Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: RickInVA

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: morvael
Omission is not falsification.
...
Being off by default it makes DC3 no different from all other games to date in this aspect. So it's an improvement.

Morvael, you lost me here... First, we are talking precisely about falsification, not omission.

While it is true that most wargames ignore the darker aspects of the war, by doing so they simply do not address it, not falsify it, as is the case here. If a game decides to address these issues, it should address them accurately, not in some sanitized, fantasy version.

76 I'm really not following you here at all. I don't personally know of any other game that includes anything about the atrocities of WWII. The fact that it is an option at all puts it above other games. So the fact that they have the standard option to be like all other games, with the "opt-in" option to include these unsavory facets seem perfectly appropriate to me.

I also don't understand at all where you are getting a "sanitized, fantasy version." The option is either off, and the game plays like any other game, that is, without these events, or it is on and includes them. Where is the fantasy, the falsity??

And while you can buy or not at your whim, I'm 100% confused about why the option being the way it is would have made you not buy. To punish Matrix for including such an interesting, controversial and non-PC topic in a game, or for not shoving it down everyone's throat?

+1

In my view, anything to whitewash history is a dishonor to those who gave their lives in the most important conflict in human history. I wish we could all do away with political correctness. Ignoring these issues will just cause them to happen again. But I understand why they did it. Welcome to 2015, where you have to watch what you say

ORIGINAL: NotOneStepBack

In my view, anything to whitewash history is a dishonor to those who gave their lives in the most important conflict in human history. I wish we could all do away with political correctness. Ignoring these issues will just cause them to happen again. But I understand why they did it. Welcome to 2015, where you have to watch what you say

Wargames, even this one, are all very sanitized versions of the whole thing in a lot of different ways. It's just there are different people wanting different things.

Rick, you raise some fair points. You're absolutely right that most games don't address these issues at all, and that Matrix, Vic, and Cameron are to be commended for coming out with a really innovative game (in general, not only with respect to these issues). And I'm certainly not asking for atrocities be included--as you point out, no other game has done so and there is no reason for this game to do so either.

But my response would be that:
1) Since the option is called "Germans follow Geneva Convention" (and not "Turn Off Atrocities", etc.), presumably whether or not the Germans follow the Geneva Convention has in-game effects--in other words, if the Germans follow the Geneva Convention, these issues are not simply ignored, as in most games, but the German player would be presented with a set of false, ahistorical, sanitized choices in which they scrupulously comply with the Geneva Convention.
2) If in fact turning on the Geneva Convention option actually turns off all decisions/messages regarding these type of issues, so that this game completely ignores them like all other games, then my various objections are withdrawn with one exception: the option is mislabeled and should be called something different (something like "Turn Off Atrocities"), because in this case it really doesn't matter if the Germans follow the Geneva Convention or not--these issues just aren't part of the game.
Why call this option "Geneva Convention" if in fact it has nothing to do with whether the Germans follow the Geneva Convention--you're just ignoring the whole set of issues. For example, can you imagine any of the other host of East Front games including a statement in the designer notes like "We have assumed that the Germans complied with the Geneva Convention" when in fact it doesn't matter, since it has no effect on gameplay?
3) Finally, as others have pointed out, the default option doesn't force you to do anything, so nothing is being forced down your throat--you don't like it, turn it off.
4) The reason I would not have bought it is that rather than this game being "non-PC", I consider changing a historical fact to avoid offending someone or another to be very PC.

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: BodyBag33
Does it matter if it's default or not?
Surely the important thing is, that you can have the more realistic option.

Actually, it does matter if it is default or not:
--as explained above, many players simply play with default options, whatever they are. So things like forum discussions and the majority of PBEM++ challenges will be based on this fantasy version of the East Front;
--moreover, lots of people play these games to immerse themselves in, and learn more about, history. Therefore deliberate falsifications of history should not be included as default options.

I think you have bought the wrong game,- this is not "WW2 Warcrimes Simulator 2015".
It's a wargame, and it does not try to tell the absolute truth about atrocities committed by ANY side.

If you want info about warcrimes by Germans in Russia, or by Russians in Germany, there is a lot of documentaries and books about that.

76mm, I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill here.

So.. much.. effort.

ORIGINAL: Panzeh
So.. much.. effort.

So.. little.. value. But thanks for the cool graphics demo.

ORIGINAL: BodyBag33

Does it matter if it's default or not?
Surely the important thing is, that you can have the more realistic option.

It is probably self-censorship, like not using the svastika-symbol.
Many people think that it's banned in Germany, but it's not. If you are using it in a historical context, it's fine.

Hi,

You are right about the historical context but computer games (such as DC: Barbarossa) would not count as such, as they would be considered ... well, games (doesn't matter that we players (oops [;)]) might call them "historical sims". So, offering DC:B in Germany with swastikas would be a felony under Federal German criminal law. Also, there are more countries worldwide that have similar rules: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post%E2%8 ... Nazi_flags

I think some are missing 76mm's point...perhaps deliberately? Its not about "effort" or "Molehills", its mainly about the default position. This can be changed fairly easily in a patch. I assume you would not have a problem with that?

