Recommended Reading

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

On a recommendation from somebody, I recently picked up a book called the "Manual of the Mercenary Soldier" by Paul Balor. I've found it an extremely interesting read, and despite being written in 1987 the ideas are all-too-relevant to the current political climate and the United States' out-of-control military-industrial complex.

 

It's not just a book about cleaning guns or sneaking through the jungle. It's a book about government, ethics, terrorism, travel, international relations, and yes, spies. Definitely good material to get you thinking during the wait for AP.

[Patrick K Mills]

A couple of my major inspirations while working on my section of the game (which may or may not change substantially now that I'm no longer there, but I think they will turn out well.)

 

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9743.htm

 

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=the+...l=en&emb=0#

 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9219858826421983682

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0365737/

 

OK, so the last three aren't reading, but damn are they good. Plus The Power of Nightmares uses music from Brian Eno and the theme from Investigation of a Citizen Above Suspicion.

[Pop]

What are you up to now, Patrick K Mills. Drumming for Spinal Tap?

[Patrick K Mills]

What are you up to now, Patrick K Mills. Drumming for Spinal Tap?

 

Yeah it's a good gig.

 

<boom>

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

Well, I suppose I could expand the scope of the thread to include movies etc. ) Eisenhower fan I take it?

 

Syriana was pretty pimp.

 

Just sat down and watched "Why we fight," very well-done.

 

If that list is indicative of the overall tone of AP, we may have a winner.

[Patrick K Mills]

I don't know if that's really the tone of the game, it's certainly not that dour. I mean, fundamentally it's a game about shooting people in the face and stealing bombs and making deals with murderers. Virtually all games we play are, dare I use the phrase, murder simulators. That doesn't mean that they need to be stupid or encourage violence, or can't use virtual violence in the service of a greater virtual good.

 

But I'm getting off subject. Some of my inspirations for my section of the game, (which has, last I heard, gone to Brian Newland, who is a fantastic designer,) were the ignored warnings of Eisenhower and the teachings (or interpretations of the teachings) of Leo Strauss.

 

You could say that my section of the game is ironically dedicated to William Kristol.

 

I don't know if that will be conveyed by the final product or not, but I hope so. At the very least I think the game is going to be a lot of fun to play.

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

I mean, fundamentally it's a game about shooting people in the face and stealing bombs and making deals with murderers. Virtually all games we play are, dare I use the phrase, murder simulators. That doesn't mean that they need to be stupid or encourage violence, or can't use virtual violence in the service of a greater virtual good.

 

The problem I have with this is that most games' ideas of the greater good come off as naive and immature. Put simply, they reinforce the dehumanization and moralization practices that got us into this mess in the first place. I'm generally more interested in a game that lays no claim to the greater good and simply presents a complicated and multifaceted problem to the player. The core gameplay does not reinforce a particular ideology, but rather it's a journey of discovery and seeing the issue from all angles.

 

Such a game exists primarily in my imagination, though there are nods in the right direction. Certainly film doesn't shy away from this sort of approach.

 

That said, people certainly are willing to buy up "the greater good" like hotcakes, so perhaps a wise business move. Then again, the RPG market might be a more sophisticated audience than Joe the plumber.

[Patrick K Mills]

One of my goals in my zone was to try and present the player with two different "greater goods". Essentially the old railroad ethics question, but with a twist.

 

You are near the fork in a railroad. Aways from you there are five men working on track A, while one man works on track B, they all have ear protection on and can't hear the incoming train or your shouts. You look at the switch in the fork and realize that the train will soon arrive and take fork A, killing five men. You have the chance to divert the train to track B, but then you have taken responsibility for killing the one man. Is it justified to do so? Most people say yes, studies show that 90% of people polled are willing to pull the lever.

 

But then there is a more complex take on the question. In this one, you are on an overpass looking down on a trainyard. Five men are working on a track, and up the way a train is heading towards them. There is no way for them to get out of the way in time and you are nowhere near a switch to divert the train. The conductor has spotted them and hit the brakes, but it's not going to be enough- the train is still going to hit the five men unless something heavy can be put on the tracks to slow it down. You look around- nothing. Nothing except a fellow onlooker who happens to be, ahem, very large. With a hefty push you could toss him down to the track below, saving the five men. Do you do it? Polls show that only 10% of respondents say yes, even though it's the same math.

[Pop]

The lever allows for an allowed disconnect between the action and the consequence. But as The Milgram Experiment showed, if you've got a sufficiently justifying factor (and it doesn't take much, at least according to that experiment) people will be willing to take action even when the ill effects of said action were abundantly clear. We're saving the world in this game, are we not?

Edited November 4, 2008 by Pop

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

Ooh, getting fancy with the moral philosophy & cognitive psych. Consider yourself warned, I have a psych degree

 

What the two railroad examples show is that it's pretty hard to get the average person to embrace Kantian ethics (where the means matter) in making their decision. It is possible in extreme cases (such as having to kill somebody with your bare hands), but eh. The applied problem worth considering in video games is that the "disconnect" is built into the medium. The player isn't killing, per se, he's pushing a button.

 

But, this isn't a scientific experiment, it's a game. I'll be interested to see how that section turns out

[Wrath of Dagon]

You could say that my section of the game is ironically dedicated to William Kristol.

Well, I certainly hope there are William Kristol choices in the game, not just **** ones.

[pcrk2]

when did they start the development of the game? february 2006?

[Pop]

You could say that my section of the game is ironically dedicated to William Kristol.

Well, I certainly hope there are William Kristol choices in the game, not just **** ones.

So you hope that we can be utterly wrong about everything in-game?

 

Maybe Mike will have the opportunity to get repeatedly browbeaten on the Daily Show. That would be a nice minigame. NWN2 OC court case all over again.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Yes please, I'd love to be put on trial for disobeying orders and committing atrocities.

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092783/quotes

 

See second quote (bad language)

Edited November 5, 2008 by Wrath of Dagon

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

Since this has kind of turned into free-for-all recommendation thread, "Spy Game" is another great movie (IMO) that treads the middle ground between glamorized spies and the real deal.

[Pidesco]

See No Evil

 

I'd like it if AP took some inspiration from this book. Not very likely, of course, even if Obsidian mentioned Syriana in one of the previews.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Sounds like a really good book, I need to get it next time I buy books, thanks.

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

I'm not actually sure whether this is AP-relevant, but I just saw Street Kings again and it's still awesome. It has pretty much nothing to do with spies, though it does have moral ambiguity combined with good action sequences.

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

Also, it almost goes without saying that everybody should catch the 2-hour 24 special "Redemption" tonight.

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/thomas_..._for_peace.html

 

The pentagon's next big strategy, perhaps. The guy is also pretty entertaining to listen to.

[sayfolsom]

dearest OP: is that a non-fiction book?

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

dearest OP: is that a non-fiction book?

 

Indeed it is. Aside from for entertainment, I'd recommend it to any ex-servicemen looking to go into private military (of which I suspect we are about to have many, on an unrelated note).

[kuhlka]

I'm generally more interested in a game that lays no claim to the greater good and simply presents a complicated and multifaceted problem to the player. The core gameplay does not reinforce a particular ideology, but rather it's a journey of discovery and seeing the issue from all angles.

 

Yes.

[Walsingham]

dearest OP: is that a non-fiction book?

 

Indeed it is. Aside from for entertainment, I'd recommend it to any ex-servicemen looking to go into private military (of which I suspect we are about to have many, on an unrelated note).

 

When I was a young lad I had a mentor who was ex-merc. Very good guy. But he advised me against it. Ditto several senior NCOs of my acquaintance. Full of nutloops, and always on guard against getting ripped off.

[Tigranes]

But then there is a more complex take on the question. In this one, you are on an overpass looking down on a trainyard. Five men are working on a track, and up the way a train is heading towards them. There is no way for them to get out of the way in time and you are nowhere near a switch to divert the train. The conductor has spotted them and hit the brakes, but it's not going to be enough- the train is still going to hit the five men unless something heavy can be put on the tracks to slow it down. You look around- nothing. Nothing except a fellow onlooker who happens to be, ahem, very large. With a hefty push you could toss him down to the track below, saving the five men. Do you do it? Polls show that only 10% of respondents say yes, even though it's the same math.

 

Something that's quite often dealt with in anime, Patrick. Not saying it's cliche or unoriginal (pfff) - but it just reminds me of how hackneyed this kind of topic can be treated if one is not careful. (i.e. it's "human" to be horrified when struck with the proximity of what one has to do for the greater good, but 'sacrifice' is nevertheless needed to keep going, cry as you pull the trigger, etc.) It would be great to get a more mature exploration of the subject in AP.