the experience of the visual landscape. Both chapters conclude, much as the
first one, with a summarising discussion of how the concepts of place, space and landscape are
mobilised and experienced through the different elements of the game.
The fourth and concluding chapter consists of a comparative analysis of the uses of
place, space and landscape respectively within the three different studies, before a broader
discussion closes things off with an analysis of the visual discourses and patterns discerned
through looking at intervention representations from both a contextual and a compositional
perspective.
25
CHAPTER 1: QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS
Introduction
To begin discussion of how US interventions have been depicted and played through in video
games, it is useful to have a basic overview to give context and grounding. Hence the choice to
conduct this content analysis, trying to capture a few of the salient features of US intervention
representations from 2005 to 2014. There have been many questions to answer to make the
analysis feasible, yet useful or enlightening, and these will be reviewed here.
Delimitation Revisited
The first question regards the delimitation of empirical material, which has been done through
three criteria, encompassing release date, technological modus and explicit representation. This
has been defined as follows:
The game must have had its first major release in North American or European
markets between 1st January 2005 and 31st December 2014. A game released earlier in, e.g., Japan
would still be included if its original release date in North European or European markets falls
within the specified time period. Similarly, a game released in, e.g., 2015 in North America, but
which had been released in 2014 in Europe, is also included. These release dates have been
compiled from publisher websites, review and review aggregate websites, as well as specialist
official console magazines (e.g. the Official Playstation Magazine).
The game must have been released for a non-mobile video game console, including
computer games, but not browser-based games. ‘Mobile consoles’ here refers to handheld gaming
platforms, such as the Playstation Portable, Nintendo DS, or Nokia NGage, as well as games for
mobile phones (smart or otherwise). The technological limitation of browser-based games
includes flash-games, as well as games hosted on social media sites; the game must require an
installation and/or download to qualify (this to further limit the sample size).
The game must contain an unequivocal representation of US military, diplomatic or
intelligence personnel engaged in a foreign country, after the conclusion of WWII. There are a
few grey areas to this approach, as many, many games contain metaphorical or proxy
representations of US agencies, agents and interests. Within the visual representation, as well as
through voicing of characters and rhetoric presentation, most fictional or vaguely defined
26
modern characters (be they military or civilian) can be assumed to be of US origin, if not
expressly defined otherwise, but unless they have been explicitly identified as of the US
government, any games containing these types of representations are not included in the study.
Following these limitations, the material was gathered, indexed and then
categorised through coding using content analysis; a process that was repeated three times.
Categorisation
Adapting Philip Bell’s model for visual content analysis, the next step is to define the categories
and variables used to interrogate the material (i.e. the 165 games studied).83 The variables were
continually updated during the collection of the material, as the scope and nature of it was
gradually revealed. Whilst many aspects, both contextual, technical and peripheral, were collected,
for coding this study limits itself to three main categories: types of intervention, the use of place,
and the visual representation of space. These in turn include a number of variables, summarised
as follows:
Interventions are coded following three variables: type of US intervention, US role
within the game, and the perceived type of adversary opposing the US. Intervention types are
divided into six values, mostly based on the perceived motivation or desired outcome for the US
in any given intervention: Counterterrorism, Covert Ops, Stabilization, Regime Change, and
outright state-on-state Warfare. The US roles vary between Protagonist, Ally, Optional Side,
Employer, Superpower and Antagonist,84 while the types of adversary follow those used by
Hitchens et al.: Terrorist, Supernatural, Extra-terrestrial, Political Enemy, Criminal group,
Scientific Abomination and Rogue Government Activity. Intervention types remain the variable
that has necessitated the most revision throughout the coding of the material, with the ‘Covert
Ops’-value a symptom of the overlap between motivation and operation. In some ways, the very
definition of these ‘types’ of intervention discourse is the heart of the study, and this process will
be revisited in more detail in the comparative analysis.
Places are primarily explored as specified locations in time and geographical space.
Hence, two clear variables were chosen; time period and geographical location represented. The
first follows conventionalised (though not unchallenged) divisions into the post-WWII periods of
the Cold War (1945-1991), Modern post-Cold War Era (1991-2020), the Near Future (2020-) and
83 Bell, 2001, p. 17. 84 ‘Antagonist’ was only found in three examples, but was more prevalent in adjacent material (e.g. games published outside Europe or North America, or games featuring the US in other time periods, or within its own borders).
27
a supplementary ‘Multiple’ value, for those games taking place across several periods.85
Geographical location is the only variable that allows for multiple values per game, as many
games represent multiple real world countries and regions. The main value coded is the country
where an intervention is set; countries are then grouped according to the United Nations
Statistics Division’s M49-standard for geographical regions to give an idea of the representation
of different parts of the world.86 Fictional locations are included within their imagined region,
although clearly marked as not actually based on an existing country.
Spaces are divided into five variables; perspective, dimension, stylisation, genre and
subgenre. Perspective includes first-person, third-person, and overhead (isometric or top-down)
views as values, while dimension notes whether the visual presentation uses two- or three-
dimensional graphical models. Stylisation is a three-step scale of the level of photorealism the
game is (aiming at) presenting, from filmic photorealism, through deliberate stylisation into
conscious abstraction or symbolism. These aspects are primarily defined by the games’ respective
genres; a difficult typology to use and define. I have chosen to employ broad motivational genres
(henceforth ‘meta-genre’) suggested by Egenfeldt-Nielsen et al. (i.e. Action, Adventure, Process,
and Strategy) as a framework. These have been supplemented by two levels of subdivision, the
first trying to sum up the primary interaction (e.g. Action-Fighting, Action-Racing, Action-
Competing), still following Egenfeldt-Nielsen et al., the second applying conventionalised genre
typologies to further specify the type of game (e.g. FPS, TPS, Vehicle Simulator).87
This is the basic setup of variables and values used for coding, with the full
definitions of all variables, and where necessary their respective values, available in Appendix 1.
Coding
The coding was carried out by me alone over the period of several months, and included making
use of several sources, both for defining and gathering the material, and analysing it. This
immediately raises concerns of subjective valorisation, and heightens the risks for mistakes or
misinterpretation. Unfortunately, due to time constraints, it was not feasible to conduct a more
controlled, devolved study, although this would be an excellent avenue for further research. In
order to ensure reliability, once the categories (values and variables) were clearly and finally 85 The idea of a continuous US policy, from before WWI into modern times, is further elaborated in the first chapters of Chomsky, 1991. 86 UNSD, ‘Methodology: standard country or area codes for statistical use (M49)’, United Nations Statistics Division, 2018, https://unstats.un.org/unsd/methodology/m49/, (accessed 6 September 2018). These categorisations follow primarily geological and large-scale political guidelines, and are familiar to a Western worldview, with few exceptions. 87 Egenfeldt-Nielsen et al., 2013, pp. 45-50.
28
defined, a reclassification of 50 examples was made after a one month hiatus, and the results were
compared with a >98% correlation.88
Primarily, where possible, first-hand experience of play or directly captured imagery
from the games were used (including YouTube-playthroughs and in the worst case promotional
material). Furthermore reviews, previews and summaries, as well as guides and walkthroughs
were consulted to assess primarily the third category (intervention), i.e. if and how US actors were
depicted. The mass of the material meant that this was the only viable way to collect all the
necessary data, but it does rely on third party descriptions, and as such introduces an unwanted
element of unreliability. For every game, at least two corroborating descriptions have been found,
and walkthroughs and detailed guides have been given preference, as their objective is generally
to give as detailed and correct information as possible. For the visual categories, every game has
been inspected through video footage, with the exception of two titles, where descriptions and at
least two separate still images of the game have been used.89 With only ≈10% of the games (18
out of 165, full list in the ludography) having been played to any significant extent by myself,
coding remains superficial, primarily noting the genre and general perspectives used.
This methodology shares similarities with the study conducted by Hitchens et al.,
focusing on the signifiers of FPS adversaries. They similarly used supplementary material to
account for games they were unable to personally play, with a comparable rate of approximately
10% of games played. I took the same steps as they did in comparing the secondary sources’
descriptions of games I had played with my own first-hand experience, and contented myself
with using only sources where no significant discrepancies or errors were found, to establish a
dependable level of accuracy in their content.90
Furthermore, the supplementary coding of adversaries has borrowed its
terminology from their study, to enable possible cross-referencing, especially since the time
periods overlap (as noted, their study covered the period from 1992 to 2009). Their definitions of
enemies are somewhat intersecting, which also highlights the difficulties inherent in creating these
kinds of categories, some problems with which will be gone over in the analysis.
In conclusion, the directed nature of the delimitation, coupled with the simplistic,
surface level method of coding, means that the results of this quantitative study can only strive
for broad indications of trends and practices. It is not possible to draw deep conclusions about 88 It is hardly stunning that I, as a researcher, agree with myself, but it is important to thus qualify the values and variables as clearly enough defined to be able to be repeated after some potential forgetfulness. However, for a continuation of this kind of study, I would strongly suggest something along Bell’s suggested line of three independent, trained coders, evaluated through test trial and subsequent observed agreement percentages tested against expected percentages (Bell, 2001, pp. 23-24.) 89 These titles are Air Assault Task Force (2006) and Special Operations Forces: Operation Eagle’s Talon (2006); having niche audience appeal and low budget respectively, both games have seen fairly low circulation. 90 Hitchens et al., 2014, p. 12.
29
what type of meaningful play is taking place within individual games or genres, nor to make
generalisations about genres or the medium as a whole, but it is possible to identify common
tropes and techniques employed when US agents are portrayed as acting abroad. The patterns
and usages of these symbolic markers, as well as the context and landscape where these are
portrayed as taking place, can give a useful outline of the major thrusts of discourse visible in the
material, as well as the associations and implications most often encountered when playing with,
against or as the fictional representations of US international power.
Coding Results
To get an overview of the results of the content analysis, the results have been condensed to a
handful of tables and charts, presented on the following pages. Tables exhibiting development
over time have been calculated with averages across two years at a time (i.e. 2004-2005, 2006-
2007, and so on), to concisely present data, and reduce large swings from year to year. The full
table of results is supplied in Appendix 1, but for now, let’s go through a few first impressions.
Interventions
One of the striking features when reviewing the result of the types of
intervention (see table 1.1) is the aggressive nature of the motivations
depicted. The explicit, sometimes implicit, goal ranges from
elimination of a designated enemy (Counterterrorism), the toppling
of a certain government (Regime Change) to outright total war
between nations (the key distinction of a full-scale war being
sovereign military forces clashing with large-scale deployments). The so-called Covert
Op(eration)s are also mostly offensive in nature, where the US frequently violently interferes in
other governments sovereignty, although its specifics and inclusion warrant further examination.
Following Machin and van Leeuwen’s special forces discourse present within certain
video game genres, I deemed it necessary to create the category of ‘Covert Ops’ as a complement
to the more clearly defined motivational types of intervention. This is because of the
overwhelming number of games that portray a small squad of elite soldiers performing a variety
of missions (mostly involving assassination or spying) behind sovereign borders. While some are
clearly tied to existing motivations (such as counterterrorism, stabilization and regime change),
Intervention % Counterterrorism 21% Covert Ops 16% Regime Change 13% Stabilization 9% Warfare 39% Other 2%
Table 1.1. Relative frequency of types of intervention
30
some are less clearly defined, aligned to less clearly defined goals, or simply combine some or all
of the above. Thus, the covert nature of these interventions has been judged to take precedence
over the others, and this is how the
category has been employed.
As seen in diagram 1.2,
the major change has been a steady
decline of all types of overt
depictions of US interventions. The
small changes that can be seen is an
early decline of Counterterrorism
examples, separate peaks for
Stabilization (2007-08) and Regime
changes (2010-2012), and a late surge
of less specific Covert Operations.
Out of these, only ‘Stabilization’ can be construed as somewhat ‘less aggressive,’ although it is
important to stress once again that these categories of intervention are primarily based on the
stated motivation from the US side, and their ultimate goal in the events depicted. Stabilization
thus implies a US aim of maintaining a current status quo, of entering into a region in order to
primarily defend an existing institution or government.
The few examples of intervention types that are not overtly aggressive in nature
include either intelligence personnel or peace-keeping forces. The latter, despite their name, are
not as passive as they may seem, as will be further explored in Chapter 3’s examination of one
such example, Arma 3.
Lastly, the perceived adversaries of the US presented are significantly skewed
towards two types; political enemies and terrorists (see table 1.3). These are clearly tied to the
‘warfare’ and ‘counterterrorism’ intervention types, but the major
difference as regards Hitchens et al’s results is probably due to the
focus on overt representations of the US abroad, which may have
skewed the results towards more ‘realistic’ conflicts, such as those
against the most often recurring identifiable adversary in the
material: Russia. These political conflicts thus seem to follow certain
Cold War logics, quite often repeated in a more modern context.
0
10
20
30
40
50
2005-06 2007-08 2009-2010 2011-2012 2013-2014
Intervention types over time(number of depictions)
Counterterrorism Covert Ops Other
Regime Change Stabilization Warfare
Diagram 1.2. Examples of different types of intervention from 2005 to 2014.
Adversaries % Aliens 1% Criminals 4% Political Enemies 64% Rogue Govt. Activity 2% Science 1% Supernatural 1% Terrorists 26%
Table 1.3. Relative frequency of adversary depictions
31
Places
The significance of representations of specific places becomes interesting in illuminating what
conflicts and what regions are considered interesting or commercially viable to depict. The places
chosen for the different interventions are potentially telling, especially when cross-referenced
with the different types of intervention.
Time periods are easy enough to categorise, but the locations depicted can vary
immensely between games, with some taking place entirely within one town, while others zip
between continents, visiting dozens of countries on the way. No weighting has been applied to
the results, but rather each instance of a depiction is counted, regardless of the time or space it
occupies within the actual game. This results in some games getting multiple data points, while
others barely gain one. The statistics for most charts are based on how many individual games a
specific region is represented in, e.g. if a game has parts set in both Bolivia and Argentina, it still
only gets counted as one representation of the South American (AM[S]) region.
Diagram 1.4 summarises all representations, including the complementary
categories of ‘worldwide’ (more than 15 regions represented) and ‘undefined’ (usually action
games set in exotic locations without clear cultural or geographical markers). We can immediately
notice the prevalence of Asia and Europe, with honourable mentions to North Africa (AF[N])
and South America. However, these different high scorers are part of very different discourse.
West Asia (AS[W], Eurocentrically known as the Middle East), North Africa, South America and
‘undefined’ regions are rife with counterterrorism, while Europe, Russia (AS[N]) and East Asia
(AS[E]) are most often locked in open warfare, when not being the target for a myriad of covert
operations, which in turn is the most usual intervention in the Carribbean (AM[E]).
177 2 4 4 4 11
2115 2
3224
1624
40
17 16 16 1317
819
10
AF[
N]
AF[
E]
AF[
S]
AF[
C]
AF[
W]
AM
[N]
AM
[E]
AM
[S]
AM
[C]
AN
T
AS[
N]
AS[
E]
AS[
S]
AS[
SE]
AS[
W]
AS[
C]
EU
[N]
EU
[E]
EU
[S]
EU
[W]
OCE
WO
RLD
UN
DE
F.
AFRICA AMERICA ANT ASIA EUROPE OCE OTHER
Representations per region
Diagram 1.4. Number of depictions of each geographic region,* including the complementary categories of ‘Worldwide’ and ‘Undefined. *There are a few idiosyncrasies of naming, namely AM[E] as the Carribbean, AS[N] as Asian Russia, AF[C] as Middle Africa.
32
If we cross-reference regional representation with types of intervention, we can get a top-three of
most represented regions for each type of intervention, seen in table 1.5.
Beyond our usual suspects of WANA (Western Asia and Northern Africa) and Russia, we also
see Southeast Asia appearing often in warfare, and this has a very simple contextual explanation;
the Vietnam War. Regarding real world conflicts, the Vietnam War enjoys the lion share of
representations encountered, with the Korean War only getting a few mentions. The Cuban
Missile Crisis is thematically present, but seldom fully played out, while the Gulf War and the
numerous interventions in former Yugoslavian and Latin American territories are not revisited
even once in the material, except in fictionalised form.91
Whether fictional or not, the interventions of the US are
predominantly represented as military in nature, and aggressive at that.
The locations chosen as setting vary between countries to protect,
defeat or coerce, and the most recurring individual countries are
summarised in table 1.6. The spectre of the Cold War, whether
reminisced or re-enacted, is joined with the phantasm of terrorism and
the protection of traditional Western European allies (for only a
fraction of the games imagines any of Germany, France or the UK as
enemies, or even neutral to the US).
The distribution across different
time periods has been heavily favouring modern
era (here meaning post-1990) conflicts, a trend
that just started losing prominence at the end
of the period. If we look at the relative
prevalence of the different time periods as a
percentage of all released titles, as in diagram
1.7, we can see a gradual increase in Cold War
era games, as well as those involving multiple
eras, such as Call of Duty: Black Ops II switching
between a near future conflict and flashbacks
to the Cold War. 91 Arma 2 (2009) takes place in a fictional Caucasus region, while the Tropico-series (Tropico 3, 4, and 5 released 2009, 2011, and 2014, respectively) takes a satirical view of superpower intervention on a fictional Caribbean island.
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2005-06 2007-08 2009-10 2011-12 2013-14
Relative frequency of period depictions over time
Cold War Modern Near future Multiple
Diagram 1.7. Percentage of time periods represented among intervention depictions, between 2005 and 2014.
Counterterr. Covert Ops Reg. Change Stabilization Warfare Other AS[W] 15% AS[N] 13% AS[W] 23% AS[W] 11% AS[SE] 11% WW 67% AF[N] 13% AS[W] 9% AS[N] 12% AS[E] 11% WW 11% AM[E] 33% AM[S] 9% AM[S] 8% AS[C] 12% AM[C] 11% AS[N] 10% AS[SE] 0%
Table 1.5. Three highest percentages of examples of regions per genre.
Country No. Reg. Russia 29 AS[N]
UK 14 EU[N]
Vietnam 14 AS[S]
Afghanistan 12 AS[W]
Mexico 11 AM[C]
France 10 EU[W]
Iraq 10 AS[W]
Germany 8 EU[W]
N. Korea 8 AS[E]
Table 1.6. Nine most recurring individual countries.
