Racism or Cultural Accuracy - Street Fighters Uniquely Cultural Roster

Hey everyone my last blog critique for my last assignment, next one ill be looking into whether who should be liable for excessive playing and the implications it has on our society anyway enjoy :).

Racism or Cultural Accuracy - Street Fighters Uniquely Cultural Roster

The Street  Fighter franchise has a plethora of fighters from everywhere in the world. The roster of fighters is very unique for a fighting game it reaches around the world and includes fighters from places such as the United states, Japan, Russia, India and more. The game does not hold back when it comes to creating people from those places in the world for example the fighter from India, his name is Dhalsim. He can blow flames, his win dance is that of an Indian dancer, and he is a yoga instructor, at the time of his creation around street fighter 2 the internet did not exist so this interpretation of what an Indian was pretty much became the norm. Is it right to say that this is acceptable? perhaps seeing that this over stereotyping did not only look at one portion of the world. Looking at Street Fighters evolution and understand why they made the choices they did with the characters and how their character creation has changed over time.

The racial look at street fighter 2 even begins right at the start of the game, in the opening a street fight breaks out between a white guy and a black guy fighting below a building where the white guy throws one punch and this knocks the black guy out. Could you say this was racist?, I think not if you look at it for what it is, it is simply two people fighting, their colour is truly irrelevant. However due to the backlash received, Capcom made a change in the next iteration of the game by changing it to two white guys fighting.

We can atleast say that Capcom heard of the complaint and took action to correct the issue even though you could argue there was no real issue to begin with. Characters like that though made people think that all Americans had American flag tattoo's on them and that they were all a part of the military. The stereotypes in this game are just a reflection of our society in those times. It was a common thought for people to think America then to think of America's army. Guile's stage is just a reflection of what people thought movies like top gun would have if it was a stage in a video game. The fighter jets all lined up with everyone lounging around having a good time. The other fighter from America Ken, he also had a familiar theme to his stage where there is a large boat with people standing about all looking generally happy to be there. Compare this to that of say Blanka's stage where the people look isolated you could understand as to why people thought that way.

Street Fighter 3 came along and brought with it a new cast that was just as diverse as Street Fighter 2, however it strayed away from stereotypes. The characters never stood out as much except the a few like Dudley whom was an intellectual boxer compared to the racially charged Balrog whom like it or not was based on Mike Tyson. This change in looking at fighters was a nice touch however the game felt like it lacked the personality that Street Fighter 2 had. The characters didnt have the same appeal and so the game did not do as well commercially. The look at culture that was in Street Fighter 2 really helped define the game for many players.

The people asked and Capcom answered, Street Fighter went back to its roots for Street Fighter 4 in regards to characters and design. Bringing back the old classics like Dhalsim that were such a hit in Street Fighter 2. They even created new characters that weren't so stereotypical the likes of C.Viper whom you can't really say has a nation however she is definitely a stereo typical spy with sex appeal. If there was ever a character that was a part of the Street Fighter 4 roster that could maybe offend people might be either El Fuerte or Hakan. Both are stereotypes, Hakan is a Turkish wrestler and El Fuerte is a Lucha Dore wrestler.

Though with both as above it could be stated that they are references to their source material. As we can see from the games that have come through the Street Fighter series its more to do with visually making their characters different enough to be able to allow them to have a sense individuality making the roster feel as though they have collected a cast that is from totally global standpoint. Can we see this series as racist? Maybe Street Fighter 2, however since then I would say that this game follows the stereotype tropes of people from different parts of the world.

References:

Leone, M. (2014). Street Fighter 2:An Oral History. Retrieved from: http://www.polygon.com/a/street-fighter-2-oral-history

Demby, G. (2014). 'Street Fighter II': Most Racist Nostalgic Video Game Ever?. Retrieved from: http://www.npr.org/blogs/codeswitch/2014/03/16/290119728/street-fighter-ii-most-racist-nostalgic-video-game-ever

Lo, V. (2001). The rise and fall of Street Fighter 2. Retrieved from: http://web.stanford.edu/group/htgg/sts145papers/vlo_2001_2.pdf

Image Reference

Banner: http://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/streetfighterallcharactev9.jpg

Image 1: http://cbssports.com/images/blogs/tumblr_m142jmcKsB1r8a6xoo1_500.gif

Image 2: http://www.fightersgeneration.com/nx8/char/sf2-intro-possibly-mike-and-joe.jpg

Image 3: http://static.gamesradar.com/images/mb/GamesRadar/us/Other/Features/2008/Street%20Fighter%20Retrospectives/worst%20characters/Dudley_SFIII_Third_Strike(2)--article_image.jpg

Image 4: http://i.ytimg.com/vi/qd-HXajgn9Q/maxresdefault.jpg

Virtually Training an Army through call of duty - Call Of Duty: Modern Warfare immersion true reflection of War?

