ethical questions?

[malika]

Im curious about this though...it might be somewhat of a more serious matter. But are you going to include stuff like the deathcamps/swastikas/etc in this game as well. For example scenarios in which the Americans liberate a death camp or something? Or will you try to keep this game "friendly" for younger players as well?

[Darkson]

I had to sit back and think of the best way to answer this question. I do not want to glorify anything that was done to people during our history that was inhumane nor do I want symbols of hate to be thought of as "cool". This is a GAME set in another world and time this is to be fun. We at Darkson Designs do not wish to promote any political views of ideology that reinforce hatred toward any race or ethnic background. Things will be implied sometimes in stories but will not be a focal point. I hope this answers your question.

Robert

[malika]

Okay fair enough, I can understand what you are saying. So it will be similar to lot of the WWII (computer)games that are out there, just focus on the war and not on the political ideologies.

[Darkson]

I wanted to touch on this again to see what the general feel is on this subject. I don't want this to turn in to a huge political debate. What I want to know is how do you feel about including historical Villains, Events and symbols. I was thinking it was not such a good idea to call certain parts of the German factions Nazis but that someone brought up a point that by just avoiding that part of "History" was not a good thing to do either. What is your general feeling about this.

Cheers,
Robert

Play nice

[malika]

Well the problem with Nazi iconography is that you wouldnt be able to sell your game in Germany and some other European countries. Personally I dont really mind if you use the names and the icons, but perhaps you should try to find more info on these laws in Europe for Nazi iconography.

[kousa]

i think that the systematic killing at the concentration camps could be left out.

why?
because i personally think that the endlösung (correctly written?) was taken to use because the germans saw that they were losing and wanted to make damage and change something before they bited the dust.
and what i have understood from this game's background, germany ain't yet going down, and so is no need for the endlösung.

still prisoner camps with harsh conditions would suit for the background, but no systemical killing at such places.

and for the iconography, yeah, in some places nazi iconography could be used (such as seremonial banners), but just not overuse it

thought for the moment: you cannot change the past ( )

[malika]

Like I said try to find some info on laws regarding Nazi iconography, its not that free all over Europe.

because i personally think that the endlösung (correctly written?) was taken to use because the germans saw that they were losing and wanted to make damage and change something before they bited the dust.

The termination of Gypsies, homosexuals, handicapped, jews, communists, etc was something that the Nazis were preaching form the beginning, it was only after a while that they found an "effective" way of doing this. But yeah it might be handy to keep this out, or vaguely mention something in the background that they wanted everybody who was "inferior" to be terminated while not really going into whats inferior or not.

still prisoner camps with harsh conditions would suit for the background, but no systemical killing at such places.

That and the concentrationcamp can stay, however stay away from mass termination camps such as Auswitz (sp?)

[xeoran]

Its there, we say its there but we dont go into detail. We should keep all the various horrible things EVERYONE did (Allies testing nukes on their soldiers, German extermination plans, Soviet gulags etc. We dont need to mention Aushwitz unless a character comes from there, we mention policies in passing but we talk about them only as required backround or because somehow this impacts on the war. So we might mention a member of the German government as minister for extermination or a resistance fighter as having escaped from a camp. We could also rename the camps (ie Camp 12 is Auschwitz but because we only give general direction (in southern Poland) it doesnt have to be.). And so on. We also need to know that not everyone is like this- so while in the Japanese backround section we might have a blurb about Japs killing Aussies in the camps then a short story featuring a dying Jasp who knows it, giving his rations to the American who is wounded and gave him the mortal wound. Etc. We4 should also include historical figures but we dont need to say much (who doesnt know Goebbels etc). Its there, we mention it but we dont go into detail.

I'd also say this game should be 12+. After all WW2 itself shouldnt be for kids. It should be adult enough but we dont need to ram the point home. Subtelty is the key.

Swastikas should be painted on, not part of the model itself.

[skorzeny]

I don't think it could really be avoided, but I feel that employing any sort of 'purpose' to the Final Solution beyond the ethnic and idealogical cleansing envisioned by Hitler, Himmler and Heydrich is treading on very shaky ground. Perhaps the best way to discuss it would be a simple 'disclaimer' in the background section about the Holocaust and explaining why such sensitive material is being side-stepped in a way. Not ignored, that would be just as wrong as 'justifying' it as some insane SS plot to open a doorway into Hell or something, but simply not a part of the background that is actually delved into.

Atrocities are something that shouldn't be ignored, but, for better or worse, they seem more palatable when couched in terms of POWs and political prisoners rather than hideous ethnic cleansing. Avoiding the issue altogether would place the Nazis, the Japanese and the Soviets on the same moral ground as the Americans and British and I really think that would be extremely wrong. The evil side needs to be shown for what it is, and there is no better way of showing that than in their callous view toward human life. I think everyone can agree that the political philosophies and their execution by the Nazis, Soviets and Tojo's militarists would qualify as evil.

On the Nazis vs Germans front, I see a very big difference between these two terms. A Nazi is probably a German (although there were Nazi party offshoots in countries like Hungary, Albania and even Lithuania) but a German is not necesarily a Nazi. When discussing armed forces like the Wehrmacht or Kriegsmarine, or even the normal German citizen, calling them Germans would be more appropriate than actually calling them Nazis (indeed, early on, memebers of the army were not allowed to belong to any political party, even the Nazis). Groups such as the SS, Hitler Jugend, SD and Gestapo would certainly qualify as being labeled Nazis since the political ideaology is a very big part of what makes them who they are. I would make the same distinction between a Russian and a Soviet - your average slob who is handed a rifle at Stalingrad is a Russian, the NKVD butchers mowing them down when they retreat are Communists or Soviets. I don't think deliberately avoiding use of the term 'Nazi' would be wise, but I think a very clear distinction in regards to how it is used would be.

[xeoran]

Well put Skorenzy. And of course you must distinguish between members of the party (be it Communist or Nazi) amd those who actually believe. After all many jobs were ony available to those who joined the party.

[skorzeny]

There's an old expression out here: 'You ride with outlaws, you hang with outlaws'. I don't have a great deal of sympathy for men who, out of expediency, join a perverted political party. In Germany, at least, there was always the option of 'running away' to the military like Baron von der Heydte did. Without the many who don't believe but still support, the few who do believe would never be able to prosper. Besides, I think one would be hard pressed to find a member of the NKVD who wasn't a frothing at the mouth communist psycho. I put better odds on bagging sasquatch.

[xeoran]

Yes but say you lived in Russia or Germany and were a teacher- if you dont join the Communist/Nazi party you cant remain as one. And it costs nothing, hell think tp the Korean war when thousands joined parties (particually the Communist) in order to be given free food. Plus in Russia- there was no alternative, sometimes you joined or you died. I have sympathy for them. After all not everyone can join the military or wants to. That said the NKVD is most definately very Communist (as were the SS).

[skorzeny]

It is an ugly question, to be sure, but the simple fact is that if enough people stand up against something, it gets shot down. Hence, anyone who joined the Nazi or Communist party was, in however small a way, part of the problem. Certainly their reasons for joining were far removed from genocidal anti-Judaismus or psychotic Marxism, but in the end, the net result was the same. Think about how many men must have joined the Nazis from utterly innocent reasons like you have illustrated and later found themselves a direct participant in the Final Solution. One of the leaders of an Einsatzgruppe in Russia wasn't a fervant Nazi, he joined so he could get a civil service job. That didn't really matter in the end, he became part of a murderous politcial institution and in the most extreme example he became a frontline triggerman.

I say it is an ugly question because I doubt if any of us has ever been placed in a position where we had to make that kind of choice. No man truly knows the quality of his moral fortitude until it is put to the test. Given the same conditions perhaps any one of us could have joined ranks with the Nazis or the Stalinists. But I don't think that would make it any easier to live with.

I don't have sympathy for men who abandoned their moral principles, their personal ideals and beliefs to follow ruthless regimes like the Nazis. I do pity them, but it isn't quite the same thing.

[xeoran]

Sure but people lack the political conciousness to all stand up- at the same time. That would require organisation too. More than that the problem is that implicates all members of a party, no matter their views in anyhting done or caused as a result of the regime they support- hence to use a recent example Republican party members are responsible for Iraq, Abu Ghraib etc. As for moral principles, well I'm always suspicious of them until soene tewsts them at the point of a gun. The truth is very few people have that moral firmness.

[malika]

Hmm like Darkson feared this is slowly turning into a political debate