33
Spaces
The different types of spaces represented depends a lot on the genre
chosen for the game. With each genre comes a great deal of convention,
and one of the most easily defined and identified one is that of
perspective. As table 1.8 shows, the material consists primarily of games
presented in a first- or close third-person perspective (i.e. presented as though seen through a
camera placed at head height, or slightly behind and above, relative to the protagonist). This
comes down almost entirely to genre, especially as some genres actively allows players to change
between these. Games have been categorised according to the mode
that is preferred by the games default setting, but the issue highlights
some of the interpretative difficulties faced by a visual culture
perspective analysis. There is not always one fixed perspective to take
into account, but often multiple, and the degree to which there is
player agency and power in moving the virtual camera can sometimes
become the very essence of the game itself.92
Due to the comparatively homogenous nature of the material, the types of genres
found in the material include examples from a total of four ‘meta-genres,’ six ‘genres,’ and 13
different conventional ‘sub-genres’ (table 1.10). Table 1.9 shows the domination of fighting
games, taking more than two thirds of the share of
total games, although these fights can offer very
different experiences. Adventure games are very
focused on exploration of the environment, but
the only subgenre encountered is that of the
action-adventure, a hybrid genre shared with
Action games, who in turn are primarily divided
into different types of shooters. The outlier is the
vehicle simulations, which are shared with
simulation games, focused on the detailed
replication of real life processes, or most usually
specific military vehicles, from helicopters to
submarines.
92 Egenfeldt-Nielsen et al., 2013, 124-131.
Perspective % 1st Person 35% 3P-Close 39% Isometric 17% Top-Down 9% Table 1.8. Relative frequency of perspectives.
Genre % Adventure - RPG 1% Action - Fighting 68% Process - Simulation 4% Process - Management 5%
Strategy - RTS 16% Strategy - TBS 7%
Table 1.9. Relative frequency of genres.
Meta-Genre Genre Subgenre %
Adventure Role-playing Action-Adv. 1%
Action Fighting
Action-Adv. 3% Shooter(Arcade) 6% Shooter(FPS) 34% Shooter(TPS) 13% Shooter(Stealth) 4% Vehicle Sim. 8%
Process Management Vehicle Sim. 4% Simulation Gvnmt. Sim. 5%
Strategy Colonisation
4X 3% Classic RTS 1%
Wargame Strategical 4% Tactical 15%
Table 1.10. Relative frequency of subgenres, with their genre and meta-genre categorisation.
34
Management or government simulations are the true
standout, merely because shooting enemies is not the
only or main activity that propels the game, while the
strategy category is almost exclusively about military
conflict and conquest, zoomed in or out to different
levels of detail. I have separated these into ‘pure’
wargames, mostly concerned with the military logistics
and combat itself, and the broader ‘colonisation’ games,
that have an element of occupation and exploitation of resources. Still, the three most common
genres in the material, FPS, TPS and Tactical Wargames, are all basically focused on small groups
of soldiers shooting moving and shooting their way through different terrains. Lastly,
photorealism dominates representations (see table 1.11), with stylization and abstraction mostly
present in zoomed-out strategical ‘god-like’ perspectives.
Summary
The means and perspective of presentation chosen for intervention representations present a
clear, if not surprising, picture. The vast majority are portrayed not only from a US perspective,
but from the viewpoint of the individual soldier or special forces member, heavily emphasising
the heroic, individual and romantic view of warfare and the role of US military in international
politics. Only 18 games restricts the player from playing as the US, and with very few dissenting
or opposing views, the visual presentation conveys the excitement, danger, of boots-on-ground
and behind-the-lines heroics, where the technologically benign US presence views a landscape it
can change while looking at it over the barrel of a gun.
There are a few questions that can be answered once the material is collated and
compared, and the first is very clear; out of the hundreds of US interventions enacted between
1945 and 2014,93 a very limited selection merited inclusion among the themes chosen to be
represented in video games from the last ten years of that period (Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan).
The locations chosen correspond both to real world conflicts, but also propaganda
narratives regarding possible future enemies, with direct conflicts with Russia and China the most
recurring tropes. The spaces reflected mostly follow the conventions of the different genres.
93 According to my (fairly generous) reinterpretation and consolidation of the data points provided by Salazar Torreon (2017), about 200 separate instances (unedited numbers reach >300, but that includes multiple mentions of effectively ongoing operations).
Genre Photor. Styliz. Abstr. Adventure - RPG 1 0 0 Action - Fighting 109 2 0 Process - Management 3 4 1
Process - Simulation 7 0 0 Strategy - RTS 14 11 2 Strategy - TBS 3 7 1
Totals: 137 24 4
Table 1.11. Examples of photorealism, stylization and abstraction per genre.
35
With action-games, and more specifically shooters, an intervention narrative often allows for the
presentation of varied and exotic locales while exploring cultural anxieties about foreign
interventions. The closer to the proverbial action we get, the more ‘photo-realistic’ the aesthetic
style gets. It is only when slightly removed that the presentations switches towards the more
openly stylized, sometimes cartoonish simplifications, and it is also here that we find the lonely
16 games presented in two dimensions. The close perspectives, first- or third-person, go hand-in-
hand with being ‘authentic,’ ‘realistic,’ and ‘visceral.’ This can be linked to a wish to reproduce as
closely as possible the convention of realistic televisual presentation, up to and including
replicating effects and defects.94
Once again, this quantitative study is nothing if not superficial. It has merely been
able to catalogue, imperfectly, certain narrative markers (US intervention, chosen location), game
genres and goals, and rudimentary framings of the visual perspective. It does not tell us much,
but it gives us an indication, a hunch, a sense of the context of different games, narratives and
styles used in portraying US intervention over the period. The changes seen over time are not
conclusive, and the very premise of focusing only on explicit portrayals of US action skews the
results into becoming somewhat predictable.
What we can see however are the broad strokes, the recurring themes and the
dominant forms. Of an issue that is logistically multifaceted, diplomatically complex and often
carried out with great secrecy, neither organisation, politics or espionage has taken the front seat.
Instead interpersonal violence dominates, predictably considering the overall thrust of the
medium over the period, together with its slightly removed ally, military strategy. Be it through
FPS:es, TPS:es, RTS:es or ‘Tactical Shooters,’ the clear majority of the games focus on killing
enemies. Furthermore, in keeping with Hollywood dramaturgy, and the traditions of the arcade,
the enemies are almost always numerically superior and dehumanised, while effort is expended to
make a small group of (often special forces) US military personnel recognisable and heroic. While
many of these things may seem inherent in the medium itself, the medium itself and its genres
and narrative conventions do not come out of nowhere. In terms of subtlety, the propagandist
message is far from unclear; US good – interchangeable ‘othered’ cultures,95 if not bad, then at
least deserving to die.
But in what way do these themes impact the games’ visuality, and how is this
visuality constructed by the games, as well as the culture around them? To look closer into this,
94 Murray (2018, pp. 154-157) discusses, through referencing Nitsche (2008), several different camera techniques emulated in certain genres, including the ‘aesthetics of lens-flare.’ 95 The ‘other,’ that which is dehumanised and placed as opposite to hegemonic discourses is comprehensively discussed, in terms of its importance for representation in Hall, S., ‘The spectacle of the “other”’, in S. Hall (ed.), Representation, 2nd ed., London, SAGE, 2013, pp. 215-287.
36
the examples of Battlefield: Bad Company 2 and Arma 3 have been chosen as they represent the
most prevalent genre, the shooter. But they have also been chosen because they highlight some
of the differences possible within the presentation of what is essentially the same activity;
controlling a digital avatar of a US soldier who kills foreign soldiers. The ironically
straightforward patriotism and jingoism of Battlefield: Bad Company 2 revels in the juvenile joy of
watching things explode, while the po-faced, earnest ‘war is hell’-quotes that frame Arma’s
military simulation sets the player’s mind to something more serious, more ‘real,’ something that
leads to quite distinctive experiences of fundamentally similar activities.
37
CHAPTER 2: CASE STUDY – BATTLEFIELD: BAD COMPANY 2
‘Narration (Marlowe): Wars are fought for any number of reasons. Sometimes, if the ones they give you aren’t good enough, you have to find your own, and, maybe, if you’re lucky, you get out in one piece.
But in the end, I guess it’s really about the guys next to you.’96
Introduction
Developed by Swedish studio Digital Illusions CE (DICE) and released in early 2010 by US
electronics giant Electronic Arts for a worldwide market, Battlefield: Bad Company 2 is the sequel to
the series’ first attempt to emulate the success of Activision’s success with Call of Duty 4: Modern
Warfare. Crucially, the Bad Company-series also introduce an ironic distance and distinct (attempts
at) humour, through the insubordinate, immature and independent actions and motivations of
the members of its titular unit (the above quote is said over a video sequence in the original
game, where the protagonist steal a truck full of gold from their employers, the US Armed
Forces, effectively deserting for the second time).
The appeal of the ‘modern-era’ shooter experience is centred around the idea of
transposing the excitement of the first-person shooter game into contemporary fictional
conflicts, permitting an imaginary play within current catastrophes and fears, as well as playing
around with top of the line military hardware. Marketing material, as well as mission design
emphasize the idea of another kind of warfare than that employed in simulations of WWII, the
most recurring military theme of the period. First-person shooters’ norms and expectations, not
least the concept of near-endless hordes of enemies (in single-player) and large detachments
(multiplayer) facing off in set-piece battles, may appear at first blush to clash with the increasingly
irregular and hybrid nature of modern conflicts. However, if one ignores the vagueness of
politics, and the vagaries of civilians in warzones, the idea of Special Operations’ squads sent into
the middle of enemy territory perfectly fits the above-mentioned genres, and highlights the
outnumbered, heroic US soldiers facing off against the untold, but ultimately undeserving, other.
Battlefield: Bad Company 2 as a game experience is centred around offering an
engaging, arcade-like playground, where it is easy to shoot, easy to change roles, and easy to drive
any vehicle encountered. This is evident in the approach to design, as well as in the mainstream
appeal hoped for in the writing and presentation. The mainstream, AAA, FPS is a genre entirely
of its own, and it is important to note that this game, as with many of its peers, was primarily
designed with online multiplayer in mind, with the goal of providing an engaging, easy to grasp,
exciting action spectacle. 96 Battlefield: Bad Company (2008), final mission.
38
Keep this in mind when we launch into a brief description of the narrative framing of the game,
primarily provided by the single-player campaign. Because, despite the prevalence and importance
of the multiplayer dimension, the single-player, together with the marketing materials (not
examined here), are crucial to understanding the framing of the play experience, and in mentally
preparing the player for the play activity, as well as contextualising the action on screen.
Places ‘Archangel: Bravo Two Actual, hold your fire, hold your fire.
Marlowe: I had him! We let that piece of shit go? Redford: You ain’t got shit on no one unless I say you do! Simmer the fuck down,
your time will come. Archangel, subject is gone, vehicle is still present. Archangel: Bravo Two Actual, the town has been declared hostile, secure the vehicle.’97
The game takes place during a fictional ‘Second Russo-American War,’ and the geographical
location for each individual mission of the game is indicated through a succession of zoom-ins
on a depiction of the globe, very
reminiscent of satellite imagery. It
serves both to give a geographical
context (although without borders
or infrastructure clearly indicated, it
mostly indicates an approximate
area in South America) but also to
ground the subsequent action in a
world surrounded by technological
surveillance and tracking
techniques, a world where military
uses of technology define how we
see the world. Once the missions
begin the player is often treated to a
panoramic shot, either via helicopter or other military vehicle, to take in the striking landscape,
before descending into the generally vastly restricted space of play.
Through the cinematic story presented in the single-player campaign, the player
follows the titular ‘Bad Company’ through Russia and various locales in South America, in
addition to a short prologue set in Japan during WWII. This prologue introduces the main focus
97 Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (2010), first mission after the prologue, ‘Cold War.’
Figure 2.1. Battlefield: Bad Company 2 uses technological satellite vision to enhance the sense of place, through a perspective of near-divine authority.
39
of the narrative, a weapon of mass destruction developed by the Japanese military, chased by the
two competing forces in the present day. The discussion quoted above takes place when the
player character (Preston Marlowe) is ordered to let an unknown enemy (or ‘piece of shit’) go,
establishing several relevant themes. Firstly, it introduces the main villain; this scene bookends
the narrative, as the game will end with Marlowe (finally) killing this unknown enemy, revealed to
be Russian agent Andrei Kirilenko). Secondly, it goes some way towards establishing the
personality of the main characters; irreverent jargon, near-insubordination, and a certain
disassociation with central command (represented by Archangel) portray the cohesion of the
squad. Lastly, on both a diegetic and non-diegetic level, it exemplifies the moral outlook and
approach of both protagonists and player; the last line sets the scene not just for this mission, but
for the whole game: the player can proceed to eliminate everyone that moves, they have after all
been declared ‘hostile.’ Before analysing the depictions of landscape in more detail, what follows
is a small summary, or travelogue if you will, of the places of this story.
The Locations
The prologue (‘Operation Aurora’) starts things off in the Sea of Japan. The choice of location
helps situate the game within the dominant narrative of WWII FPS-games, also tying the
machinations of the player characters into the righteous cause of US as Liberator.98 On the 6th
October 1944, the only given date in the entire game, a group of US soldiers are trying to find
and destroy a suspected Weapon of Mass Destruction (WMD), a so-called ‘Scalar Weapon.’99
When one of these prologue characters notes that ‘we got atomic bombs, Krauts got V-2s, the
Japs have gotta have something,’ it both places an expectation and a confirmation of the US
paranoia towards any perceived adversaries secretly creating WMDs of their own. It
simultaneously highlights motivations for modern interventions such as the invasion of Iraq, and
retroactively justifies one of the largest instant losses of human life (i.e. the first use of an atomic
bomb offensively) as a necessity since the enemy (designated by disparaging, if historically
appropriate, slurs) also had that capability, and undoubtedly would have used it given the chance.
The mission itself goes through night to day, letting the player learn the ropes, while exploring 98 As previously noted, the earlier predominance of WWII settings, as well as the corresponding dearth of real world Cold War conflicts (with Vietnam the possible exception) suggests the relative ease of portraying US Armed Forces as the Good Guys; WWII may have been the last undeniably, uncritically, ‘just’ war, at least in video game world. 99 Within the narrated story, it is presented as an electro-magnetic pulse device (EMP), ostensibly capable of disabling electronics in a large radius, while leaving other infrastructure intact. The visual (and mechanical) effects of its detonation, as well as its testing blast, suggest a far more physically devastating weapon. This, together with the implications and urgency of the protagonists’ chase for it, motivates me to refer to it as a WMD, as that is the role it primarily fills in the game.
40
rope-bridged, exotically jungle-clad rocky islands, to finally make a failed escape in a stolen
submarine.
This is followed by an expository news-segment collage, focusing primarily on a
‘red disease’ spreading across the Eurasian continent, and most significantly into South America;
a perfect modern illustration of the worst paranoid ramblings of the cold war domino theory
ideologues. It follows this reductionist cold war logic by clearly identifying fully sovereign nations
as merely the playground for two superpowers, where they can either be free (i.e. subjugated to
US power and capital control) or subsumed under the red wave of Russia (in the post-1991 world
Russia somehow remains a credible military threat in and of itself, communism doesn’t even have
to be mentioned).
The global perspective then proceeds to zoom in on the Chukchi Peninsula, the
section of Russia closest to the Bering strait. The connotations of satellite imagery help to embed
the player in a military-technological mind-set, establishing a view of the world defined by
dominion of orbital space, as well as assisting in situating the approximate place of the
subsequent action. The mission (‘Cold War’) introduces the protagonists (as noted above), and
shift to a mountainous snowy vista, for a clear differentiation from the previous mission,
establishing a theme of shifting between ecologically and meteorologically spectacular locales, as
well as doubling down on stereotypes of the Russian homeland.
The second mission (‘Heart of Darkness’), is centred on Río Beni in the Amazon
Rainforest parts of Bolivia, with stone terraces and logging camps showing both cultural and civil
traces of inhabitation. Here the player is tasked with killing indigenous forces, who are termed
Guerrillas or Paramilitaries, with the search for a potential WMD (and the suggestive ‘red tide’ of
the introductory montage) the only rationale given for why the US soldiers are in this country
killing its presumed inhabitants. The title, Heart of Darkness, clearly references Joseph Conrad’s
1899 novella set in the Congo.100 This highlights parallels between the novel and the main thrust
of this, and the following (‘Upriver’), mission, as the protagonist (Preston Marlowe, whose name
references the novel’s Charles Marlow) and his comrades proceed deeper into the ‘wilderness’
along a jungle river.
Once out of the jungle, the action returns to its previous snowy peaks in the fourth
mission (‘Crack the Sky’), this time somewhere in the Mendoza province in Argentina (the game
merely specifies the place as ‘Las Montanas,’ a misspelled version of ‘the mountains’ in Spanish).
Through vertiginous action sequences the player is now facing off directly with Russian forces,101
100 Conrad, J., Heart of darkness, New York, Broadview Press, 1995 (1889). Although it is possibly more likely that they refer to its modern film adaptation Apocalypse Now, which despite attempts by its director, Francis Ford Coppola, hasn’t yet been made into a video game. 101 Argentinian guerrillas apparently don’t come as naturally to mind as Bolivian ones.
41
and once the WMD has been secured, they are faced with a battle with the elements
(‘Snowblind’), as Marlowe tries to navigate through a snowstorm on his own, without freezing to
death (or being shot) in the process.
The sixth (‘Heavy Metal’) and seventh (‘High Value Target’) missions sees the Bad
Company close to the border with Chile, joined by an armoured division of the regular US
Armed Forces, traversing ‘Aconcagua Village’ by tank. This segment takes place in a hilly,
autumn-coloured rural area, culminating in a short siege and subsequent assault of an uphill city.
The specific sense of place is becoming gradually less obvious; this sequence is (possibly) set in
either Parque Eólico de Talinay in Chile (a famous wind park), or the Puente del Inca in
Argentina (or possibly in both, neatly sidestepping the 400+ km distance between the two).
