The Russo-Georgian War was predicted by this game
This thing still leaves me dizzy, so expect awful thoughs.
I started replaying games from the 2000s last year and oh boy I was little prepared for it, the military propaganda and the crazy historical revision seem to be synonymous with any shooter that does not have a fancyful background. More or less a month after the 9 / 11 comes this ghost recon, taking seriously the narrative premise that in a future 2008 an ultra-nationalist group has seized power with plans to rebuild the Soviet Union. In 2008. in a game from 2001. Of course the glorious United States of America with the help of NATO prepare to avoid the resurrection of evil through breaches similar to those in the first Splinter Cell, but here is the catch: at an interactive level nothing sells soldiers as supermen capable of everything, nothing similar to those sequences of Medal of honor where we, a lone ranger, resist waves of, I don't know, enraged Japanese soldiers, here, a single round can permanently kill any member of the player's team , meaning that knowing the map and terrain and carefully considering each action is key to keeping Ghosts alive. In that sense, Ghost Recon dignifies, with hardly any script or interruptions, the approach and military action (I can't believe I'm writing this) although at the same time it positions the player as a complete god, being able to take control over any member of the squad at any time while you manage the rest through a fairly detailed in-game map, which creates critical distance between the player and the Ghosts. Maybe embodying a single soldier would have solved the problem, maybe it would have brought others to the table, but for me, going through so many soldiers through the game makes the attempt to dignify the efforts of the military by distancing them from the superhuman characterization that usually seeing oneself in video games like a lost of potential, and an interactive approach where I, as a player, return to being a divine entity, does not help either.I understand that back in 2001 this was an almost revolutionary idea, I understand why the game is how it is, and in theory it should have worked.
This thing still leaves me dizzy, so expect awful thoughs.
I started replaying games from the 2000s last year and oh boy I was little prepared for it, the military propaganda and the crazy historical revision seem to be synonymous with any shooter that does not have a fancyful background. More or less a month after the 9 / 11 comes this ghost recon, taking seriously the narrative premise that in a future 2008 an ultra-nationalist group has seized power with plans to rebuild the Soviet Union. In 2008. in a game from 2001. Of course the glorious United States of America with the help of NATO prepare to avoid the resurrection of evil through breaches similar to those in the first Splinter Cell, but here is the catch: at an interactive level nothing sells soldiers as supermen capable of everything, nothing similar to those sequences of Medal of honor where we, a lone ranger, resist waves of, I don't know, enraged Japanese soldiers, here, a single round can permanently kill any member of the player's team , meaning that knowing the map and terrain and carefully considering each action is key to keeping Ghosts alive. In that sense, Ghost Recon dignifies, with hardly any script or interruptions, the approach and military action (I can't believe I'm writing this) although at the same time it positions the player as a complete god, being able to take control over any member of the squad at any time while you manage the rest through a fairly detailed in-game map, which creates critical distance between the player and the Ghosts. Maybe embodying a single soldier would have solved the problem, maybe it would have brought others to the table, but for me, going through so many soldiers through the game makes the attempt to dignify the efforts of the military by distancing them from the superhuman characterization that usually seeing oneself in video games like a lost of potential, and an interactive approach where I, as a player, return to being a divine entity, does not help either.I understand that back in 2001 this was an almost revolutionary idea, I understand why the game is how it is, and in theory it should have worked.