I understand Matrix wants the largest audience possible for any game they are selling, however considering this genre, historical accuracy should always prevail over PCism. Give the PC crowd the option, but do not make their "sensitivity" the default.

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

I think some are missing 76mm's point...perhaps deliberately? Its not about "effort" or "Molehills", its mainly about the default position. This can be changed fairly easily in a patch. I assume you would not have a problem with that?

I understand Matrix wants the largest audience possible for any game they are selling, however considering this genre, historical accuracy should always prevail over PCism. Give the PC crowd the option, but do not make their "sensitivity" the default.

+ 1

I think there is merit in 76mm's argument. I think people who were affected by Nazi war crimes would actually take offence at Nazi'z being portrayed as good guys. More so than these perceived people who would take offence at the harsh realities of the war in the east.

The option of the clean war smacks of 'misinformation' about the true war. Some people with limited knowledge about the war, seeing the clean war as default, may well assume its the truth, or reinforce some warped view that existed in the first place.

IMO the default option should be the 'real' war. Clean war as an option. Though I would never use it.

ORIGINAL: Michael T

IMO the default option should be the 'real' war. Clean war as an option. Though I would never use it.

I agree completely.

Maybe its to make the game more sell-able in markets that require the removal of Swastikas.

I don't think it is fair to attack the game for making something optional that has been straight out missing from every other wargame - as others have pointed out.

Of course we share the prevailing opinion here that the horrible events and actions referenced by the events disabled by the Geneva Convention option should be part of a realistic simulation of operational concerns in Barbarossa - that's why we have included them. Personally I think they help raise awareness to the horrors of the war modelled, and the moral choices a commander of those times had to make, and if anything, I believe it pays respect to the victims, by not pretending these things didn't happen.


However, we cannot ignore the fact that this topic of war atrocities -however abstractly covered by the game- is a sensitive subject, and there must be strategy and war gamers out there who are interested in the more technical military-science related aspects of Barbarossa, who would be upset by facing these in-game events and the choices they must make in relation to them and would prefer to play without them.
This does not make them less interested in history or military. It is one of the valid choices one can make when facing such a sensitive and emotional subject.

Now, if we establish that there are players out there who would be upset by the coverage of this aspect of the war, then to me it makes perfect sense to have default settings that do not expose them to this aspect.
The only possible counter-argument for that is to try and forcefully expose them to it against their will, and I cannot find that justified.

ORIGINAL: Michael T

I think there is merit in 76mm's argument. I think people who were affected by Nazi war crimes would actually take offence at Nazi'z being portrayed as good guys. More so than these perceived people who would take offence at the harsh realities of the war in the east.

The option of the clean war smacks of 'misinformation' about the true war. Some people with limited knowledge about the war, seeing the clean war as default, may well assume its the truth, or reinforce some warped view that existed in the first place.

IMO the default option should be the 'real' war. Clean war as an option. Though I would never use it.

Certainly there is merit, I rarely have encountered a totally meritless argument. [:)]

In this case, however, I think that many people are reading something very unintended into the naming of the option, and I repeat, the option, of having certain unsavory realities of WWII included as events.

Consider the decisions the developers have to make. They have an idea to include certain elements in the game that are not normal to include. They feel that these elements would add to the immersion and uniqueness of the game. But, they understand that some players might find the content objectionable for a variety of reasons. So they decide to make the inclusion of these events optional. I bold that because they did not make the other choice, to make the exclusion of these events optional. As it is optional to include the events the default selection is to exclude them. I understand that reasonable people can disagree on which way that should work, but so long as the option either way is available I really don't see what difference it makes. I also very much doubt that the average purchaser of this game just plays the default settings. I tend to think the average would be, well, above average, hence this discussion in the first place.

Then the developers have to determine what to name the option. Now I happen to think that the developers came up with quite a good name in Geneva Convention. Selected means that the Geneva Convention is being honored, not selected means it isn't. My historical reason for thinking this is a good name is that Hitler specifically informed the military that the war against Russia was to be fought without the normal rules of war (Geneva Convention). He specifically declared that the Geneva Convention was not going to be honored. He could have specifically stated that it was. While simply stating that it was to be honored would be no guarantee of angelic behavior by the troops, this specific renunciation of the Convention, to me, makes the name and use of the option very reasonable.

That is how I see it. Reasonable people may disagree.

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14
I understand Matrix wants the largest audience possible for any game they are selling, however considering this genre, historical accuracy should always prevail over PCism. Give the PC crowd the option, but do not make their "sensitivity" the default.

I think "PCism" is just a buzzword people use to bash people who disagree with them. Your "sensitivity" about the default state of a button in a computer game is pretty evident.

Couldn't care less what the "default" is. Don't like it, just click the button and move on. Sheesh.

This isn't really about whether that button is clicked by default is it. I see where is says Geneva convention, but i don't see anything about a German clean war, is that in the manual? To be fair they did say it would be off by default. Default or not, whatever makes people happy.

ORIGINAL: elmo3

Couldn't care less what the "default" is. Don't like it, just click the button and move on. Sheesh.

Exactly. Like I said, a mountain out of a molehill.