The adventures of Bad Company lead them on to the Atacama Desert (‘Sangre del
Toro’), as the WMD (or a part thereof) is tracked to the titular beached cargo ship. This mission
is more open than the previous ones, opting not to direct the player through a predetermined
advance through a narrow corridor. Instead, the map is opened up, and the protagonist proceeds
to navigate desert dunes and dissonantly large stone castles to neutralize three camps, in any
order, to finally triangulate the location of the WMD. Occasional sand storms, as well as heat
wave effects, bring home the threat of this third elemental extreme visited throughout the
campaign.
An interrupted helicopter ride with the squad’s ally, a heavily stereotyped hippie,
brings them to the location for the story's twist and finale. After parachuting into the Colombian
jungle (probably somewhere in the Valle del Cauca department), they meet up with their CIA
contact, codenamed Maguire, for the second time (‘No One Gets Left Behind’). The protagonists
hand over the WMD, only to find out that Maguire has turned turncoat after learning about his
father’s death as part of Operation Aurora (the prologue). He gets stabbed in the back (read: shot
fatally in the side) by his new confidant, the villain from the first mission, Kirilenko. Escaping the
subsequent ambush, Bad Company make a third and final jungle journey to an unnamed city,
where they arrive just in time to see the test detonation of the WMD (‘Zero Dark Thirty’). This
location is among the least specified, as no country is mentioned (the satellite zoom-in strongly
suggest Colombia), and the absolutely devastated city is not dignified with a name (a fan-created
wiki-webpage tentatively identifies it as Medellín, with no explanation as to why).102
The eponymous Bad Company then proceed through the wrecked cityscape
(‘Force Multiplier’) to catch Kirilenko’s plane, that carries the WMD towards it final detonation
destination, the USA. Once on the plane, the team detonates the weapon prematurely, and
102 ‘Zero Dark Thirty’, Battlefield Wiki, [website], 2018, http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/Zero_Dark_Thirty, (accessed 6 September 2018).
42
Marlowe (and the player presumably) gets the satisfaction of jumping out of the airplane, shoot
Kirilenko in free fall, grabbing his parachute in the process (‘Airborne’). The final scene, set in
gloriously sun-kissed Texan fields, reveals that the Russian Federation has launched an invasion
across the Bering strait into Alaska, setting up a potential sequel.
Throughout, the sense of specific place, as both a cultural identity and a mapping
of a real-world terrain, is quite absent throughout this game. In the single-player campaign
locations are never defined by anything smaller than a region, and once settlements are
encountered, they bear no resemblance to any real-world city. The concept of South America is
employed not to engage with it in any invested sense, but merely to conjure the spectres of Cold
War fears of Russian subversion in the US’s ‘backyard,’ and as an exciting backdrop with varied
natural phenomena to spice up the game’s action. Similarly, the multiplayer maps hint at a
narrative of superpower struggle across Chile, Argentina and Panama, while never remotely
representing these countries, their peoples nor even their national military forces. The places thus
become non-specific (except for the iconic Panama Canal), tied to a conception of the continent
of South America and its meaning specifically to US Armed Forces, and their struggles against
their current enemy (in this case a post-Soviet Russian Federation).
All in all, the campaign offers a grand tour of exotic climates and unspecified
locations across South America (with cameos from Russia and Japan), where nature is spectacular
and dangerous, cultural clues are non-specifically ‘South American,’ and adversaries are either
unnamed guerrillas or Russian aggressors. While the tone and style of presentation of the
campaign aims for humour and includes a dose of satire, it is never biting, and only furthers the
stereotypes it is (maybe?) aiming at sending up. Indeed, the increasingly anonymous locales,
together with the game’s mechanical emphasis on destructible environments, lends itself to the
suggestion that any real-world location could have served as the excuse, the real aim is the
exoticism and variation of the environment and climate. The effect becomes one of tourism, of
travelling to supposedly faraway places, not to learn anything of the specific sites, but to take part
in a ritual of the spectacle, which in this case just happens to include shooting nameless South
American and Russian men to death. Thus, the spectacle and the sublime, as that which engages
and enthrals, and that which fascinates and unsettles, can be seen as motivations for the choices
of represented locations, as well as the way that players are invited to traverse them.
43
Spaces
The actual simulated spaces available to the player differ significantly between single-player and
multiplayer, not necessarily because of the details of their simulated terrains (indeed a couple of
maps are shared between the two game modes), but because of the difference in movement and
looking that is employed. This is quite usual within the genre of FPS:es, and Battlefield: Bad
Company 2 can be seen as a fairly typical example of the genre. The directionality of the single-
player experience is exclusively forward, the player progressing in an orderly fashion through the
narrative and the spatial corridors provided. Only in a few cases are the walls of the corridor
taken away, and the player forced to actually navigate the landscape, although even in these cases
the mini-map in the bottom left corner still provides a GPS-like clarification of position, so that
there is no chance of actually getting lost. The mini-map acts similarly in the multiplayer modes,
but the introduction of other human actors injects an element of added unpredictability, and the
different game modes enforce a significant difference in directionality. The game was released
with four multiplayer game modes (Conquest, Rush, Squad Rush, and Squad Death Match), and a fifth
(Onslaught) was added later as a downloadable addition, although the latter was not made available
for PC, and is thus not covered in detail here.
Conquest is a staple of the Battlefield franchise of games, where players are tasked to
capture and hold certain points, marked with flags, while killing the opposing team’s soldiers and
preventing them from doing the same. Killing enemy soldiers and holding a majority of flags
depletes the other team’s pool of reinforcement tickets; the first team to lose all of their tickets
loses the match. This mode creates a cyclical sequence, whereby players’ avatars are killed and
‘respawn’ (return to a fixed starting point after a short delay), and flags are captured, lost and
recaptured. The map is traversed and retraced as players run between capture points, and try to
outsmart the movement of their enemies, enforcing a sense of repetition, but also of fighting and
dying ‘for’ certain pieces of terrain.
In Rush one team is tasked with destroying a set number of military communication
crates (‘M-Coms’), while the other tries to prevent them. In a slight variation of the core game
mode of the genre-dominating FPS Counterstrike, the attackers have to either plant a timed charge
on the crate, or collapse the entire building housing it, while the defenders have to kill enough
attackers so that their reinforcement tickets (typically 75) run out. The maps consist of three to
five bases, with two M-Coms in each, and once all M-Coms are destroyed in one, the defenders
can retreat to the next, and the attackers’ ticket count is reset. This gradual unlocking of the game
space creates a fundamentally different feel for the maps, while giving each match a sense of
progression and sequential heightening of tension.
44
Squad Rush works similarly to Rush, except on smaller variant maps (two bases with one M-Com
each) and with limited teams, each ‘squad’ consisting of a maximum of four players. Without
vehicles, and on a smaller area, this creates a much more condensed experience, though still with
the progressive invasion from one base to another.
Squad Deathmatch similarly focuses on teams of up to four players, but without
bases, flags or M-Coms. Four teams compete, and the first team to kill 50 opposing soldiers (in
any combination of the other three’s) wins; the most straightforward, kill-‘em-all, mode of the
game. Both this and the Squad Rush modes are new additions to the Battlefield-series, and this is
similarly a condensed version of the Deathmatch-mode available in later instalments of the
franchise. Fixed respawn points lend the terrain some solidity and direction, but the triple threat
of enemy factions and the necessity to find enemies makes it a paranoid and deadly space.
Finally, Onslaught is the final mode, added after the others, which most resembles
parts of the single-player experience. Once again in a ‘squad’ of up to four players, players face an
unlimited number of computer controlled adversaries (‘bots’), and work together to capture
points along a map to unlock the next section. Similarly to much of the single-player campaign,
but also the Rush game mode, this gives clear directionality and a form of narrative evolution of
the experience of the landscape.
These are the modes available to traverse the maps, lending a fundamentally
different experience of the spaces and places represented. Going forward, then, we have to take
into account both the simulated terrain, as well as the different approaches, interactions and
movements that are to be expected through and throughout its spaces.
The Maps
At the end of its update cycle, including all map expansions, Battlefield: Bad Company 2 had a total
of 25 different maps, divided between single-and multiplayer game modes.103 At launch, the game
had the single-player campaign’s 13 missions together with 8 multiplayer maps variably available
to play in four different game modes. Over the course of seven ‘Map Packs’ and one Game
Mode expansion, four new multiplayer maps were added, two single-player maps were adapted
for multiplayer, individual maps were made available in other game modes, and a new game
mode was added.
103 Not included in this count, nor this analysis, is the Battlefield: Bad Company 2: Vietnam-expansion, which presents a different conflict, and 5 multiplayer only maps set in unspecified locations in 1960’s Vietnam.
45
Figure 2.2. An example of a destructive approach to the environment. Note the mini-map in the bottom left-hand corner, and the glowing colour of texts and symbols.
I mention this, not for the sake of exhaustive lists, but to lend some context to how the game was
experienced by many of its players. When analysing a game after its heyday, it is easy to look at
the finished, patched and expanded product and make certain conclusions, when a large part of
online gaming is the social network, and the implicit social attachment of following the
development of a game’s additions and community. However, these kind of gradual content
releases also serve as a marketing tool, to keep players interested in a fast-moving market, and to
ensure physical sales and combat piracy and second hand markets.104
Within this vast array of maps and modes, there are some recurring themes and
uses of space that is worth noting. First of all, the multiplayer maps follow the design philosophy
of focusing on the spectacular and explosive (see figure 2.2), as established in the single-player
campaign. Extreme climate and weather returns (from the sandstorms of Atacama Desert to the
snowy oilfields of Port Valdez), as do spectacular views, such as the great dam of Laguna Presa.
104 Map packs were made available for free for PC users, and through a one-use activation code in console copies; second hand, or pirated, console copies thus had no working code. This is one of several practices employed by games publishers to make sure sales of new physical, or verifiable digital copies, are sold, as publishers and developers do not receive revenues on resales. These tactics have not always been appreciated, and this incentive-based system was employed by Electronic Arts after some less popular punitive measures in previous titles.
46
Secondly, each map requires different specially acquired knowledge of how to approach it
depending on game mode. Different vehicles, topographies and vegetation mean that a trained
eye on one map may focus on the bushes, in another on the skies, and on a third one identifying
a specific cliff outcropping as a potential hiding place. With my limited time and skill, as well as
the relatively low level of activity on this fairly old game’s online battlefields, I have not been able
to provide a detailed analysis of the majority of primarily multiplayer maps.
Summary
‘Haggard: Maybe one day we’ll visit places like this and not shoot the natives’105
Full of superfluous, facile and surface-level shout-outs, any reflections on real world events or
politics present in Battlefield: Bad Company 2 are clearly not meant to be taken at face value. Indeed,
most reviews at the time, as well as later retrospectives, primarily remember the humour (for
good or for bad) and enjoyment of blowing up parts of the spectacular environment.106
The game shows a glimmer of self-awareness, irony and distance, but it ultimately
remains far too little to subvert the joined forces of the main plot, the action as described by the
player’s traversing of the landscape, and the ideological iconography deployed to hail the
technological superiority of the US and the West. The combined effect of the audio-visual is one
of transient, if exciting, places where US uniforms move through the extremes of weather and
climate to kill Russians and crack some jokes.
If the jungles, deserts and tundra of Battlefield: Bad Company 2 at first glance are
presented as exotic, foreign and threatening, throughout the experience they are revealed to have
been sanitized, neutered and pre-prepared for the player. In multiplayer, confusion gradually
gives way to mastery of the map and its representations, and the landscape fades away into points
of interests, objectives and props and set dressing to be destroyed at leisure. In single-player,
avenues have been cut out through these far-flung landscapes, and the player follows their
predefined route much as a group of charter tourists on an ‘exotic’ vacation, or, perhaps more
fittingly, a 19th century wealthy dilettante who has paid to experience ‘exploration’ while sailing up
the Congo.107
105 Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (2010), ‘Heart of darkness’-mission. 106 This has, among other places, been expressed in a retrospective by Smith, G., ‘Have you played… Battlefield: Bad Company 2’, Rock Paper Shotgun, 20 October 2016, https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2016/10/20/have-you-played-battlefield-bad-company-2/, (accessed 6 September 2018). 107 Mirzoeff, 2011, pp. 13-18.
47
CHAPTER 3: CASE STUDY – ARMA 3
‘This Is War Experience true combat gameplay in a massive military sandbox.
Authentic, diverse, open - Arma 3 sends you to war.’ Promotional copy on Arma 3’s website.108
Introduction
The view from a helicopter traversing the island landscape frames expectations and gives a first
view of the expansiveness of Arma 3’s two meticulously rendered islands. The player is able to
look around from the vantage point of a soldier seated on the side of the helicopter, getting a
mobile, aerial introduction to Stratis, a (politically) fictional Mediterranean island. The vastness of
the simulated terrain is in many respects its main attraction; allegedly close to 300 square
kilometres of virtual space, and hundreds of sites, are represented on the screen.109 This landscape
promises boundless exploration, not least in the sense that most players will probably voluntarily
quit before having traversed its entirety. It is also the scenery, background and stage for conflict,
exploration and creation. The Arma-series, developed by Czech game studio Bohemia Interactive,
have been exceptional in their accommodation of modifications (mods) to their games, created
by amateur designers and coders. The sandbox presented in Arma 3 (released in 2013) is not just
the setting for its three-part single-player narrative, or the playground for its multiple modes of
multiplayer conflict, it is also a toolbox and canvas for the creativity of its playing community.
This first flyover gives a sensation of persistent landscape, of a world lived in, but it
is gradually transformed into a stylized playground due to an absence of movement (other than
soldiers), and the transience of episodes occurring in the same place with no consequences
transferred. The centrality of the player character’s body, the definer of the player’s perspective
and movement ability, is also clearly demonstrated and problematized by that first moment in the
helicopter, a body apparent when the player turns the camera around; a body without a head.110
The Operation Flashpoint/Arma-series have placed a great deal of focus on 'realism,'
mainly focused on giving a more tangible embodied experience within the world, more detailed
physical simulation, but also an authentic-sounding presentation of conflicts and military
108 Bohemia Interactive, Arma 3, [website], 2018, https://arma3.com/, (accessed 6 September 2018). 109 270km2 on Altis, and 20 km2 on Stratis according to Bohemia Interactive, ‘Terrain’, Arma 3, [website], 2018, https://arma3.com/features/terrain, (accessed 6 September 2018). 110 If one turns the camera around thoroughly enough, one only encounters a cavity between the shoulders. Rather than the God-like disembodied cameras mentioned in the quantitative chapter, we are here experiencing a more manifestly embodied camera; a body with a camera for a head.
48
hierarchies and procedures.111 But the theme, the backdrop or pretext for conflict, also has certain
‘realistic’ ambitions, with Arma 3 aiming to portray a NATO peacekeeping operation getting
caught up in the middle of a civil war; a war that appears entirely devoid of anything remotely
civilian. No, the realism here is altogether that of the military experience, but this ‘tactical
shooter’ delivers an experience that is not only more tactical, but also more tactile in its rendition
of digital terrain and landscape, as we shall see.
Places ‘Kerry: Yeah? They can respectfully go fuck themselves, sir. We didn’t butcher
half our own population and I sure as hell didn’t ask to be on their pissant [sic] island.’ Adams: Well ain’t that just half the problem.
Kerry: I thought the roads were closed? Adams: They are.’112
Arma 3’s approach to the specifics of place provide a telling contrast to that described in the
previous chapter. The game’s two fictional islands, Altis and Stratis, are in fact an impressively
detailed reimagining of two Greek islands in the North-East Aegean Sea, Lemnos and Agios
Efstratios (the latter colloquially referred to as ‘Ai Stratis’). These digital models are made at
roughly two-thirds scale, and were so well researched that Greek authorities detained two of the
game studio’s employees for more than 100 days on charges of espionage.113
The deliberate choice of painstakingly recreating real world terrain in a supposedly
fictional republic poses a very specific type of authenticity. It presents a form of cut-and-paste
world-building; the prosaic details are borrowed from the real world, lending the narrative fiction
a quotidian realism, while the lack of a link to an actual real world conflict allows freedom to
explore and create without hitting too close to anyone’s real home. Notably, the larger adversarial
force in Arma 3 is a coalition led by China and Iran, rather than e.g. Turkey, avoiding direct
parallels to the situation on Cyprus, while reclaiming a sense of Cold War proxy wars in its near
future setting (the events of the diegesis are set in 2035). The specifics of place are thus borrowed
111 In the time period studied the series has had three major releases, Arma: Armed Assault (2006), Arma 2 (2009) and Arma 3 (2013), as well as a re-release of one of its predecessors, Operation Flashpoint: Cold War Assault (2001) as Arma: Cold War Assault (2011), neither of which have been included in the selection. 112 Arma 3 (2013), 1st mission of The East Wind-campaign. 113 The employees had been on vacation at the time, but had apparently not been able to refrain from taking pictures of what, in hindsight, turned out to be fiercely protected military installations, as per: Polygon Staff, ‘Jail time: how two Arma 3 developers were arrested in Greece’, Polygon, 2013, https://www.polygon.com/2013/2/8/ 3968814/arma-3-developers-arrested-for-spying-on-military-in-greece, (accessed 6 September 2018). After the incident, the developers declared that they would fictionalise their place names to avoid real-world associations, as per: Bohemia Interactive, ‘New name for main island in Arma 3’, Bohemia Interactive Developer’s Blog, [website], 1 February 2013, https://www.bohemia.net/blog/new-name-for-main-island-in-arma-3, (accessed 6 September 2018).
49
to lend credibility to the use of mythologies from certain types of conflicts, the type of ‘authentic’
war that the game intends to ‘send’ the player to.
The Campaign ‘War seems sweet until one tastes it;
known, it takes the heart and wastes it. -PINDAR
“For the Thebans (Fragment 110)”’114
Every mission in Arma 3’s single-player campaign The East Wind is prefaced with a quote from
authors and philosophers, such as the one above, emphasizing the complexities and hardships of
war. The game’s attempt to immerse a new player are most immediately apparent in their Prologue
chapter, which takes place on the smaller island of Stratis. The segment opens with the player
learning to move around in an unadorned Virtual Reality environment. After a couple of minutes’
instruction in the basics of the game’s systems, it is revealed that this VR-exercise is taking place
in the diegesis of the game, as the player’s character is asked to remove his VR-headset and the
visuals cuts to a first-person view of an open laptop in the middle of a green field. This is a clever
section that blurs the distinctions between different levels of reality both inside and outside of the
game, while simultaneously showcasing the game’s VR-compatibility.115
The Prologue continues its conscious playfulness with boundaries as it invites the
player to continue their training in combat basics by taking the role of an instructor’s assistant as
NATO-forces provide combat training for the Altis Armed Forces (AAF), the local
government’s military branch. The player learns to use a compass and map to navigate with
coordinates (no mini-map in the bottom corner provided), the effects of different stances the
character can take (21 in total), and how to aim (and control their breathing) and adjust for
distance and wind when shooting. From the get-go, Arma 3 drives home the realistic way that the
physical world has been modelled, all the while making the player feel in control and competent,
while ostensibly teaching al soldier that which they themselves are currently learning.
Next, the player has to put these new skills to test when they and their local charges
are called out to investigate a suspected terrorist hideout. Beyond giving a first taste of the quite
difficult task of driving a military truck, this sequence introduces the very important narrative
concept of irregular combatants. When the player arrives, local forces have already killed every
person in sight, and the superior officer reacts in disgust at this excessive force against apparent
114 Arma 3 (2013), after The East Wind’s 2nd mission, when the player is introduced to ‘camp Maxwell.’ 115 I have no doubt that this section has an even greater blurring effect when experienced through a VR-interface, which I sadly have not had the opportunity to try yet.
50
civilians. This serves to associate the AAF forces with atrocious behaviour, and the rest of the
prologue goes on to further emphasize the suspiciously oppressive nature of the government,
even while the player is embroiled in fights with the local guerrilla resistance (FIA, or Freedom
and Independence Army). But the scene with the dead civilians also highlights another interesting
stance; the dialogue emphasises how careless and brutal the AAF soldiers have been, but the
Prologue is the only time that these rules of engagement are given any weight. For the rest of the
campaign, there are only enemies and fellow allied soldiers, and the complexities of a landscape
filled with non-combatant life is conveniently hand-waved away.
The presentation of Arma 3’s main single-player campaign, The East Wind, begins
with a montage of news footage from their imagined world in 2035 (see Figure 3.1). After this
grounding in mass medial depictions of strife, shortages and political turmoil, the camera zooms
in from a satellite position towards Stratis, which appears to be placed close to Malta. With
effective collage and familiar GPS-inspired localisation the player is situated both politically and
geographically, and their expectations are set for near-future, politically complex military conflict.
The story starts one year after the events of the prologue, and the first act of three, Survive,
focuses on a multinational NATO squad that try desperately to regroup after a sudden betrayal
by the AAF. A returning feature of Arma 3’s mission design is that the objectives given at the
start of the mission often change due to unforeseen circumstances in the field. This first act
hammers home that point repeatedly, as Kerry, the main character, treks through hilly
Figure 3.1. Example of a news clip from the opening montage of The East Wind, headlining a humanitarian crisis that leaves no trace in the landscape that is ultimately portrayed.
51
countryside and deciduous forest from point to point, losing his original squad, his command
base and ultimately his commander, who perishes after stepping on a landmine.
Kerry finally regroups with British special operations captain Miller, who guides the
remaining survivors (including Conway, the protagonist of the prologue) to a new camp. From
this camp, NATO forces conduct several missions, with limited success, to establish
communications and request reinforcements, while helping allies in need, and denying strategical
resources to their enemies. The struggle for control of the barren landscape of Stratis takes place
in alternatingly open and forested hilly terrain, small villages and, at the climax, during the
invasion of a small town. After having lost their second camp to an air raid, survivors join forces
with the FIA guerrilla, succeeding in inflicting some damage and gaining significant ground until
a sudden near-total defeat, as reinforcements thought to be from NATO turn out to from the al
Canton Protocol Strategic Alliance Treaty (CSAT), a coalition headed by China and Iran.116
Kerry washes up on the shore of the bigger island of Altis in the beginning of the
second act, Adapt, with all of his comrades, including Conway, apparently dead. He is gradually
reunited with the British special operations team, and captain Miller, and they proceed with their
cooperation with the FIA. Through numerous guerrilla operations, the groups work towards
destabilising the AAF, and their CSAT allies, conducting ambushes, stealing supplies and rescuing
prisoners. Altis is here introduced fully, with its varied terrain offering both tactical and touristic
highlights for players, from the dense city of Kavala with its peninsular castle ruins, a vast
international airport with accompanying facilities, and winding roads crisscrossing through ruins,
villages, military bases and striking natural beauty with equal ease.
The player is also increasingly tasked with commanding an entire squad throughout
this act, forcing them to further take in the entirety of the terrain available, for both strategic
significance and positioning, but also, imperatively, the way it does or does not impair lines of
sight. The tug of war over the island is concluded with the arrival of a bona fide invasion by
NATO forces, who unfortunately manage to shoot down the FIA leader, much to Kerry’s
horror. When asking central command why captain Miller, who had been in contact with NATO,
had not informed them of the FIA operations, a bewildered Kerry is told there are no records of
a captain Miller, before being whisked off the island for debriefing.
Kerry returns to action for the final chapter, Win, and as the skirmishes get
progressively larger, NATO manage to push back a CSAT counterattack, before pushing the
AAF forces to the brink of defeat. The major narrative fork in the road arrives after a few
116 A move that was not appreciated by the government of Iran, who promptly banned the game, as per: Sarkar, S., ‘“Arma 3” banned in Iran’, Polygon, https://www.polygon.com/gaming/2012/9/19/3357600/arma-3-banned-in-iran, (accessed 6 September 2018).
52
successful missions, when Kerry is contacted by the hitherto disappeared Brits. The player can
here choose to either join NATO’s final offensive, or disobey orders to disregard Miller’s team,
and seek them out. The latter choice brings the story of this civil war to a conclusion, as Miller is
revealed to be part of NATO’s special forces, struggling with their CSAT counterparts to secure
an experimental weapon. Miller is revealed to have masterminded the events at the beginning of
the campaign in order to secure the device, the breaking out of civil war a less important
consequence of the larger struggle of NATO against the encroaching winds from the east.
Spaces
In theory, the entirety of the islands rendered in Arma 3 are available to explore, and it is only
individual missions and game modes that selectively restrict their traversal. The spaces available
have been accurately modelled on their real-world counterparts, with the major differences being
wider roads (for use of the games military vehicles), smaller scale (including the size and scope of
towns, one suspects for computational speed), and higher density of ‘interesting’ elements dotted
throughout the landscape (read: military bases, secret hideouts, etc.).
When I use the word traversal, it is not lightly; much of the experience of Arma 3’s
single-player campaign consists of lightly jogging through fields, creeping through high grass and
darting between bushes. This is space that needs to be crossed at great peril, and the campaign
missions ensure that there is ‘realistic’ amounts of transport before reaching any given objective.
It does not employ a mini-map, but does use highlighted markers placed in the terrain, which
makes it easy to follow the general direction of a mission. However, frustration and death will
await the unwary player who just makes a beeline for the objective, as they will undoubtedly be
shot in the head while unheedingly crossing some invitingly open fields.
Movement in this vast landscape is very much restricted not by physical obstacles
(most slopes have been made less steep than in reality to accommodate easy passage), but by the
threat of immediate incapacitation by enemy bullets. This movement is additionally modified
when using vehicles, and the game includes a vast variety of these to try out through several
showcases, as well as a myriad of multiplayer modes, the scope of which I am unfortunately
unable to do justice here.
53
A Closer Look
Supply Network, the fourth mission in the second act, puts the player in charge of planning an
ambush on an enemy convoy. This mission represents a turning point in the increasing
complexity of the campaign, as the player is invited to command others, and expected to take
individual responsibility in planning strategically, and, crucially, mastering the militarisation of the
terrain. Having to take into account other bodies than their own, and effectively widening and
raising their perspective, changes the gaze from one of identification and survival to control and
mastery. This is a conscious design decision, as the campaign essentially acts as a prolonged
learning exercise, introducing the player to the various strategical elements in the game, before
launching into one of its many multiplayer modes.
The player’s movement through space has so far been guided and hemmed in by
the movement of their group (led by a superior officer) and the movement, violence and
perceived gaze of the enemy. Now the player’s gaze must change; they are now in control of their
group, and are able to predict and possibly counteract the enemy’s direction and viewpoint.
Elements in the terrain take on new significance, as their distribution not only determines their
usefulness to the player and their allies (in terms of vantage, cover or concealment as in figure
3.2), but also of enemies and this ultimately puts the player in a position of increased power.
Power is not granted without a certain requisite mastery, however. Full disclosure, I am not very
good at Arma 3. It took me three full restarts to best this mission (not counting dozens of quickly
reloaded deaths), and the very first attempt resulted in frustrated, impotent orders given to my
Figure 3.2. The protagonist (Kerry) oversees the site of an ambush, with splendorous visual presentation merging with utilitarian triangles and symbolism (bottom left corner). This staging was not scripted by the game.
54
computer controlled squad, which I had somehow led into a firefight where we were hopelessly
outnumbered and outplanned, despite being the supposed ambushers. Gradually, with different
approaches tested, I learned more about squad commands, and I learned more about how to use
the terrain to my advantage, and the terrain was changing together with my perception of it. My
new-found outlook did not save me from spending 20 minutes, and more than 15 attempts, to
run a measly 100 in-game metres without being shot in the back in the mission’s scripted
ignominious retreat. It ended when I finally started scurrying, heart in my throat, from shrub to
shrub, switching between lying flat against the ground, catching my breath, and rushing between
trees in a panicked crouch.
This is why this mission holds a key significance, at least in my experience with
Arma 3. It forced me to widen my perspective, to try to take a more holistic approach to
understanding both my missions as well as the environment they took place in. It also hammered
home the importance of the stance of my digital avatar, forcing me to take into account their
projected body in the virtual world, with a level of detail that I hadn’t before. But, as I more fully
took in and assessed the features of this digital landscape, the shallowness of the simulation was
also gradually laid bare.
Mods
Arma 3 is above all a sandbox and a toy box, a playing space with tools for players interested in a
particular kind of military fantasy. It puts in considerable effort to present an array of military
tactics, technical hardware and jargon that all work to put the player in an imagined world of
military command and action. The versatility of the world and the interactive possibilities thus
given have also notably given rise to a rich flora of external modifications, or ‘mods.’ These are
additions to a game that are distributed via online platforms, that include everything and anything
between new models of weapons or clothing, to entirely new types of maps and games within the
parameters of the original game, and deserve some deeper discussion.
User-created modifications have existed for a very long time, and can usefully be
described as forming part of a symbiotic relationship with its ‘official,’ ‘commercial’ counterpart.
This has been highlighted by US Media Studies scholar Hector Postigo, who posits a few of the
mutual benefits exhibited, including extended (cost-free) testing and community engagement for
the producers, with ‘modders’ (creative users) getting a chance to develop technical and aesthetic
55
skills, as well as building an artistic portfolio.117 Developers and publishers can be more or less
accommodating to this kind of intervention, and Bohemia Interactive (the developers of Arma 3)
have been very welcoming in the way they have made tools for development available, and the
code easily modifiable.
This approach has paid dividends, with a lasting legacy of mods that far surpasses
most games in the same genre. Most notably, two recent major sensations, DayZ and
PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds (PUBG), have grown from modifications to Arma. The DayZ-mod,
based on Arma 2 and released in 2013, led a surge of ‘survivalist’ games, where players had to
navigate the game’s harsh landscape with resources significantly scarcer than what is usual within
these genres, while threatened by any other players online. Battle Royale was subsequently created
by the modder ‘PlayerUnknown,’ based on the DayZ-mod, and later moved to Arma 3. Players
are here dropped into a steadily shrinking map, where they battle it out until only one person or
team remains, and this type of competition has grown into a bona fide genre of its own. Released
in 2017 as a standalone game separated from its Arma origins, it has broken several records for
popularity, including largest number of simultaneous players active online, and has defined much
of the mainstream landscape of video games in the beginning of 2018 with a rivalry with the
similar game Fortnite.
What both DayZ and PUBG share is a new perspective on the simulated landscape,
as survival starts encompassing food, shelter and fire, and not just weapons-focused strategy.
These explorations comfortably exceed the palette of interactions offered in the base games of
Arma 2 and 3, yet the basic structure provided is at the very foundation, and the main creators of
both modifications have highlighted the inspiration they got from the original games and their
communities, as well as the relative ease they had in changing the game to their visions. The
change of perspective does highlight what was not quite there before however, by giving meaning
to parts of the terrain that previously only had value for stopping bullets, or gazes.
Summary
It is naturally impossible to include everything in a simulation, and any model of the world relies
on healthy (and quite often unhealthy) doses of generalisation, simplification and condensation.
The choices made in generalising, simplifying and condensing the experience that is represented
117 Postigo, H., ‘Of mods and modders: chasing down the value of fan-based digital game modifications’, Games and culture, vol. 2, no. 4, 2007, p. 311.
56
are revealing as to what is deemed important, what is deemed meaningful, by the creator, but also
by extension the audience, of a piece.
Arma 3, with its simulationist ambitions, has inspired a desire to further populate
their spaces with detail and meaning; potential symptoms of the experience offered in the base
game. As a simulation, it is undoubtedly engaging, but it also promises more than it is ultimately
able to deliver, and the impressive craftsmanship belies the simplicity of the interactions possible;
above all this is a space where enmities are settled by erasing the opposing party.
The visual fidelity of the landscape, and the sheer work and artistry that has gone
into it is undeniably impressive.118 However, the prioritisation shines through again, where the
placement of hills, towers, villages and blades of grass has received meticulous attention to detail,
while the game remains devoid of a single character model of a woman or a child. It is truly a
military sandbox, where players and modders can live out military fantasies, with a photorealistic
world conveniently devoid of everyday obstacles to mass-slaughter.
In single-player, despite a setting and plot that tries to bring in nuances of NATO-
and UN-led peacekeeping, the map, empty of civilians, life and any of the actual complexities of
war, lays bare the limited focus and empathy of the military shooters genre. This landscape is
created for the player’s concern and perspective only; it is tougher, more granular, and less of a
free playing field than e.g. Battlefield: Bad Company 2, but it is nevertheless made simply for the
amusement of the colonizer, the controller, the intervener.
118 For some comparative pictures of the real Lemnos island, you can do worse than vacation pictures posted on a forum discussion board for the game (kostaatanasov [username], ‘A vacation on Altis - or - to Limnos and back again’, Bohemia Interactive Forums, [website], 8 November 2014, https://forums.bohemia.net/forums/topic/175155-a-vacation-on-altis-or-to-limnos-and-back-again/, (accessed 6 September 2018).
57
CHAPTER 4: COMPARATIVE DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
‘…memory and its representations touch very significantly upon questions of identity, of nationalism, of power and authority.’119
The central power relation, as portrayed in the quantitative material, is that of competition and
conquest in a colonial mode. Be it through two-dimensional, top-down grand strategy games,
three-dimensional isometric tactical war games, or tactical shooters switching between first- and
third-person perspectives, players are invited to either claim, cleanse or destroy the represented
terrain. Nearly all examples fall squarely within Jay’s linear perspective-based scopic regime, but
arguably in two variations. The landscapes all follow enlightenment-inspired logics of control and
exploitation, but this control can either be from an expanded god-like point-of-view, or from the
individual hunter, the aforementioned eye of the predator, sweeping the landscape for undue
infringement. Switching between historical and fictional conflicts, the selection of subject
materials results in a very specific use of history and memory, as well as fantasy, which
emphasizes the military power and discursive authority of the US on the global stage. But,
although the quantitative results suggest a certain lack of diversity of approaches, they are unable
to tell the full story of how these environments feel when you actively play in them.
Patterns
‘Play scenarios or build your own on any place on earth – from classics like the Middle East, South Atlantic,
North Cape and Europe to new and rising hotspots like the Arctic, the Pacific and the Indian Ocean.’120
The recurring themes, recurring settings and recurring narratives observed in the quantitative
material are perhaps most succinctly summarised by the quote above, from the website of Matrix
Games, developer of numerous military simulations, outlining ‘classic’ confrontations as well as
those new potential conflicts that the military imagination could extrapolate. The two case studies
put forth in this thesis are different takes on the perceived types of US intervention. They share a
scopic regime, that of the predator and its gun-aligned central perspective. They are both action-
games focused on fighting, they are both primarily presented as played in first-person perspective
119 Said, E. W., ‘Invention, memory, and place’, in W. J. T. Mitchell (ed.), Landscape and power, 2nd ed., Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2002, pp. 241-242. 120 Marketing spiel for the Command Modern Air/Naval Operations game, as described on Matrix Games Ltd., ‘Command: modern air naval operations wargame of the year edition’, Matrix Games, [website], 2014, www.matrixgames.com/products/483/details/Command:.Modern.Air.Naval.Operations.Wargame.of.the.Year.Edition, (accessed 6 September 2018).
58
in a photorealistically modelled three-dimensional virtual world. At the same time, they diverge in
the aesthetic choices made in visio-graphical terms within the regime, and they also qualify as
different intervention types. Arma 3 can be considered an example of ‘stabilization,’ where the
main aim, and original intention of US presence on foreign soil is to aid the governing forces, and
maintain peace. Battlefield: Bad Company 2, meanwhile, is set in the full swing of a ‘second Russo-
American war,’ one which primarily takes place in Central and South America, with both
countries’ special forces struggling for control over a fictional, seismic weapon of mass
destruction. As it turns out, however, the conflict in Arma 3 also revolves around a fictional,
seismic weapon of mass destruction. This time the larger geopolitical conflict is between China
and Iran versus NATO, but the main narrative difference is that Arma 3’s story is told from the
perspective of a soldier not inducted into the special forces. While the stories of the two games
may have seemed quite distinct at the outset, they tell an essentially identical story, but the way
they present it makes for a very different experience.
Place
Arma 3’s military and tactical simulation differs significantly from Battlefield: Bad Company 2’s
brand of easy-going ‘Special Ops-tourism,’ and this is further highlighted by its approach to the
specifics of place, space and landscape. In Arma, the terrain is a meticulous scale model of two
real islands, presented as a fictional state. Contrast this to Battlefield’s satellite-image localised real
world locations, whose simulated terrain has been invented whole cloth to create spectacular
environments inspired by US myths of Latin American countries and landscapes. Simply put, in
one real islands are made fictional, and in the other fictional environments are presented as real.
Both act as examples of appropriation of virtual land, but in almost opposite ways.
Arma utilises the geography of the Greek islands to lend credibility and authenticity
to their playground for war between a new East-West duopoly. The landscape is stripped of its
original political significance, so that it can become scenery for an invented conglomeration of
Cold War-themed elements, including superpower proxy struggles, WMD arms races, and
military coups with political militias. This allows a certain element of freedom in designing the
conflict to reflect and include those elements that the developers are interested in exploring. They
have been at liberty to invent whatever they wish, and have chosen to mould their imagined
world very closely on certain specific elements of ours. The game admits the existence and
relevance of local forces (AAF and FIA) as factions in the conflict, but still takes a very simplified
militarised approach to describing those factions’ motivations and objectives.
59
Battlefield’s romp through Latin America is similarly interested in evoking real world strife, but to
a much greater extent takes its inspiration from cinematic representations of these conflicts. In
the narrative, the dialogues and the fictional camerawork, the game shows great awareness of and
homage to war films, especially those concerning modern conflicts including the Vietnam war, so
much so that its one major expansion takes place during the latter. The terrain modelled is
instead designed to accommodate functionality and spectacle. When the game evokes Bolivia, it is
to be able to show jungle – the mythological nemesis of colonial power from the ‘darkness’ of
the Belgian Congo to the failure in Vietnam – but no Bolivians, or even clear traces of specific
cultural artefacts. Similarly, when Chile is mentioned, it is to employ the myth of the Atacama
desert, the driest desert in the world, but the terrain depicted holds very little similarity beyond
the sand itself, with ruins of what appear to be late medieval European castles sharing the dunes
with stranded tanker ships.
When Arma tries to be liberatingly unspecific about the political reality, Battlefield
reduces the political reality to spectacular scenery and the basic assumption that South America is
the US’ backyard, theirs to control and defend, but never to understand or value. This is
addressed in dialogue, ironically, when making fun of the ‘ignorant’ character of Haggard
confusing South America for ‘Africa,’ but this criticism rings hollow when the whole premise of
the game, and the systemic nature of its representations blurs the lines between countries and
regions to the extent of reducing it to backdrop.
Space
The experience of playing the two case study games is strikingly different, mostly tied to their
approaches to space and embodiment. Battlefield’s striking panoramas of jungles and snowy
mountaintops makes for spectacular yet superficial viewing, as much of the experience becomes
centred on recognising enemy soldiers in the field, and observing the mini-map in the bottom left
corner. Movement and concealment play a larger part in multiplayer, but the focus on explosive
environments together with the lack of a persistent ability to crouch, means a quick, volatile play-
style reaps considerable benefits. At the same time, especially in the single-player game, weather
effects are used to severely restrict both vision and mobility at several crucial points, heightening
tension, and further bringing home the extremes of climate chosen as staging.
Conversely, Arma 3 is known for its long draw distance (how far away from the
viewer objects in a three-dimensional space are rendered), and the player is often treated to
stunning overview perspectives, making it possible to take in and analyse the landscape from a
60
vantage. At the same time, the player is given little aid in identifying targets or objectives,
meaning the player does have to inspect their environments more carefully. The differentiated
stances available to a player also means that the sense of controlling their avatar’s body is more
detailed, if not always intuitive. When the going gets rough, this means the player has to take into
account very small details of the terrain when positioning themselves, and when trying to hit
others. One consequence of these differences, at least in my subjective play experience, is that
firefights in Arma often take place at a considerably larger distance, and the accompanying skill of
identifying enemy combatants prone behind high grass is one of attention to detail and scrutiny.
The spaces in Arma are also generally much larger, and more open. This does lead
to infuriatingly and monotonous sequences of running through an apparently empty landscape,
until hopefully spotting an enemy before they spot, and shoot, you. Battlefield’s maps are smaller,
denser in content, and consequently more action filled. The sensation of progression is made
clear in single-player by more traditional mission design, guiding the player’s perception and
direction through visual design, lighting and camerawork through sometimes quite narrow
corridors. Contextual details, such as resupply points, also provide easy clues as to when and
where enemies are expected to appear. In multiplayer, most modes focus on controlling certain
chokepoints, creating a certain predictability in the movement of squads, with an enhanced sense
of progression added in the two- and three-tiered sections of the Rush and Squad Rush modes.
Landscapes
So, as ideological formations, the places and spaces of the two games work somewhat differently.
Battlefield entices with its spectacular vistas, destructive interactivity with its environment, and
metaphorical representations of real world locations, everything presented with cinematic
techniques steeped in Hollywood conventions of action and light-hearted war movies. Arma
presents the player with a huge terrain, the navigation of which requires considerable investment
to master, as does its movement and control scheme. The avatar body’s physical incarnation is
modelled in more detail, while simultaneously the player is given less information of where other
bodies are in this space. The feeling often becomes one of exposure rather than Appleton’s
detached observation, and though the predator’s gaze is present in both games, experience of
other predators’ gazes throughout the landscape is much stronger in the latter.
The combined experience is still following Yi-Tuan’s concept of ‘scenery’ and
‘domain.’ The former is experienced in Battlefield and Arma as sublime spectacle and impressively
detailed simulation, respectively. The impetus to control and dominate the respective domains is
61
strong in both, even though it is sometimes thwarted by natural forces or personal vulnerability.
However, the differences in difficulty and mastery do not undermine the sense that complete
dominion is still the agenda in both cases. Even though Arma’s representation elaborates on the
motives and agency of local guerrillas, the civilian ‘Greek’ populace is still missing, and
indigenous life is thus still erased. Arma’s narrative framing is considerably more nuanced, and
also leaves the player with a significantly less clear sense of victory and conquest, but the visual
logics of the landscape as empty of everything but enemies, and with little inherent value of its
own other than for visual pleasure, follows the imperial logic of landscape representation
presenting terrain as naturally subservient to the eye of the coloniser.
Context ‘Any military simulation attempts to draw an objective model of the world and its potential situations. But
because it involves peering into the void of the future and the blurry shapes of the present, it must also be mythic: It has to draw on culturally tutored imagination, fears, and wishes. To look at . . . war games, then, is to see
certain American anxieties played out as if to tame them.’121
Both games attempt to model US military invention in a manner that fairly resembles actual
events in recent history, or at least visions of how they could conceivably play out. In Battlefield
the military are inserted on the pretext of defending against Russian aggression, although the
121 US anthropologist Catherine Lutz, as quoted in Allen, 2011, p. 51.
Figure 4.1. Pre-mission breefing in Arma 3; gruff military men meet and make decision of the shape of the world while pouring over terrain maps, without either input or thought for others.
62
sovereign wishes of the respective nations does not even merit a footnote of consideration. In
Arma the contact with local forces is more nuanced, but becomes gradually less so as the
presence of Chinese/Iranian forces devolves the whole logic to the same Cold War polarisation.
With a landscape that admitted civilian life and existence, the narrative might have truly been
compelling in its portrayal of minor states caught up in the machinations of the larger ones, but
in the end the heightened ambitions still end up with a similar spatial logic; important spots must
be controlled, and the environment must be cleansed of dissenting bodies.
In their presentations, both games clearly reference representations of war from
other media, and this intertextuality becomes a good starting point for discussing the broader
discursive forces at work, and how they compare to some of the referenced material.
Intertextuality
The different approaches of the games are clearly visible in their choice of outside references,
that comment or contrast the content of the game itself. Arma anchors it’s ‘mature’ approach to
depictions of war with a myriad of quotes, from Sun Tzu to general Patton, illustrating
presumably sound tactical advice and highlighting more humanitarian reflections on the costs of
war. Battlefield borrows more heavily from cinematic conventions, and there are numerous action
sequences that play out as if directed by Steven Spielberg or Stanley Kubrick, but they are equally
often injected with humour and physical comedy closer to a Richard Donner buddy cop movie
(the most recurring reference to Lethal Weapon being Sergeant Redford’s indefinitely postponed
retirement). While Arma’s quotations are presented very seriously, with white text on a black
background, slightly distorted as if received from an unreliable connection, most of Battlefield’s
references are presented as tongue-in-cheek, which follows the generally satirical slant of its
narrative. These represent, once again, fairly different stances to established discourses regarding
war and intervention, but this difference is not necessarily reflected in the visio-spatial framing.
In Arma 3’s case, the more overtly military quotes work in tandem with the high
degree of granularity in military jargon and tactical decisions to enhance the ‘authenticity’ of the
experience. The design of missions, with constantly changing circumstances and objectives is the
epitome of this, yet in that very design of missions the more reflective quotes are repeatedly
ignored. While cynicism and distrust of the command chain form a central part of the main story,
psychological trauma, human suffering and oppressive injustice, mentioned as intrinsic effects of
the wars that Arma purports to realistically simulate, are not present in the visual presentation,
except partially in the prologue. In the end, the prologue and the contextualising quotes used
63
work against any aspersions to realism, beyond military or photographic minutiae, and serves to
put a stark spotlight on the absence of the human cost of warfare in this simulation. When they
claim to send the player to war, it is war from the perspective of power, propaganda and
domination. The knowledge imparted is that of military command chains and call-signs, the
names of weapons, vehicles and tactics, but it is not of the human interactions in a war zone.
Thus, it promotes the discourse of war as spectacle, war as entertainment, and war as justified, if
regrettable.
A deeper analysis of the references and shout-outs in Battlefield: Bad Company 2
would undoubtedly yield many more examples, but, bonding dialogue aside, the most recurring
structural allusions I found are evident in the naming of missions in the single-player campaign.
From overt association (‘Cold War’), through literal description (‘Upriver’), to military jargon
(‘Zero Dark Thirty’ and ‘Force Multiplier’), names seem to have been chosen with a mind to
recognisability, giving a sense of both the mission’s content and a fitting allusion. The most direct
reference comes in the third mission, the first set in South America, titled ‘Heart of Darkness.’
While the mention of Conrad’s novella here seems to be fairly gratuitous, it serves to highlight
how much the game fails to address the central issue of the novella in its presentation.
The novella’s tale of a European explorer entering deep into colonial jungles, while
slowly going insane and reflecting upon the cruelty and untenable contradictions of the colonial
worldview, has served as inspirations for adaptations many times, perhaps most famously in the
film adaptation Apocalypse Now, restaging the journey within the Vietnam conflict. It has similarly
been restaged within a number of video games, most prominently in Far Cry 2 and Spec Ops: The
Line. The former is a loose adaptation set in an undefined Central African nation, with the latter
being a more direct reworking setting it in an imagined conflict in Dubai, identifying the Arabic
world as a modern era colonial phantasm.
Both have been analysed more thoroughly than Battlefield: Bad Company 2, as their
approach is more developed, and Mukherjee comments about Far Cry 2 that despite more than a
century of difference, and the ‘other’ being central to themes and debates of the novella, the
game still manages to fall into the same pitfalls when it comes to othering, generalising and
conflating cultures and colonial experiences in Africa.122 His critique of Spec Ops: The Line is more
direct, and is also contextualised within the modern power relation between the US and West
Asia, also tracing the psychological obsession and deterioration of the protagonist.123 Murray,
meanwhile, notes that, while the tension between the player and the game creates a potentially
fruitful site for intervention in the medium as a whole, unchallenged assumptions about why
122 Mukherjee, 2017, pp. 13-19. 123 Mukherjee, 2017, pp. 45-46.
64
Dubai would represent a new ‘heart of darkness’ presents continued issues. The resistance and
critique are all placed within the personal crisis of the white, male character, and not extended to
include the cultural specificity of its setting, nor its inhabitants.124 Mukherjee belabours this point
further, by pointing out the lack of agency for indigenous characters in the game, being reduced
to victims without agency, or mobs without capacity for anything but violence.125
Both examples, while problematic, at least offer a somewhat considered take on
themes of intervention, human rights and the suffering of war, while Battlefield: Bad Company 2
merely deploys it as a nod to a staple of popular culture. The structure of the game, its narrative,
and its unspecified sensationalised approach to landscapes works arguably more effectively than
any of the incarnations of this tale to strip the scenery of its culture, the countries of their people
and the intervener of their responsibility to care about anyone but themselves, and the enemy
they must conquer.
Edward Said notes at one point that Conrad’s imagination was limited by the
experience available, and that was to see the world as unavoidably carved up into different
spheres of Western control. This, to him, somewhat redeems Conrad’s simultaneously anti-
imperial, and deeply imperial narrative.126 I do not believe that the same limitations of world-view
apply quite as generously to these more recent explorations of the theme, and I would have
hoped that unthinking, dehumanising depictions of colonial landscapes, as that which has
garnered Conrad substantial critique over the past 130 or so years, would have decreased
considerably in that same time frame. However, when seeking to provide entertainment,
spectacle and ‘authenticity,’ mainstream video games still do not shirk from employing the point-
of-view, discourse and world-view of the unrepentant conqueror, inviting players to recreate
injustices both real and imagined.
124 Murray, 2018, pp. 122-124. 125 Mukherjee, 2017, pp. 77-79. 126 Said, 1993, pp. 114-115.
65
CONCLUSION
‘I suggested […] that there were other massacres, forgotten or dimly remembered, that deserved to be recalled. These ignored episodes could tell us much about racial hysteria and class struggle, about shameful moments in our
continental and overseas expansion, so that we can see ourselves more clearly, more honestly.’127
Games about political events come in many shapes. There are examples of testing grounds for
political and military systems, propagandistic tools for upholding heroism of individuals or states,
and safe spaces to play out utopias and worst nightmares, as well as a new form of
historiography. Games offer the possibility to act out different versions of important sequences
in a cultural imaginary, and by giving that interactivity they also give a sense of agency, and of
deeper understanding of the presumed agency of the actors depicted. Through this, they present
an image of the world, a model that in its visuality describes how the world could or should be
interpreted, in terms of values, ideology and possible actions. In the commercial environment of
developing and publishing games, the selection of worldviews also highlights which narratives
and power relations that are deemed lucrative to pursue.
On the whole, those are the histories of the conquerors, the European perspective
of colonial, mostly righteous, dominance, portrayed through controlled landscapes, appropriated
places and spaces that only admit the duality of fight or flight, of conquer or be conquered. In
games these discourses are acted out, again and again, hammering home the material,
technological and moral superiority of the West, and while this is sometimes even more overt in
games set in the colonial era, post-WWII intervention representations are rife with depictions of
the right of US agents to dominate places, spaces and landscapes. And although there are a few
cases of resistance, none really highlights alternative episodes from history or attempt to clearly
and honestly examine the power relations that drive this drive for dominion.
Meaning of Place
Across the different examples visited and revisited, there have been several usages of the
connotation and association of specific places. In terms of countries and cultures, you can see
their inclusion as parts of discourses that legitimise or delegitimise certain courses of (often
violent) action. Furthermore, specific locations are employed most often in conjunction with
either their cultural and economic significance in imagined conflict, their mythological currency
as sites of symbolic value, or real events that mirror, foreshadow or in other ways resemble those 127 US historian Howard Zinn, quoted by Said (2002, p. 243).
66
of the game. In the first instance, games are often engaged in playful counterfactuality and
fantasy, posing ‘what if?’-scenarios that are meant to excite, terrify or intrigue players, making the
game and its virtual stakes more interesting. They are consequently often more ‘close to home,’
introducing the spectacular or scary into the well-known. Even more well-known are the
examples of mythological sites; these range over a broader area of the Earth’s surface, and
includes the common symbols of outstanding human or natural landmarks, from the Eiffel
Tower, through the Chinese Wall, to the Cristo Redentor, subsumed into a shared library of
‘worthy’ landmarks.
The specifics of place are engaged in an ongoing dialogue with the mythologies of
connotation that surrounds video games. It is also clear that many cases include an urge to be
taken as seriously as other media, and intermedial borrowing, adapting and sparring serves to
present a situation of medial parity. Battlefield: Bad Company 2 chose to namecheck half a
continent, without half an attempt at representing it or its inhabitants, while Arma 3 claimed
fiction as alibi, as it engaged in ‘authentic’ military simulations on meticulously modelled real-
world terrain. This is not to say that detailed modelling of real world places always occur with an
alibi. As an example, Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter (2006) allows a player to spend
three days in virtual Mexico City, living out US dreams of intervening directly and violently in
both criminal and political crises of its southern neighbour.
Place, both mythological and physical, is simultaneously evocative and grounding
as new virtual worlds are created, tethering the player to known landscapes and phenomena as
they explore alternate realities. It is only somewhat disheartening to note, then, that the places
where the US is envisioned as entering are entered with a violence and disregard for other
perspectives that is all too familiar from more than a century of real-world interventions.
Meaning of Space
Video games’ potential scopic regimes are intricately tied together with conceptions of genre, and
the immediate styles of play that accompany these. A visual framework comes with certain
explicit and implicit directions as to what is possible, what is encouraged and what is demanded
to be done. Looking is often followed by acting, and the spaces of different genres define what
each glance’s accompanying act is likely to be. That is not to say there isn’t space for resistance, it
is just that the space and variety of resistance is highly restricted by the rule-bound nature of
many games. Beyond the act of ceasing to play, or the often provoked standstill where a game
67
cannot progress longer, there is the possibility to bend and break rules, both from within the
player experience, but also through ‘external’ modifications.
Regardless, resistance, or ‘playing back’ serves often only to highlight the rigidness
of certain customs, the omnipresence of certain assumptions. While the 165 games analysed in
this material carry within them a myriad of choices, each style and genre
emphasising different aspects of complex conflicts, the truth is that the
fundamental core of the play-act, that which allows a player to engage, and
further their engagement with the game within the given parameters can all
too often be boiled down to two types of response to a situation; ‘Shoot!’ or ‘Shoot?’ (the
statistical distribution of which can be seen in table 5.1).
The first includes all of the different types of shooter games we have seen, naturally
including both Battlefield: Bad Company 2 and Arma 3. But it also includes the majority of strategy
and tactical games, as well as most simulations of vehicles seen, no matter how technically astute.
The main mechanic of interaction is to shoot other (human) beings. Rarely are you asked to
distinguish between which human beings to shoot. The second category earns its question mark
merely on the qualification that other potential ways to interact with your environment exist,
even though violent aggression may still be the heavily favoured or preferred one. As Murray put
it, the concept of mastery and domination is everywhere, as the observation of the simulated
space invites, urges, and in many cases demands dominion.128
The results are naturally in no small part due to the questions asked of the material,
and those used to select it. Still, the question was asked in terms of economic, cultural, political,
or military intervention, and the fact that the found samples nearly exclusively allowed only the
latter tells a clear story. Together with the large majority of games being explicitly pro-USA, with
only a handful consistently critical in their depiction, the visual worlds represented present a clear
picture; spaces serve either functionality or aesthetic, tool or spectacle, and any life that differs
from that of the (US) protagonist found therein must either be colonised or exterminated.
Landscapes of US intervention
This study has shown, in agreement with observations by Murray, that within depictions of US
intervention, the construction and utilisation of landscape within mainstream videogames, and
particularly the wide genre of ‘shooter’ games combine to further a couple of foundational myths
128 Murray, (2018, pp. 175-176) when analysing Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain.
Response: % Shoot! 92% Shoot? 8%
Table 5.1. Condensed response of subgenres.
68
of US historiography, but also contemporary political ideology.129 The central tenet, which I have
not belaboured, is the primacy of the gun as an object of liberation, of power, of identity and
emancipation. It shapes and defines the visuality presented and the possible positions of the
spectator as centrally that of looking through the visor or down the barrel of the gun at the
world. This ‘world’ is there for your (the privileged spectator/player) consumption, domination
and annexation.
US interventionism is deployed mostly uncritically, and as a ‘wholesome’ excuse for
violent killing of the ‘other.' The multimedial nature of games offers possibilities for perspective
shift, embodiment and limited agency; but fundamentally, the perspective of a game’s framework
guides all possible interactions. The US-centric perspective (both visual and rhetorical) has
penetrated many cultural spheres, through mass-market capitalism and an urge to cater to
imagined demographics. The narratives employed form part of a broader world-view, inextricably
tied to centuries of oppression, and ongoing social, economic and technological inequality. It is
not necessarily tied directly to tangible behaviours, but it is nevertheless pervasive, and formative
for discourse, and subsequently policy.130 This is a form of historiography, much as film is, and it
is visceral, it is repeated until forming almost instinctive knowledge, and it is incredibly pervasive.
The landscape fills an expanded role, compared to that observed of its art historical
predecessor, not only expressing the colonial assertion of power, but encouraging players to
partake in and repeat that assertion. Although this thesis’ case studies departed from games that
the quantitative study categorised as different types of intervention, their discursive frameworks,
especially as expressed through their virtual landscapes, are strikingly familiar. Their main
difference consists in the experience of space, which does highlight different elements of a shared
discourse, and considerably affects the moment-to-moment experience of the game. An opposite
approach to fictional and specific places has served to further drive home the overarching
dominance of the central thesis; terrain is represented as depoliticised places, whose specificity is
only valued in engaging special mythologies or authenticities, creating spaces for interaction that
are entirely based on destruction and dominance. The landscapes of US intervention follow
established imperialist discourse where they are rendered as scenery, however detailed or
spectacular, complicit in an ongoing process of becoming subsumed into an imperial domain.
129 As engaged by Murray (2018, p. 163) in her description of US societal identity construed against the ‘primitive’ landscape surrounding its earliest member states. 130 As evidenced in Sparrow et al. (2018).
69
Further research
As is so often the case, this study has raised more questions than it could possibly answer. The
material examined in the quantitative study was so extensive that the study inevitably only
scratches the outermost crust of its surface. Further, the exhaustive nature of games, and the
different ways available to experience and examine them also means that even the case studies
serve only to illuminate one, very specific, perspective on their presentation and interaction. This
thesis is at its core a juxtaposition of two games out of hundreds, and the briefest sampling of the
other hundred and a half. What this study didn’t have time to cover is in a very real sense much
larger than any conclusions it can claim to draw.
To begin with the site of production, the ties between the US military-industrial
complex and the invention, development and industry of video games merits thorough
investigation. Comparing games produced within the US and outside, and outside the West, can
explore possible differences arising from diverse corporate structures and cultural backgrounds.131
A US centric narrative does not have to originate from within the US, as the case studies of one
Swedish and one Czech game shows, but the specific discourses nevertheless share clear US-
positive traits, and a framework that has been adopted from US popular culture.
Focusing on the site of the image (or game) itself, similar, expanded studies
detailing video games backward (e.g. comparing depictions before and after the World Trade
Center attack), but also delving deeper into the material, further categorising and unpicking the
specificities and logics of these categories, has rich potential. While Spec Ops: The Line has already
been thoroughly examined as a site for resistance and for creating complicity in the acts
depicted,132 further studies of examples of resistance in video games, but also their comparative
scarcity, can only enrich the medium.
The thesis touches upon the inherent inhumanity present in simplistic game
experiences, where wars become games and human life and dignity become nothing, as well as
the oppressive historical and political structures that underlie these power relations.
Unfortunately, it was not able to incorporate wider theoretical perspectives, above all
postcolonial theory, and studies inspired by those of Mukherjee and Murray of the same time
period would undoubtedly yield even more interesting conclusions.
131 Once again, one possible such avenue has been explored by Dyer-Witheford and de Peuter (2009), although one could easily imagine other theoretical foundations than the version of ‘Empire’ that they use. 132 Kristine Jørgensen explores the idea of the constructive uses of discomfort in ‘The positive discomfort of Spec Ops: the line’, Game studies, vol. 16, no. 2, 2016.
70
Today, astride the world, the US has spread its military, economic and cultural influence to every
corner, with military bases putting old Roman Imperial Limes-systems133 to shame, and
domination of public broadcasts worldwide dwarfing the dreams of many a diligent autocrat. The
influence of the US is everywhere, culturally and politically dominant in the Global North, with
military presence and logistical exploitation still checking the Global South. The naturalisation of
US domination owes a tremendous amount to its cultural machinery, actors who are not
necessarily consciously complicit in the transgressions of their government, but who nevertheless
facilitate the transmission of its ideologies, economic models and political logic across the globe.
Video games, as a medium of the age, with an indelible US heritage, are merely more overt (in
their indirect interactivity) than some other media in its abeyance to US narratives. This is one
reason why it is important to continue to question games, to critique and analyse them and the
worldviews contained within, and in order to do this, multiple perspectives are crucial. From
ludology to literary, postcolonial and visual culture studies, every new perspective can bring
greater understanding, and hopefully lead to discourses, power relations and landscapes in games
that are far more diverse than those found in this study.
133 A network of forts and defences that stretched across Western and Central Europe, marking the Empire’s boundaries against ‘barbarian’ lands, as well as providing a system of military bases and invasion response.
71
Appendix(1.(Content(Analysis:(Full(table(of(resultsYear
PlatformIntervention)Type
US-RoleUS-Adversary
PeriodLocation
SpecialPerspective
DStylisation
GenreSubgenre
1AC@130:-O
peration-Devastation
2009C
Warfare
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesMultiple
Vietnam,)Iraq,)Afghanistan
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
Arcade)Shooter
2Act-of-W
ar:-Direct-Action
2005C
CounterterrorismProtagonist
TerroristsNear)future
Egypt,)RussiaIsom
etric3D
PhotorealisticStrategy)A)RTS
Tactical)Wargam
e
3After-Burner-Clim
ax2010
P|XWarfare)(Air)
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesModern
UndefinedGlobal
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
Flight)Sim
4Air-Assault-Task-Force
2006C
Warfare
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesCold)W
arVietnam
,)Somalia,)Afghanistan
TopADown
2DPhotorealistic
Strategy)A)RTSTactical)W
argame
5Air-Conflicts:-Vietnam
2013C|P|X
Warfare
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesCold)W
arVietnam
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
Flight)Sim
6Alpha-Protocol
2010C|P|X
Covert)OpsProtagonist
Political)Enemies
Modern
S.)Arabia,)Italy,)Russia,)Taiwan
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAdventure)A)RPG
ActionAAdventure
7Am
erica's-Army-3
2009C
StabilizationProtagonist
Political)Enemies
Modern
EU[E]Fictional
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
8Am
erica's-Army:-
Rise-of-a-Soldier2005
XCounterterrorism
ProtagonistTerrorists
Modern
AS[W]
Fictional1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFPS
9Am
erica's-Army:-
True-Soldiers2007
XWarfare
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesModern
Undefined1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFPS
10Apache:-Air-Assault
2010C|P|X
CounterterrorismProtagonist
TerroristsModern
AS[W],)AM
[S],)AFRFictional
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
Flight)Sim
11ARM
A-22009
CStabilization
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesModern
AS[C])"Chernarus"Fictional
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
12ARM
A-2:-Operation-
Arrowhead
2010C
Regime)Change
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesModern
AS[C])"Takistan"Fictional
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
13ARM
A-32013
CStabilization
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesNear)future
EU[S]"Stratis/Altis",)OCE"Tanoa"
Fictional1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFPS
14ARM
A-Tactics2013
CCounterterrorism
ProtagonistTerrorists
Modern
AS[W],)AF[N]
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticStrategy)A)TBS
Tactical)Wargam
e
15ARM
A:-Armed-
Assault2006
CStabilization
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesModern
AF[N])"Atlantic)isl."Fictional
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
16Arm
ored-Brigade2008
CWorld)W
ar)IIIOptional)side
Political)Enemies
Cold)War
Germany
TopADown
2DAbstract
Strategy)A)RTSTactical)W
argame
17Arm
y-of-Two
2008P|X
CounterterrorismEm
ployerTerrorists
Modern
Somalia,)Afghanistan,)Iraq,)
Philippines)(Sea),)S.)Korea3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingTPS
18Battlefield-2
2005C
World)W
ar)IIIOptional)side
Political)Enemies
Modern
China,)S.)Arabia,)Afghanistan,)Qatar,)Kuw
ait,)Wake)isl.,)
Lebanon)coast,)Caspian)Sea,)Russia,)Syria,)Kazakhstan,)Iraq
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
19Battlefield-2:-Modern-Com
bat2005
P|XWarfare
Optional)sidePolitical)Enem
iesModern
Kazakhstan1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFPS
Game-Nam
e
Appendices
72
YearPlatform
Intervention)TypeUS-Role
US-Adversary
PeriodLocation
SpecialPerspective
DStylisation
Genre
SubgenreGam
e-Nam
e
20Battlefield-3
2011C|P|X
Regime)Change
Protagonist)(sev.)Political)Enem
iesModern
Iran,)Iraq,)France1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFPS
21Battlefield-4
2013C|P|X
Regime)Change
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesModern
Azerbaijan,)China,)Singapore,)Tibet,)Egypt,)Hong)Kong,)Ukraine,)Turkm
enistan,)Iran,)France,)Thailand,)N.)Korea,)Russia
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
22Battlefield-Play4Free
2011C
Warfare
Optional)sidePolitical)Enem
iesModern
AS[W],)AS[SE]
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
23Battlefield:-Bad-Com
pany2008
P|XWorld)W
ar)IIIProtagonist
Political)Enemies
Modern
AS[C])"Serdaristan",)"Sadiz"Fictional
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
24Battlefield:-Bad-Com
pany-22010
C|P|XWorld)W
ar)IIIProtagonist
Political)Enemies
Modern
Japan,)Argentina,)Bolivia,)Chile,)Colom
bia,)Panama,)Russia
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
25Battleship
2012P|X|N
Warfare
ProtagonistAliens
Modern
Pacific)OceanIsom
etric3D
PhotorealisticStrategy)A)TBS
Tactical)Wargam
e
26Black
2006P|X
CounterterrorismProtagonist
TerroristsModern
Russia)(Chechnya/Ingushetia)1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFPS
27Breach
2011C|X
Covert)OpsProtagonist
TerroristsModern
AS[C]3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFPS
28Call-of-Duty-4:-Modern-W
arfare2007
C|P|X|NRegim
e)ChangeProtagonist)(sev.)
Political)Enemies
Modern
Kuwait,)S.)Arabia,)Russia,)Iraq,)
Ukraine,)Azerbaijan1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFPS
29Call-of-Duty:-Advanced-W
arfare2014
C|P|XWorld)W
ar)IIIProtagonist
TerroristsNear)future
Greece,)Bulgaria,)Nigeria,)S.)Korea,)Thailand,)Antarctica,)Iraq
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
30Call-of-Duty:-Black-Ops
2010C|P|X|N
Covert)OpsProtagonist
Political)Enemies
Cold)War
Russia,)Kazakhstan,)Cuba,)Hong)Kong,)Laos,)Vietnam
,)Canada
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
31Call-of-Duty:-Black-Ops-II
2012C|P|X|N
Covert)OpsProtagonist
Criminals
Multiple
Angola,)Myanm
ar,)Afghanistan,)Nicaragua,)Pakistan,)Caym
an)Isls.,)Panam
a,)Yemen,)Haiti
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
32Call-of-Duty:-Ghosts
2013C|P|X|N
Covert)OpsProtagonist
Criminals
Modern
Space,)Venezuela,)Mexico,)
Argentina,)Antarctica,)Atlantic,)Brazil,)Chile,)UK,)Uruguay,)Egypt,)AM
[E],)Australia,)Canada
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
33Call-of-Duty:-Modern-W
arfare-22009
C|P|XWorld)W
ar)IIIProtagonist
Political)Enemies
Modern
Afghanistan,)Kazakhstan,)Russia,)Brazil,)Georgia,)Pakistan,)Ukraine,)Iraq
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
34Call-of-Duty:-Modern-W
arfare-32011
C|P|X|NWorld)W
ar)IIIProtagonist)(sev.)
Political)Enemies
Modern
AS[W],)India,)Sierra)Leone,)
Germany,)Som
alia,)France,)Czech)R,)Russia,)UAE,)Ukraine,)S.)Korea,)Brazil,)Afghanistan
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
73
YearPlatform
Intervention)TypeUS-R
oleUS-A
dversaryPeriod
LocationSpecial
PerspectiveD
StylisationGenre
SubgenreGam
e-Nam
e
35Cannon-Fodder-3
2012C
CounterterrorismProtagonist
TerroristsModern
Undefined
GlobalIsom
etric3D
StylizedStrategy)A)RTS
Tactical)Wargam
e
36Civilization-IV
2005C
Warfare,)Covert)O
psOptional)side
Political)Enemies
Multiple
Worldw
ideIsom
etric3D
StylizedStrategy)A)TBS
4X
37Civilization-Revolution
2008P|X
Warfare,)Covert)O
psOptional)side
Political)Enemies
Multiple
Worldw
ideIsom
etric3D
StylizedStrategy)A)TBS
4X
38Civilization-V
2010C
Warfare,)Covert)O
psOptional)side
Political)Enemies
Multiple
Worldw
ideIsom
etric3D
StylizedStrategy)A)TBS
4X
39Classified:-The-Sentinel-Crisis
2006X
Covert)Ops
ProtagonistTerrorists
Modern
EU[E]
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
40Close-Com
bat:-First-to-Fight
2005C|X
StabilizationProtagonist
Political)Enemies
Modern
Lebanon1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFPS
41Close-Com
bat:-Modern-Tactics
2007C
Regime)Change
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesModern
IraqTopADow
n2D
StylizedStrategy)A)RTS
Tactical)Wargam
e
42Codenam
e:-Panzers-–-Cold-War
2009C
World)W
ar)IIIProtagonist)(sev.)