Hey,

Second blog post for a school assignment, the all mighty call of duty

Call Of Duty: Modern Warfare is a series filled with controversy yet uses the words immersion as a marketing tool. Being immersed within a game is being able to suspend disbelief and feel a part of the world you are engaging in. First person shooters have an edge in this department due to the camera angle giving you the illusion of being in that world and looking through it with your own eyes. Call of Duty is able to capture this in a nut shell and the first outing of the game had such a great story which helped you stay immersed and involved. The question is how far does immersion actually go in this game and why is it important?. What makes the game immersive to me is the modern setting of the game, it makes it easier to not have to make things up or try to understand what certain things are doing in the environment. As Madigan states "Dealing in a familiar environment also allows the player to comfortably make assumptions about those blank spaces without being pulled out of the world to think about it." (Madigan, 2010).

 This means the player can focus more on playing the game. The aim of call of duty is to kill the enemies that are in your path to the objective and then to complete said objective. However what truly helps with the immersion is that this game was made with the help of the army in America or people whom have had military service to solidify the experience and to give it a more solid grounding in reality. Doing this can only bring the sort of attention to detail that is seen in the real thing, allowing the game through immersion to de sensitize the player against killing or firing a gun. The narrative of the story mode shows a great notion in keeping the players brains occupied to deter the player from seeing any faults in the world that is made in the game. As Madigan says " Cognitively demanding environments where players have to focus on what’s going on and getting by in the game will tie up mental resources. This is good for immersion " (Madigan, 2010). The story in the game does it well by using many explosions or high speed chases keeping the players focus on the action and going fast. A great example of the above is in the final mission of the game where the player has just averted a nuke from firing and is now escaping the bunker he was in via hummer, in a flash the car you are in is flipped over by a helicopter missile explosion. The game pushes the immersion by giving the player blurry vision to try and simulate the groggy state a person would be in under such circumstances.

I generally felt dread as the villain in the game slowly approaches your view shooting your comrades in the head as you lie there without the ability to fire back or anything like that until Captain Price throws you a gun to shoot the villain with. I was stuck in that moment when my character had picked up the gun and I shot at the Villain with glee, I couldn't help feeling heroic at this moment knowing that it is only a story.

However the game itself has some reflection on the world and what has recently happened in regards to terrorism and how its changed people's perception of the middle east. In regards to Call Of Duty's view of war it is not one that correctly immerses and mirrors that of the real world. The army do use video games for training in some instances however they use games specially made for them like Virtual Battlespace 2. This make sense as Peck says " First, the military doesn't play games. It uses training tools that happen to be games.(Peck, 2012)". These games are not meant to be played with the intent of having fun they are made with the intent of immersing the soldier into a realistic simulation to teach them how to operate in certain situations. Games like Call of Duty teach people to shoot whatever is in your path without a second thought as to why, as Peck notes " Army needs a game to teach soldiers how to butter up the natives not to shoot at them."(Peck, 2012). If the world were to be filled with soldier like that in Call Of Duty's story mode we may not have a world to live in, the game shows no empathy for the opposition and acts as though everything the player does is the right of the player. It gives you only one path to walk and that path is forward, could it be training a generation of players to become natural killers?. I highly doubt this as it does not give the player that type of immersion that gives someone the confidence to be able to move and do as they do.

References

Peck, M.  (2012). Forget Call of Duty and Battlefield. Real Military Training Needs a Different Kind of Game. Retrieved From: http://kotaku.com/5883105/forget-call-of-duty-and-battlefield-real-military-training-needs-a-different-kind-of-game

Madigan, J. (2010). The Psychology of Immersion in Video Games. Retrieved from: http://www.psychologyofgames.com/2010/07/the-psychology-of-immersion-in-video-games/

Andersen, R, Kurti, M. (2012). From America’s Army to Call of Duty: Doing Battle with the Military Entertainment Complex. Retrieved from: http://www.lib.sfu.ca/sites/default/files/10730/cmns130_enda_scholarlyarticle.pdf

Grimshaw, M, Jagger, R, Charlton, J, P. (2011). First-Person Shooters: Immersion and Attention. Journal for computer game culture, 5(1), 29-44 .Retrieved from: http://www.eludamos.org/index.php/eludamos/article/viewArticle/vol5no1-3/html3

Image Reference

Images

Banner: http://solvetube.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/How-To-Install-Call-of-Duty-4-Modern-Warfare-Game-Without-Errors.png

Image 1: http://firsthour.net/screenshots/call-of-duty-4-modern-warfare/call-of-duty-4-helicopter-cargo-tanker.jpg

Image 2: https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgOn7f_NLDbFMnTEdJeeDE-_56zd88QPrNZXHk5tpygGz_ov43BV1eUr6SoNGVGRCZM4u4KRmmcQl-3_2vTNxkJ2uHSvFgYhfbCeMbZ1tBvC8YFWXoFAwAI9kcHR-eT083APGypvSE_U7k/s1600/Call+of+Duty+4+Modern+Warfare+(04).jpg

Image 3:  http://www.herdofcats.ca/files/images/Cod4_heartbreakers.jpg