Read on Twitter
The take “This game is apolitical, actually” has always been nothing but asinine and ludicrous. Taking an apolitical stance is, in fact, taking a political stance.
So imagine how ridiculous it is for the creators of a game based on real-life war crimes to claim ‘apolitical.’
https://twitter.com/polygon/status/1361359661820239877
So imagine how ridiculous it is for the creators of a game based on real-life war crimes to claim ‘apolitical.’
https://twitter.com/polygon/status/1361359661820239877
We’re talking about a city where US Armed Forces used thermobaric weaponry (strongly suspected to be white phosphorus) and at first denied using them before retracting the denial and admitting to using it as an offensive on Falluja.
The game could never be apolitical.
The game could never be apolitical.
As George Monibot pointed out fifteen years ago, “the use of chemical weapons was a war crime within a war crime within a war crime. Both the invasion of Iraq and the assault on Falluja were illegal acts of aggression.” https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/nov/22/usa.iraq1
And let’s just put this to bed once and for all: you don’t get to have vidya without politics in it.
The creation of a video game is a political process as well as a creative one. Art imitates life and vice versa. Virtually every text - fictional or non-fiction - is political.
The creation of a video game is a political process as well as a creative one. Art imitates life and vice versa. Virtually every text - fictional or non-fiction - is political.
When I became a man, I put away childish things. That includes acting like claims of “free speech” and “apolitical” are akin to some magic eraser to take away all the things you wish weren’t active elements or a shield to deflect any and all criticism you don’t want to deal with.