Political)Enemies
Cold)War
Germany
Isometric
3DPhotorealistic
Strategy)A)RTSTactical)W
argame
43Cold-Fear
2005C|P|X
Covert)Ops
Employer
SupernaturalModern
Bering)Strait)(Pacific)Ocean)
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
TPS
44Com
bat-Mission:-
Shock-Force2007
CRegim
e)ChangeProtagonist
Political)Enemies
Modern
SyriaIsom
etric3D
PhotorealisticStrategy)A)RTS
Tactical)Wargam
e
45Com
mand-&
-Conquer:-R
ed-Alert-3
2008C|P|X
World)W
ar)IIIOptional)side
Political)Enemies
Near)future
UK,)France,)Germ
any,)Japan,)Cuba,)Russia,)Sw
itzerland,)Greece,)Iceland,)Chile,)Netherlands
Isometric
3DStylized
Strategy)A)RTSClassic)RTS
46Com
mand-&
-Conquer:-R
ed-Alert-3-–-U
prising2009
C|P|XWorld)W
ar)IIIOptional)side
Political)Enemies
Near)future
Japan,)Romania,)Russia,)
Mexico,)Guam
Isometric
3DStylized
Strategy)A)RTSClassic)RTS
47Com
mand:-
Modern-A
ir-/-Naval-O
perations2014
CWarfare
Optional)side
Political)Enemies
Multiple
Worldw
ideTopADow
n2D
AbstractStrategy)A)RTS
Tactical)Wargam
e
48Com
mander-in-
Chief2008
CWarfare,)Covert)O
psProtagonist
Political)Enemies
Modern
Worldw
ideTopADow
n2D
StylizedProcess)A)Managem
entGovernm
ent)Sim
49Conflict:-D
enied-Ops
2008C|P|X
Covert)Ops
ProtagonistTerrorists
Modern
Venezuela3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingTPS
50Conflict:-G
lobal-Terror
2005C|P|X
CounterterrorismProtagonist
TerroristsModern
Colombia,)S.)Korea,)U
kraine,)Russia,)Egypt,)Philippines,)Pakistan
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
TPS
51Crysis
2007C|P|X
StabilizationProtagonist
Political)Enemies
Near)future
N.)Korea
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
52Crysis-W
arhead2008
CStabilization
AlliedPolitical)Enem
iesNear)future
N.)Korea
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
53Cuban-M
issile-Crisis:-The-Afterm
ath2005
CWorld)W
ar)IIIOptional)side
Political)Enemies
Cold)War
Worldw
ideIsom
etric3D
PhotorealisticStrategy)A)RTS
Tactical)Wargam
e
74
YearPlatfo
rmIntervention)Type
US-Role
US-Adversary
Perio
dLocatio
nSpecial
Perspectiv
eD
Stylisatio
nGenre
Subgenre
Game-Name
54
Dangerous-W
aters
2005
CWarfare)(Naval)
Optional)sidePolitical)Enem
iesModern
Worldw
ide3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Process)A)Sim
ulationNaval)Sim
55
Dark-Sector
2008
C|P|X
StabilizationEm
ployerScience
Cold)War
AS[C])"Lasria")(Soviet)satellite)Fictional
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
TPS
56
DCS-world
2013
CWarfare)(Air)
Optional)sidePolitical)Enem
iesModern
AS[W],)Georgia
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticProcess)A)Sim
ulationFlight)Sim
57
DCS:-A
@10C-
Warth
og
2011
CWarfare)(Air)
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesModern
Russia,)Georgia3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Process)A)Sim
ulationFlight)Sim
58
DCS:-B
lack-Shark
2009
CWarfare)(Air)
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesModern
Russia,)Georgia3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Process)A)Sim
ulationFlight)Sim
59
DEFCON:-
Everybody-Dies
2006
CWorld)W
ar)IIIOptional)side
Political)Enemies
Cold)War
Worldw
ideTopADow
n3D
StylizedStrategy)A)RTS
Strategical)Wargam
e
60
Delta
-Force:-
Xtre
me
2005
CCounterterrorism
ProtagonistTerrorists
Modern
Peru,)Chad,)Russia1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFPS
61
Delta
-Force:-
Xtre
me-2
2009
CCounterterrorism
ProtagonistTerrorists
Modern
Russia1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFPS
62
Elite
-Warrio
rs:-
Vietnam
2005
CWarfare
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesCold)W
arVietnam
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
TPS
63
Empire
-Earth
-II2005
CWarfare,)Covert)Ops
Protagonist)(sev.)Political)Enem
iesMultiple
Worldw
ideIsom
etric3D
StylizedStrategy)A)TBS
4X
64
Empire
-Earth
-III2007
CWarfare,)Covert)Ops
Optional)sidePolitical)Enem
iesMultiple
Worldw
ideIsom
etric3D
StylizedStrategy)A)TBS
4X
65
Falcon-4.0:-A
llied-
Force
2005
CWarfare)(Air)
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesModern
N.)Korea1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Process)A)Sim
ulationFlight)Sim
66
Far-C
ry-4
2014
C|P|X
Covert)OpsAntagonist
Political)Enemies
Modern
AS[S])"Kyrat")(Nepal)Fictional
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
67
Far-C
ry-In
stin
cts
2005
X|N
Covert)OpsAllied
Criminals
Modern
OCE)"Jacutan")(Micronesia)
Fictional1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFPS
68
Fate-of-th
e-W
orld
2011
COther
Superpower
Political)Enemies
Modern
Worldw
ideTopADow
n2D
StylizedProcess)A)Managem
entGovernm
ent)Sim
69
Flash-Point-
Germ
any
2005
CWorld)W
ar)IIIOptional)side
Political)Enemies
Cold)War
Germany
TopADown
2DAbstract
Strategy)A)TBSTactical)W
argame
70
Frontlin
es:-Fuel-of-
War
2008
C|X
World)W
ar)IIIOptional)side
Political)Enemies
Near)futureAS[C],)EU[E]
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
71
Full-S
pectru
m-
Warrio
r:-Ten-
Hammers
2006
C|P|X
Regime)Change
Protagonist)(sev.)Terrorists
Modern
AS[W])"Zekistan"
Fictional3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Strategy)A)RTSTactical)W
argame
72
Ghost-S
quad
2007
NCounterterrorism
ProtagonistTerrorists
Cold)War
Undefined3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingArcade)Shooter
73
Hammer-&
-Sickle
2005
CStabilization
AntagonistPolitical)Enem
iesCold)W
arGerm
any)(West)
Isometric
3DPhotorealistic
Strategy)A)TBSTactical)W
argame
74
Heavy-Fire
:-
Afghanistan
2011
C|P|N
CounterterrorismProtagonist
TerroristsModern
Afghanistan3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingArcade)Shooter
75
Heavy-Fire
:-Black-
Arm
s2011
NCovert)Ops
ProtagonistCrim
inalsModern
AM[S]
Fictional1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingArcade)Shooter
75
YearPlatform
Intervention)TypeUS-Role
US-Adversary
PeriodLocation
SpecialPerspective
DStylisation
GenreSubgenre
Game-N
ame
76Heavy-Fire:-Shattered-Spear
2013C|P|X
CounterterrorismProtagonist
TerroristsModern
Iran3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingArcade)Shooter
77Heavy-Fire:-Special-Operations
2010N
CounterterrorismProtagonist
TerroristsModern
AS[W]
Fictional3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingArcade)Shooter
78Iron-M
an2008
C|P|X|NRegim
e)ChangeEm
ployerTerrorists
Modern
Afghanistan3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingActionAAdventure
79Joint-Task-Force
2006C
Regime)Change
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesModern
Somalia,)Bosnia,)Afghanistan,)
Colombia,)Iraq
Isometric
3DPhotorealistic
Strategy)A)RTSTactical)W
argame
80Just-Cause
2006C|P|X
Regime)Change
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesModern
AM[E])"San)Esperito"
Fictional3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingActionAAdventure
81Just-Cause-2
2010C|P|X
Regime)Change
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesModern
AM[E])"Panau"
Fictional3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingActionAAdventure
82Made-M
an:-Confessions-of-the-Blood
2006C|P
Warfare
ProtagonistCrim
inalsCold)W
arVietnam
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
ActionAAdventure
83Masters-of-the-
World
2013C
Warfare,)Covert)O
psProtagonist
Political)Enemies
Modern
Worldw
ideTopADow
n2D
StylizedProcess)A)Managem
entGovernm
ent)Sim
84Medal-of-Honor
2010C|P|X
Regime)Change
ProtagonistTerrorists
Modern
Afghanistan1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFPS
85Medal-of-Honor:-
Warfighter
2012C|P|X
CounterterrorismProtagonist
TerroristsModern
Pakistan,)Yemen,)Som
alia,)Philippines,)Dubai,)Spain,)UAE
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
86Men-of-W
ar:-Vietnam
2011C
Warfare
Protagonist)(sev.)Political)Enem
iesCold)W
arVietnam
Isometric
3DPhotorealistic
Strategy)A)RTSTactical)W
argame
87Mercenaries-2:-
World-in-Flam
es2008
C|P|XWarfare
Possible)employer
Political)Enemies
Modern
Venezuela3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingActionAAdventure
88Mercenaries:-
Playground-of-Destruction
2005P|X
Regime)Change
Possible)employer
Political)Enemies
Modern
N.)Korea3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingActionAAdventure
89Metal-Gear-Solid-
4:-Guns-of-the-Patriots
2008P
Covert)Ops
AlliedPolitical)Enem
iesModern
EU[E],)AS[W],)AF[N],)AM
[S]1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingStealth)Gam
e
90Metal-Gear-Solid-
V:-Ground-Zeroes2014
C|P|XCovert)O
psAntagonist
Political)Enemies
Cold)War
Cuba1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFPS
91Naval-W
ar:-Arctic-Circle
2012C
Warfare)(Naval)
Protagonist)(sev.)Political)Enem
iesNear)future
N)Atlantic)Ocean,)Arctic)O
cean,)Baltic)Sea
3PAClose2D
StylizedStrategy)A)RTS
Tactical)Wargam
e
92Neocolonialism
2013C
Other
Superpower
Political)Enemies
Modern
Worldw
ideTopADow
n2D
AbstractProcess)A)Managem
entGovernm
ent)Sim
93Operation-
Flashpoint:-Dragon-Rising
2009C|P|X
Regime)Change
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesModern
AS[N])"Skira")(Kiska)Fictional
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
94Operation-
Flashpoint:-Red-River
2011C|P|X
CounterterrorismProtagonist
Political)enemies
Modern
Tajikistan3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFPS
76
YearPlatform
Intervention)TypeUS-R
oleUS-A
dversaryPeriod
LocationSpecial
PerspectiveD
StylisationGenre
SubgenreGam
e-Nam
e
95Over-G
-Fighters2006
XCounterterrorism
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesNear)future
Worldw
ide3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Process)A)Sim
ulationFlight)Sim
96Ram
bo:-The-Video-
Gam
e2014
C|P|XCovert)O
psProtagonist
Political)Enemies
Cold)War
Vietnam,)Thailand,)Pakistan,)
Afghanistan3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingArcade)Shooter
97Red-O
cean2007
CCounterterrorism
ProtagonistTerrorists
Modern
Undefined)Ocean
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
98Resistance:-Fall-of-
Man
2006P
Covert)Ops
ProtagonistSupernatural
Modern
UK3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFPS
99Robert-Ludlum
's-The-B
ourne-Conspiracy
2008P|X
Covert)Ops
Employer
TerroristsModern
AFR,)Switzerland,)France,)
Greece3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingTPS
100Rogue-W
arrior2009
C|P|XCovert)O
psProtagonist
Political)Enemies
Cold)War
N.)Korea,)Russia
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
101Rulers-of-N
ations2010
CWarfare,)Covert)O
psProtagonist
Political)Enemies
Modern
Worldw
ideTopADow
n2D
StylizedProcess)A)Managem
entGovernm
ent)Sim
102Shellshock-2:-Blood-Trails
2009C|P|X
Warfare
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesCold)W
arVietnam
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
103Singularity
2010C|P|X
Covert)Ops
ProtagonistScience
Cold)War
AS[N],)KatorgaA12)(Russia)
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
104Sky-G
amblers:-A
ir-Suprem
acy2012
CWarfare)(Air)
Optional)side
Political)Enemies
Modern
Undefined1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFlight)Sim
105SO
COM-3-U
.S.-Navy-SEA
Ls2005
PCounterterrorism
ProtagonistTerrorists
Modern
Algeria,)Morocco)(?),)
Bangladesh,)Poland3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingTPS
106SO
COM-4-U
.S.-Navy-SEA
Ls2011
PStabilization
ProtagonistTerrorists
Modern
Malaysia
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
TPS
107SO
COM-U.S.-N
avy-SEA
Ls:-Confrontation
2008P
Warfare
Optional)side
Political)Enemies
Modern
Algeria,)Turkmenistan,)Alaska
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
TPS
108SO
COM:-U
.S.-Navy-
SEALs-Com
bined-Assault
2006P
Covert)Ops
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesModern
AS[C])"Adjikistan"Fictional
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
TPS
109Spec-O
ps:-The-Line2012
C|P|XCovert)O
psProtagonist
Rog.)Gvt.)ActivityModern
UAE3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingTPS
110Special-O
perations-Forces:-O
peration-Eagle's-Talon
2006C
CounterterrorismProtagonist
TerroristsModern
AS[W],)AF[N
]3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFPS
111Storm
:-Frontline-Nation
2011C
Warfare
Optional)side
Political)Enemies
Modern
EUR,)AF[N]
Isometric
2DStylized
Strategy)A)TBSStrategical)Wargam
e
112Strike-Fighters-2
2008C
StabilizationProtagonist
Political)Enemies
Cold)War
AS[W])"Dhim
ar",)"Paran"Fictional
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
Flight)Sim
113Strike-Fighters-2:-Vietnam
2009C
Warfare
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesCold)W
arVietnam
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
Flight)Sim
77
YearPlatfo
rmIntervention)Type
US-Role
US-Adversary
Perio
dLocatio
nSpecial
Perspectiv
eD
Stylisatio
nGenre
Subgenre
Game-Name
114Supreme-Ruler-
2010
2005
CWarfare
Optional)side
Political)Enemies
Modern
Worldw
ideTopADow
n2D
StylizedStrategy)A)RTS
Strategical)Wargam
e
115Supreme-Ruler-
2020
2008
CWarfare
Optional)side
Political)Enemies
Modern
Worldw
ideTopADow
n2D
StylizedStrategy)A)RTS
Strategical)Wargam
e
116Supreme-Ruler-
Ultim
ate
2014
CWarfare
Optional)side
Political)Enemies
Multiple
Worldw
ideTopADow
n2D
StylizedStrategy)A)RTS
Strategical)Wargam
e
117Supreme-Ruler:-
Cold-W
ar
2011
CWarfare
Optional)side
Political)Enemies
Modern
Worldw
ideTopADow
n2D
StylizedStrategy)A)RTS
Strategical)Wargam
e
118Syphon-Filte
r:-
Dark-M
irror
2007
PCovert)O
psProtagonist
Political)Enemies
Cold)War
Alaska,)Peru,)Bosnia,)Russia,)Poland,)Thailand
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
TPS
119Syphon-Filte
r:-
Logan's-Shadow
2010
PCounterterrorism
ProtagonistTerrorists
Cold)War
Indian)Ocean,)Azerbaijan,)Syria
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
TPS
120Take-On-
Helicopters
2011
CRegim
e)ChangeProtagonist
Political)Enemies
Modern
AS[C])"Takistan"Fictional
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticProcess)A)Sim
ulationFlight)Sim
121
Terro
rist-
Takedown-2:-U
S-
Navy-Seals
2008
CCounterterrorism
ProtagonistTerrorists
Modern
AS[W],)AF[N
]3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFPS
122Terro
rist-
Takedown-3
2010
CCounterterrorism
ProtagonistTerrorists
Modern
Somalia
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
123
Terro
rist-
Takedown:-C
overt-
Operatio
ns
2006
CCounterterrorism
ProtagonistTerrorists
Modern
Colombia
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
124
Terro
rist-
Takedown:-
Payback
2005
CCounterterrorism
ProtagonistTerrorists
Modern
AS[W],)AF[N
]1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingArcade)Shooter
125
Terro
rist-
Takedown:-W
ar-in
-
Colombia
2006
CCounterterrorism
ProtagonistTerrorists
Modern
Colombia
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
126The-Hell-in
-
Vietnam
2007
CWarfare
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesCold)W
arVietnam
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
127The-M
ark
2007
CCounterterrorism
ProtagonistTerrorists
Modern
UK3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFPS
128Theatre
-of-W
ar-3
:-
Korea
2011
CRegim
e)ChangeOptional)side
Political)Enemies
Cold)War
S.)Korea,)N.)Korea
Isometric
3DPhotorealistic
Strategy)A)RTSTactical)W
argame
129Tim
e-Crisis:-R
azing-
Storm
2010
PCounterterrorism
ProtagonistTerrorists
Near)future
AM[S]
Fictional3PAClose
3DStylized
Action)A)FightingArcade)Shooter
130Tom-Clancy's-
EndWar
2008
C|P|X
World)W
ar)IIIProtagonist
Political)Enemies
Near)future
Denmark,)EUR,)Russia
Isometric
3DPhotorealistic
Strategy)A)RTSTactical)W
argame
131Tom-Clancy's-
Ghost-R
econ-(W
ii)2010
NRegim
e)ChangeProtagonist
TerroristsModern
Norw
ay,)Russia1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingArcade)Shooter
132
Tom-Clancy's-
Ghost-R
econ-2:-
Summit-S
trike
2005
XRegim
e)ChangeProtagonist
TerroristsModern
Kazakhstan1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingTPS
78
YearPlatform
Intervention)TypeUS-Role
US-Adversary
PeriodLocation
SpecialPerspective
DStylisation
GenreSubgenre
Game-N
ame
133
Tom-Clancy's-
Ghost-Recon-Advanced-Warfighter
2006C|P|X
StabilizationProtagonist
Criminals
Modern
Mexico
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
TPS
134
Tom-Clancy's-
Ghost-Recon-Advanced-Warfighter-2
2007C|P|X
StabilizationProtagonist
Political)Enemies
Modern
Mexico
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
TPS
135Tom
-Clancy's-Ghost-Recon-Phantom
s2014
CCovert)O
psProtagonist
Political)Enemies
Near)future
Undefined
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
TPS
136Tom
-Clancy's-Ghost-Recon:-Future-Soldier
2012C|P|X
Regime)Change
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesNear)future
Nicaragua,)Bolivia,)Zam
bia,)Nigeria,)Pakistan,)Russia,)
Barent's)Sea,)Kazakhstan1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingTPS
137Tom
-Clancy's-H.A.W
.X2009
C|P|XWarfare)(Air)
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesNear)future
Mexico,)Brazil
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
Flight)Sim
138Tom
-Clancy's-H.A.W
.X-22010
C|P|X|NWarfare
Protagonist)(sev.)Political)Enem
iesNear)future
Russia3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFlight)Sim
139Tom
-Clancy's-Rainbow
-Six:-Critical-Hour
2006X
CounterterrorismProtagonist
TerroristsModern
S.)Africa,)Algeria,)Netherlands,)
UK,)France,)Spain
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
140Tom
-Clancy's-Rainbow
-Six:-Lockdow
n2005
C|P|X|NCounterterrorism
ProtagonistTerrorists
Modern
Italy,)UK,)M
exico,)Brazil,)Ukraine
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
141Tom
-Clancy's-Rainbow
-Six:-Vegas
2006C|P|X
CounterterrorismProtagonist
TerroristsModern
Mexico
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
142Tom
-Clancy's-Rainbow
-Six:-Vegas-2
2008C|P|X
CounterterrorismProtagonist
TerroristsModern
France,)Costa)Rica1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFPS
143Tom
-Clancy's-Splinter-Cell:-Blacklist
2013C|P|X|N
CounterterrorismProtagonist
TerroristsModern
Libya,)UK,)Iran,)Cuba,)M
exico,)India,)Russia,)Guam
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
Stealth)Game
144Tom
-Clancy's-Splinter-Cell:-Chaos-Theory
2005C|P|X|N
Covert)Ops
ProtagonistRog.)Gvt.)Activity
Modern
Peru,)Japan,)N.)Korea,)S.)Korea,)
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
Stealth)Game
145Tom
-Clancy's-Splinter-Cell:-Conviction
2010C|X
Covert)Ops
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesModern
Malta,)Iraq,)Russia,)Azerbaijan
1st)Person3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
Stealth)Game
146Tom
-Clancy's-Splinter-Cell:-Double-Agent
2006C|P|X|N
Covert)Ops
ProtagonistRog.)Gvt.)Activity
Modern
Iceland,)Russia,)China,)Mexico,)
DR)Congo,)1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingStealth)Gam
e
79
YearPlatform
Intervention)TypeUS-Role
US-AdversaryPeriod
LocationSpecial
PerspectiveD
StylisationGenre
SubgenreGam
e-Name
147Top-Gun-(2010)
2010C|P
Warfare)(Air)
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesModern
Indian)Ocean3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFlight)Sim
148Top-Gun:-Hard-Lock
2012C|P|X
Regime)Change
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesCold)W
arAS[W
],)Persian)Gulf)(Sea)3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFlight)Sim
149Total-O
verdose:-A-Gunslinger's-Tale-in-M
exico2005
C|P|XCovert)Ops
ProtagonistCrim
inalsModern
Mexico
3PAClose3D
StylizedAction)A)Fighting
TPS
150Toy-Soldiers:-Cold-War
2011X
Warfare
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesCold)W
arUK,)Egypt,)France,)Vietnam
,)Cuba,)Korea
Isometric
3DStylized
Strategy)A)RTSTactical)W
argame
151Tropico-3
2009C|X
Regime)Change
Superpower
Political)Enemies
Cold)War
AM[E])"Tropico"
FictionalIsom
etric3D
PhotorealisticProcess)A)Managem
entGovernm
ent)Sim
152Tropico-4
2011C|X
Regime)Change
Superpower
Political)Enemies
Cold)War
AM[E])"Tropico"
FictionalIsom
etric3D
PhotorealisticProcess)A)Managem
entGovernm
ent)Sim
153Tropico-5
2014C|P|X
OtherSuperpow
erPolitical)Enem
iesMultiple
AM[E])"Tropico"
FictionalIsom
etric3D
PhotorealisticProcess)A)Managem
entGovernm
ent)Sim
154Tunnel-Rats:-1968
2009C
Warfare
ProtagonistPolitical)Enem
iesCold)W
arVietnam
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
155Vietcong-2
2005C
Warfare
Protagonist)(sev.)Political)Enem
iesCold)W
arVietnam
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
FPS
156Warfare
2008C
StabilizationOptional)side
Political)Enemies
Modern
S.)ArabiaIsom
etric3D
PhotorealisticStrategy)A)RTS
Tactical)Wargam
e
157Wargam
e:-AirLand-Battle
2013C
World)W
ar)IIIOptional)side
Political)Enemies
Cold)War
EU[N]Isom
etric3D
PhotorealisticStrategy)A)RTS
Tactical)Wargam
e
158Wargam
e:-European-Escalation
2012C
World)W
ar)IIIOptional)side
Political)Enemies
Cold)War
EU[N]Isom
etric3D
PhotorealisticStrategy)A)RTS
Tactical)Wargam
e
159Wargam
e:-Red-Dragon
2014C
World)W
ar)IIIOptional)side
Political)Enemies
Cold)War
AS[E]Isom
etric3D
PhotorealisticStrategy)A)RTS
Tactical)Wargam
e
160WinBack-2:-Project-
Poseidon2006
P|XCounterterrorism
ProtagonistTerrorists
Modern
Undefined)isl.3PAClose
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingTPS
161Wings-O
ver-Europe:-Cold-W
ar-Gone-Hot
2006C
World)W
ar)IIIOptional)side
Political)Enemies
Cold)War
Germany
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
Flight)Sim
162World-in-Conflict
2007C
World)W
ar)IIIProtagonist
Political)Enemies
Cold)War
France,)Russia1st)Person
3DPhotorealistic
Action)A)FightingFPS
163World-of-Tanks
2011C|P|X
Warfare
Optional)sidePolitical)Enem
iesCold)W
arUndefined
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
Vehicle)Sim
164World-of-
Warplanes
2013C
Warfare)(Air)
Optional)sidePolitical)Enem
iesCold)W
arUndefined
3PAClose3D
PhotorealisticAction)A)Fighting
Flight)Sim
165XCO
M:-Enem
y-Unknow
n2012
C|P|XStabilization
Protagonist)(sev.)Aliens
Near)future
Egypt,)S.)Africa,)Nigeria,)Australia,)China,)India,)Japan,)France,)Germ
any,)Russia,)UK,)Canada,)M
exico,)Argentina,)Brazil
Isometric
3DStylized
Strategy)A)TBSTactical)W
argame
80
REFERENCES Ludography
Alina Digital, Arms Race – the Cold War era, [PC game], Montreal, Alina Digital, 2017. BattleGoat Studios, Supreme Ruler Ultimate, [PC game], Ancaster, ON, BattleGoat Studios, 2014. Bohemia Interactive, Arma 2, [PC game], Prague, Bohemia Interactive a.s., 2009. Bohemia Interactive, Arma 3, [PC game], Prague, Bohemia Interactive a.s., 2013. EA DICE, Battlefield: bad company 2, [PC game], Redwood City, CA, Electronic Arts Inc., 2010. EA Los Angeles, Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3, [PC game], Redwood City, CA, Electronic
Arts Inc., 2008. EA Montreal, Army of Two, [Xbox 360 game], Redwood City, CA, Electronic Arts Inc., 2008. Eugen Systems, Act of War: Direct Action, [PC game], Paris, Atari SA, 2005. Firaxis Games, Civilization IV, [PC game], Novato, CA, 2K Games, Inc., 2005. Firaxis Games, Civilization V, [PC game], Novato, CA, 2K Games, Inc., 2010. Firaxis Games, Civilization Revolution, [Playstation 3 game], Novato, CA, 2K Games, Inc., 2008. Firaxis Games, XCOM: Enemy Unknown, [PC game], Novato, CA, 2K Games, Inc., 2012. Infinity Ward, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, [PC game], Santa Monica, CA, Activision Publishing,
Inc., 2009. Mad Doc Software, Empire Earth II, [PC game], Oakhurst, CA, Sierra Entertainment, In., 2005. Massive Entertainment, World in Conflict, [PC game], Oakhurst, CA, Sierra Entertainment, In.,
2007. U.S. Army, America's Army 3, [PC game], The Pentagon, VI, U.S. Army, 2009. Ubisoft Montreal, Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six: Vegas 2, [Xbox 360 game], Montreuil, Ubisoft
Entertainment SA, 2008. Ubisoft Montreal, Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory, [PC game], Montreuil, Ubisoft
Entertainment SA, 2005. Yager, Spec Ops: The Line, [PC game], Novato, CA, 2K Games, Inc., 2012. Internetography
AP, ‘“Great power competition”: Nato announces Atlantic command to counter Russia’, 5 May
2018, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/05/great-power-competition-nato-announces-atlantic-command-to-counter-russia, (accessed 6 September 2018).
Armed Assault Wiki, [website], 2018, http://armedassault.wikia.com/wiki/Armed_Assault_Wiki, (accessed 6 September 2018).
Battlefield Wiki, [website], 2018, http://battlefield.wikia.com/wiki/Battlefield_Wiki, (accessed 6 September 2018).
Bohemia Interactive, Arma 3, [website], 2018, https://arma3.com/, (accessed 6 September 2018). Bohemia Interactive, ‘New name for main island in Arma 3’, Bohemia Interactive Developer’s Blog,
[website], 1 February 2013, https://www.bohemia.net/blog/new-name-for-main-island-in-arma-3, (accessed 6 September 2018).
Darke, D., ‘The ruins I saw in Syria stand as a rebuke to western inaction’, The Guardian, 1 May 2018, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/01/syria-rebuke-western-inaction-military-intervention-assad, (accessed 6 September 2018).
The digital museum – Assassin’s Creed Origins discovery tour – Extra Credits, [online video], 9 May 2018, Extra Credits, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hp1DgRCEBDA, (accessed 6 September 2018).
81
kostaatanasov [username], ‘A vacation on Altis - or - to Limnos and back again’, Bohemia Interactive Forums, [website], 8 November 2014, https://forums.bohemia.net/forums/topic/175155-a-vacation-on-altis-or-to-limnos-and-back-again/, (accessed 6 September 2018).
Matrix Games Ltd., ‘Command: modern air naval operations wargame of the year edition’, Matrix Games, [website], 2014, http://www.matrixgames.com/products/483/details/Command:. Modern.Air.Naval.Operations.Wargame.of.the.Year.Edition, (accessed 6 September 2018).
Polygon Staff, ‘Jail time: how two Arma 3 developers were arrested in Greece’, Polygon, 2013, https://www.polygon.com/2013/2/8/3968814/arma-3-developers-arrested-for-spying-on-military-in-greece, (accessed 6 September 2018).
Sampathkumar, M., ’Donald Trump ”very proud” after dropping ”mother of all bombs” on Afghanistan’, The Independent, 13 April 2017, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/ donald-trump-moab-us-bomb-afghanistan-mother-of-all-response-statement-a7683221.html, (accessed 6 September 2018).
Sarkar, S., ‘“Arma 3” banned in Iran’, Polygon, https://www.polygon.com/gaming/2012/9/19/ 3357600/arma-3-banned-in-iran, (accessed 6 September 2018).
Smith, G., ‘Have you played… Battlefield: Bad Company 2’, Rock Paper Shotgun, 20 October 2016, https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2016/10/20/have-you-played-battlefield-bad-company-2/, (accessed 6 September 2018).
UNSD, ‘Methodology: standard country or area codes for statistical use (M49)’, United Nations Statistics Division, 2018, https://unstats.un.org/unsd/methodology/m49/, (accessed 6 September 2018).
Wright, R., ‘Trump drops the mother of all bombs on Afghanistan’, The New Yorker, 14 April 2017, https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/trump-drops-the-mother-of-all-bombs-on-afghanistan, (accessed 6 September 2018).
Bibliography
Aarseth, E. J., Cybertext: perspectives on ergodic literature, Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press,
1997. Allen, R., ‘The unreal enemy of America’s Army’, Games and culture, vol. 6, no. 1, 2011, pp. 38-60. Anthropy, A., Rise of the videogame zinesters: how freaks, normals, amateurs, artists, dreamers, dropouts,
queers, housewives, and people like you are taking back an art form, New York, Seven Stories Press, 2012.
Bal, M., ‘Visual essentialism and the object of visual culture’, Journal of visual culture, vol. 2, no. 1, 2003, pp. 5-23.
Barthes, R., Image text music, trans. S. Heath, London, Fontana Press, 1977. Barthes, R., Mythologies, trans. A. Lavers, London, Vintage Classics, 2009 (1957). Bell, P., ‘Content analysis of visual images’, in T. van Leeuwen, & C. Jewitt (eds.), Handbook of
visual analysis, London, SAGE, 2001, pp. 92-118. Blum, W., Killing Hope: US military and CIA interventions since World War II, London, Zed Books,
2003. Chomsky, N., Deterring democracy, London, Verso, 1991. Collins, K., Game Sound: An Introduction to the History, Theory and Practice of Video Game Music and
Sound, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 2008. Conrad, J., Heart of darkness, New York, Broadview Press, 1995 (1889). Dyer-Witheford, N. & de Peuter, G., Games of empire: global capitalism and video games, Minneapolis,
University of Minnesota Press, 2009. Egenfeldt-Nielsen, S., Smith, J.H., and Tosca, S.P., Understanding video games: the essential introduction,
2nd edn., New York, Routledge, 2013. Elkins, J., Visual studies: a sceptical introduction, New York, Routledge, 2003. Fernández-Vara, C., Introduction to game analysis, New York, Routledge, 2015.
82
Festl, R., Scharkow, M. & Quandt, T., ‘Militaristic attitudes and the use of digital games’, Games and culture, vol. 8, no. 6, 2013, pp. 392-407.
Foucault, M., Discipline and punish: the birth of the prison, trans. A. Sheridan, London, Penguin, 1977 (1975).
Foucault, M., History of sexuality: volume 1, an introduction, trans. R. Hurley, New York, Vintage Books, 1978 (1976).
Frasca, G., ‘Lugology meets narratology: similitudes and differences between (video)games and narrative’, originally published in Finnish in Parnasso, vol. 3, 1999, pp. 365-371, http://www.ludology.org/articles/ludology.htm, (accessed 6 September 2018).
Hall, S., ‘The spectacle of the “other”’, in S. Hall (ed.), Representation, 2nd ed., London, SAGE, 2013, pp. 215-287.
Hitchens, M., Patrickson, B. & Young, S., ‘Reality and terror, the first-person shooter in current day settings’, Games and culture, vol. 9, no. 1, 2014, pp. 3-29.
Höglund, J., ‘Electronic empire: orientalism revisited in the military shooter’, Game studies, vol. 8, no. 1, 2008, http://gamestudies.org/0801/articles/hoeglund, (accessed 6 September 2018).
Jay, M., ‘Scopic regimes of modernity’, in H. Foster (ed.), Vision and Visuality, Seattle, Bay Press, 1988, pp. 3-23.
Jay, M., ‘Scopic regimes of modernity revisited’, in I. Heywood & B. Sandwell (eds.), The handbook of visual culture, London, Bloomsbury, 2011, pp. 103-114.
Jenkins, H., ‘Game design as narrative architecture’, in N. Wardrip-Fruin & P. Harrigan (eds.), First person: new media as story, performance and game, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 2004.
Juul, J., Half-real: video games between real rules and fictional worlds, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 2011. Jørgensen, K., ‘The positive discomfort of Spec Ops: the line’, Game studies, vol. 16, no. 2, 2016. Kane, T., Global U.S. troop deployment, 1950-2005, Washington, D.C., The Heritage Center for Data
Analysis, 2006. Kirkpatrick, G., Aesthetic theory and the video game, Manchester, Manchester University Press, 2011. Machin, D. & van Leeuwen, T., ‘Computer games as political discourse: the case of Black hawk
down’, Journal of language and politics, vol. 4, no. 1, 2005, pp. 119-141. Metz, C., ‘From the Imaginary Signifier’, in L. Braudy & M. Cohen (eds.), Film theory and criticism:
introductory readings, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2009, pp. 694-710. Mirzoeff, N., The right to look: a counterhistory of visuality, Durham, NA, Duke University Press, 2011. Mirzoeff, N., ‘What is visual culture?’, in Nicholas Mirzoeff (ed.), The visual culture reader, 3rd ed.,
London, Routledge, 2013, pp. 3-13. Mitchell, W. J. T., ‘Imperial Landscape’, in W. J. T. Mitchell (ed.), Landscape and power, 2nd ed.,
Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2002a, pp. 5-34. Mitchell, W. J. T., ‘Introduction’, in W. J. T. Mitchell (ed.), Landscape and power, 2nd ed., Chicago,
University of Chicago Press, 2002b, pp. 1-4. Mitchell, W. J. T., ‘Showing seeing: a critique of visual culture’, Journal of visual culture, vol. 1, no. 2,
2002c, pp. 165-181. Monaco, J., How to read a film: movies, media, multimedia, 3rd ed., Oxford, Oxford university press,
2000. Mukherjee, S., Videogames and postcolonialism: empire plays back, London, Palgrave Macmillan, 2017. Murray, S., On video games: the visual politics of race, gender and space, London, I.B. Tauris, 2018. Nitsche, M., Video game spaces: image, play, and structure in 3D worlds, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press,
2008. Panofsky, E., Meaning in the Visual Arts, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1982. Parlett, D., The oxford history of board games, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1999. Payne, M. T., ‘Marketing military realism in Call of Duty 4: modern warfare’, Games and culture,
vol. 7, no. 4, 2012, pp. 305-327. Postigo, H., ‘Of mods and modders: chasing down the value of fan-based digital game
modifications’, Games and culture, vol. 2, no. 4, 2007, pp. 300-313.
83
Rose, G., Visual methodologies: an introduction to researching with visual materials, 4th ed., London, SAGE, 2016.
Said, E. W., Culture and imperialism, London, Chatto & Windus, 1993. Said, E. W., ‘Invention, memory, and place’, in W. J. T. Mitchell (ed.), Landscape and power, 2nd ed.,
Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2002, pp. 241-259. Salazar Torreon, B., Instances of Use of United States Armed Forces Abroad, 1798-2017, Washington,
D.C., Congressional Research Center, 2017. Saleem, M. & Anderson, C. A., ‘Arabs as terrorists: effects of stereotypes within vioent contexts
on attitudes, perceptions, and affect’, Psychology of violence, vol. 13, no. 1, 2013, pp. 84-99. Salen, K. & Zimmerman, E., Rule of play: game design fundamentals, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press,
2004. Schulzke, M., ‘Rethinking military gaming: America’s Army and its critics’, Games and culture, vol.
8, no. 2, 2013, pp. 59-76. Sicart, M., The ethics of computer games, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 2009. Šisler, V., ‘Digital Arabs: representation in video games’, European journal of cultural studies, vol. 11,
no. 2, 2008, pp. 203-219. Skaff Elias, G., Garfield, R. & Gutschera, K. R., Characteristics of games, Cambridge, MA, MIT
Press, 2012. Sparrow, R., Harrison, R., Oakley, J. & Keogh, B., ‘Playing for fun, training for war: can popular
claims about recreational video gaming and military simulations be reconciled?’, Games and culture, vol. 13, no. 2, 2018, pp. 174-192.
Tuan, Y.-F., ‘Sign and Metaphor’, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, vol. 68, no. 3, 1978, pp. 363-372.
Vine, D., Base nation: how U.S. military bases abroad harm America and the world, New York, Metropolitan books, 2015.
Weiner, T., Legacy of ashes: the history of the CIA, New York, Anchor Books, 2008. Wood, L. A., Kroger, R. O., Doing discourse analysis: methods for studying action in talk and text,
London, SAGE, 2000. Woods, S., Eurogames: the design, culture and play of modern European board games, Jefferson, McFarland
& Company, 2012.