Operation Sealion (et al)...with a twist
- Thread starter M79
- Start date
Not implausible, you can play Axis in most World War 2 shooters. Very few triple a shooters allow you to play Axis, although it would be interesting to play a game from the Axis POV. Even more interesting if it was Axis during the losing years.
The Nazis did set the standards for sheer evil on an industrial scale. But were they so much worse than the Soviets under Stalin, or Imperial Japan 1931-45 that it is morally wrong to play the Nazis but not these sides in wargames?
What about earlier conflicts? Should we be concerned about the worldviews of anyone wanting to play the Confederacy in ACW games or the British in the American War of Independence? Which side was morally right in the centuries long settlement of North America by Europeans at the expense of Native Americans? Or the colonial campaigns of 18th and 19th century Britain.
Lots more examples of course from other times and places.
I think unless we confine ourselves to recreating battles/wars where from our 21st century perspective there is little to choose morally between the participants (e.g. the Napoleonic Wars) then playing the Nazis occasionally as an intellectual challenge is Not reprehensible.
Although i might worry about someone obsessed with them or always taking their side ( or the Confederacy).
What about earlier conflicts? Should we be concerned about the worldviews of anyone wanting to play the Confederacy in ACW games or the British in the American War of Independence? Which side was morally right in the centuries long settlement of North America by Europeans at the expense of Native Americans? Or the colonial campaigns of 18th and 19th century Britain.
Lots more examples of course from other times and places.
I think unless we confine ourselves to recreating battles/wars where from our 21st century perspective there is little to choose morally between the participants (e.g. the Napoleonic Wars) then playing the Nazis occasionally as an intellectual challenge is Not reprehensible.
Although i might worry about someone obsessed with them or always taking their side ( or the Confederacy).
"Widely seen as morally reprehensible" by who? Certainly not the same world which more or less accepted the Clean Wehrmacht myth or the myth that Hitler lost WWII for Germany. And even then, plenty of anti-communists respected Stalin's side of WWII enough that they'd play them in a tabletop wargame or early computer strategy game.
I think all you'd have is European (mostly German/Austrian) censorship of tabletop games/early computer games which let you play as the Nazis which in other European markets and the US/North American market would be totally ignored. People in those countries always have had too much interest in the enemy their father/grandfather fought to not want to play as them in a game if given the chance.
I think one key difference is that regardless of whether you think the Wehrmacht was dirty or clean, actual combat is a universal human experience and war games have existed for thousands of years. Actual battles can be brutal or more civilized but combat is hell regardless, and you can interact on just that dimension.
The reason I think you don’t see this is that as far as I know, there’s not been any mainstream or even pretend edgelord but still available games that depict and glorify being an Eisensatzgruppen or Nanking soldier or a Unit 731 doctor or even a GTA like game about the appalling behavior of soldiers among civilians for example. Of course there probably are such things I just don’t know about but I don’t think they’re mainstream.
The reason I think you don’t see this is that as far as I know, there’s not been any mainstream or even pretend edgelord but still available games that depict and glorify being an Eisensatzgruppen or Nanking soldier or a Unit 731 doctor or even a GTA like game about the appalling behavior of soldiers among civilians for example. Of course there probably are such things I just don’t know about but I don’t think they’re mainstream.
Did you already know about the game Custer's Revenge ?
( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Custer's_Revenge )
I doubt this would ever happen considering these games come from the same societies where Nazi Germany is mocked and parodied in sketches, comedy films etc. It would be weird for Hogan’s Heroes to exist yet somehow it becomes anathema to play as the Nazis in strategy games especially when you can play as plenty of other awful countries. The people who play strategy games are clearly capable of separating fiction from reality for the most part. Actual demons from Hell could invade and turn Africa into a continental Nanking and you’d eventually be able to play as them in one game or another and watch sketches about them on SNL.
Last edited:
If its a board game one side has to play Germany or you don't have a game. One of the first and best PC strategy games from the 90s was Panzer General, in which you played a Panzer leader as he blitzed through Europe in scenarios leading up to the attack on Washington DC. The idea that Einsatzgruppen and the dystopia of Nazi occupation were following you never entered your mind. It was just a game. Grand Theft Auto simulates being an anti-social delinquent but that never stopped anybody playing it.
As far as the American Civil War is concerned, wargamers in my experience tend to have a very rose-tinted view of the Confederacy and idealise the esprit de corps and combat power of the Confederate soldiers. Anecdotal of course, but they seem to be emotionally involved in a way people who play the Axis powers don't.
As far as the American Civil War is concerned, wargamers in my experience tend to have a very rose-tinted view of the Confederacy and idealise the esprit de corps and combat power of the Confederate soldiers. Anecdotal of course, but they seem to be emotionally involved in a way people who play the Axis powers don't.
Last edited:
Lots of wargamers who play games like Johnny Reb in the US have ancestors---typically at the 3 or 4 greats grandfather level---that participated in the Civil War. I for one have ancestors who fought on opposite sides in the same battles and campaigns. That makes it a bit more real than playing battles where there's no comparably recent personal connection. Also, wargamers since the 70s have a lot of overlap with roleplaying gamers, so they tend to get into their side, sometimes in a somewhat over the top way.
Well... some questions I see on this site actually do border on the morally reprehensible, although the Rules and Guidelines steer us away, and the moderators police them. I usually don't read "How can we make <historical event x> more bloody?" threads, because they are no fun.
As long as everyone knows the Axis powers were bad guys I don't see a problem with playing as them. If it's PvP, someone has to play as the Axis, and making a non-PvP game is much harder if it's not a videogame.
Some of this could be connected to "my great grand daddy was in the Texas brigade". IE, people have an attachment to their own ancestors and histories, and for those with ancestors there it is understandable for them to want to emphasize the human side of the war.
Not that it's particularly or always justifiable, and certainly this is separate from the "lost cause" trope.
I generally agree, though some part of me can't quite approve of airport massacres in COD.
Good luck finding one....
Yeah, I think you put this well.