![]() The ICRC is suggesting that as in real life, these games should include virtual consequences for people's actions and decisions. ![]() Gamers should be rewarded for respecting the law of armed conflict and there should be virtual penalties for serious violations of the law of armed conflict, in other words war crimes. Our intention is not to spoil player's enjoyment by for example, interrupting the game with pop-up messages listing legal provisions or lecturing gamers on the law of armed conflict. We would like to see the law of armed conflict integrated into the games so that players have a realistic experience and deal first-hand with the dilemmas facing real combatants on real battlefields. The ICRC says it is now working directly with the developers of modern military simulations and the BBC report contains an interview with Marek Spanel of Bohemia Interactive, creator of the Arma series, who claims the studio's games will now be implementing the suggestions.Īrma 2: The Red Cross believes that as video games become ever more realistic, they should also adhere to international rules of warfare. The question is, how feasible are the ICRC's aims and will players really take on board the lessons about humanitarian law? It is difficult to imagine a Call of Duty or Battlefield title in which shooting a civilian leads to a mission where the player is detained in a military prison for several months before being tried and sentenced. But then if the consequences of illegal operations are subsumed into the gameplay mechanics – i.e. Shoot civilian, fail mission – the player will usually read these instances in ludic terms.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |