I decided that I'd had enough of the Grand Theft Auto series after I reached a crescendo on par with the last movement of Beethoven's 9th Symphony. I knew I had gone as high as I could as I did doughnuts over a drug deal gone bad in my 1989 Honda CRX clone as Rod Stewart's "Young Turks" blazed on. Somehow I knew it would never be this good again.
With Iraq, Afghanistan, Pirates, North Korea and watching Over There in it's entirety (and well, living in MF'n Vietnam), I decided to get a hold of some combat simulations, 1st person shooters, whatever the kids are calling them these days. I bought as many SOCOM, Call of Duty, and miscellaneous others that I could find. The others included a modern battlefield type one(which subsequently didn't work, perhaps the biggest political statement out of all of them) and a American Civil War game (wins the WTF? category and also turns out to be my favourite).
Lets start with the Call of Duty series, or as I like to call them: An Afternoon of Programming On The History Channel: The Video Game. You guessed it, Call of Duty focuses on World War II. You jump characters and theaters, it starts off in the Pacific Theater, moves to Europe and then back to the Pacific.
As a disclaimer I should note that I to this day hold the Super Nintendo as the penultimate video game platform and had an 8 year isolation from console gaming in the late 90s to mid double 0's. Gaming for me then was Sim City. Coming back into modern console gaming I found that there are many more buttons crammed onto the controller now and much more is expected than point and shoot and jump. I thought that GTA had prepared me for this, but Call of Duty proved otherwise.
The controls proved to be clumsy and unintuitive at best (I think the ISO needs to develop a standard for what buttons shoot and reload). The character moved like a fat guy holding in a Burger King shit, not the best when storming a machine gun nest. Coming off the GTA series I found the environment a little constrictive too, but then most of the Pacific Theater was on islands smaller than Lycoming County PA. My Commanding Officer sounded like R. Lee Ermey which added a touch of class. It feels like a lot of the budget of the game went into weapons, the sounds and the physics of period weaponry.
Call of Duty 3 was no better, it was like being stuck in a rat maze surrounded by people doing awful Robert De Niro and Matt Damon impersonations. The game play was slightly better, but all of the Call of Duty games have this nasty way of fragging the player in that it's easier to pick up a hand grenade than it is to get rid of it. Much of the same could be said for Medal of Honor series of games. Same shit, different buttons and character actors.
The SOCOM series, or everything that is in some way distantly related to Tom Clancy (which should tell us that it's strictly fiction), was much more challenging, and not in the way the game makers intended. In SOCOM Navy Seals (ooooo Navy Seals!) Combined Assault, one plays as a member of the highly elite and expensively equipped Navy Seals Special Operations team. This in turn means that every time one goes into battle it involves a whole Best Buy full of pointless electronic extras. Tasers, GPS devices, night vision goggles, binoculars, shit, shit and more shit. It made me long for the Ye Olde Days, when it was one man and a musket. SOCOM involved the least amount of actual combat and the least fun value. More time was spent on "goals" and trying not to shoot the AI players who went they weren't standing in front of my rife, came around on my flank and were promptly shot for being mistaken as enemy combatants.
The Civil War game I found was actually co-designed by The History Channel, dispensing with any middle man. It also was the easiest one to learn the controls for and get down to what these games are all about, the kill. The game is played out over various episodes from the actual American Civil War, but not in chronological order, and not always for the same team. Sometimes I was a Y'all'n southern gentleman and the next mission a right good Yankee. But as I said, the fun was in the pure shooting and killing. No bullshit, bare minimum objectives and only one weapon to choose from at a time. No sidearms, automatics, bazookas, kazoos or bells and whistles, just a repeating rife and righteous glory. Or something like that.
The real failure of all of these games and perhaps the genre as a whole in my opinion is that the fail to deliver the reality of war. This is "war" as imagined by Risk playing Tom Clancy reading armchair riders. People who continue to promote this Flying Leathernecks vision of modern combat. Nowhere in these games did I burn villages, have my weapon jam, endure a jingoistic CO. I did not shoot at kids, coked up with no future and a Chinese made RPG. I did not yank gold fillings nor cut off ears. I didn't sit and watch as tank crews burned alive. I didn't, after the mission was over, get blinding drunk, beat my kids and caterwaul like Jim Morrison after the 5 minute mark in The End. My platoon wasn't suicide bombed and I didn't trip over CNN pretty boys trying to get journalist credibility, feeling guilty that all the "good" wars are long gone. These games are the only games that are sold and consumed in Asia now, beating out everything except the soccer/football games. These selective episodic versions of history, with all the horror and ambiguity forgotten about. It weighs on me as I find that I want to pull a Private Pyle on the R. Lee Ermey character in Call of Duty.
No none of that sort of "reality" got in my way. Maybe I'm too old for video games any more, or maybe my niche is is fighting the War on Drugs with a monster truck and Journey's Escape album. But then I had to explain that Cabela's Big Bass Adventure wasn't a real fishing simulator because you fished without two cases of Schaffer tall boys and didn't say "fuck it" at 2pm and head down to the VFW.