Taliban Fighter Ban

                In Sulzberger’s article, “Combat Game Goes Too Far For Military”, he begins by recognizing the graphical improvements of military games throughout the past several years.  These video games are increasingly becoming for realistic.  Sgt. First Class Brian Hampton stated, “It brings back a real reminder of what it actually felt like to be out there.”  Video game creators can get this knowledge and provided depth because they are granted access to military facilities and are able to interview combat veterans.  With the new version of Call of Duty, players were granted the ability to play as Talaban fighters.  This caused a ruckus among military soldiers.  As expected, there were mixed reactions to the ban.  Some soldiers simply saw it as a form of entertainment.  Others, however, found the new game insensitive.  “You know how many of my friends have been killed by the Taliban?”  Sergeant Schober asked.  “One of my friends was sniped in the head by them.  That’s something you want to have fun with?”  As a multiplayer video game, the game mechanics rule that somebody has to be the “bad guy”.  Toward the end of the article, Sulzberger states that some of the soldiers that supported the game’s ban from the military still intended to purchase the game.  I, personally, could definitely see the problems with releasing this game to the military and the insensitivity issues that come along with it.  I think that, like other games of its kind, an option setting should be made available to play as the Taliban fighter.  As long as you have the choice and it is not forced upon the player to be “the bad guy”, I don’t see a problem with this.

                What do you think about the Taliban fighter issue?  It was stated in class that the option no longer exists, but do you think this was a mistake by the game developers?  Or, is the country too sensitive about these issues and should simply accept it as a game offering a global viewpoint?