POLITICS
FARCRY5 WASNEVERMEANTTO
BEPOLITICAL,THEGAME’SSTORY
ANDSETTINGNAILEDDOWNLONG
BEFORETHEPHRASE‘TRUMP
COUNTRY’HADANYMEANING.
THAT’SWHATUBISOFTWOULD
PREFERYOUTOBELIEVE,AT
LEAST.EVENBEFOREGLOBALISM
WASYANKEDINTOITSONGOING
EXISTENTIALCULTUREWAR,THE
USHADITSPOLITICALDARKSIDE,
ANDSOFARCRY5 – A TALEOF
RELIGIOUSFUNDAMENTALISTS,
CONSPIRACYTHEORISTSAND
GUNNUTS– HADPOLITICAL
COMMENTARYBAKEDHARDINTO
ITSTHEMATICCODEBASE.THE
DIVISION2 FOLLOWSA SIMILAR
PATTERN:ITISANINESCAPABLY
POLITICALWORKTHAT,WHETHER
BYACCIDENTORDESIGN,TAKESON
EXTRALAYERSOFMEANINGGIVEN
THECURRENTSTATEOFTHEWORLD
INTOWHICHITHASRELEASED.
Withthesetwogamesin particular,
weseea Ubisofttryingtohaveits
cakeandeatit, presentingjust-
about-plausiblealternatetimelinesfor
modern-dayAmerica,theninsisting
it’snottryingtoactuallysayanything
abouttherealworld.Andthen,even
worse,carryingthroughonthat
promisebyshippinggameswithsuch
vapidnarratives.In TheDivision2’s
case, the Clancy name doesn’t imply so
muchasguaranteea taleofmodern-day
military-industrialfetishism;andif we’re
beingunkind,it alsosuggeststhestoryis
notexactlygoingtobeonefortheages.
So,in bothcases,doesit prove.
YetUbisoft’spositiononallthisis,to
a degree,anunderstandableone.All
artis political,sure,butvideogamesare
productsaswellasworksofart.They
needtobesold,andwillnotsellaswell
if theyappeartothematicallyalienate
peoplewhoidentifywiththe‘wrong’
politicalviewpoint.AndasUbisoft
managementhaspointedoutbefore,it is
hardfora gamemadein thepublisher’s
globalstructuretopresenta unified
politicalview:when2,000peoplehave
workedona gameatstudiosacrossthe
globe,it is enormouslyunlikelythatallof
themwill holdthesameviews.
In anycase,doesit reallymatter?It is
hardtoimaginewhateithergamecould
meaningfullytellusabouttherealworld,
especiallygiventhattheirlanguageis one
ofviolenceandthebinarysplitbetween
goodandbad.In a wayTheDivision2,
likeFarCry5, makestheonlypolitical
statementit needstowhenit putsyouon
oneparticularside,immediatelycasting
youandthosearoundyouasthegood
guys.Anyonewhobats,orsnipes,for
theotherteamis cannonfodder,andfair
game.Ubisoftcansaywhatit likesabout
itsultimateintentions,butit picksa side
for you in The Division 2 as soon as youpitchupattheWhiteHouseandyour
avatarholsterstheirweapon.
Moreover,if youfindthepublisher’s
currentshooterpoliticsdistasteful,
considerthealternatives.TheCallof
Duty4: ModernWarfareeratalesof
ultra-violentderring-doagainstIslamic
fundamentalistsbelongstothepast.
Cold-WarSovietsfeelsimilarlyplayedout
(andwouldarguablybea bittooonthe
nosein a gamerightnow).Gaminghas
haditsfillofNaziantagonistsmanytimes
over,andwhileBethesdadrewacclaimfor
openlymarketingWolfenstein2: TheNew
Colossusasa gamethatletyoupunch
Nazis,it is a verydifferentsortofgameto
TheDivision;it’sa workoffantasywhose
lastthematiccontactwithrealitywas
over 70 yearsago.TheNewColossusis,if
anything,a lesspoliticalgameeventhan
thoseonUbisoft’sslate.
Which,really,is thepoint.TheDivision
2, likeFarCry5 beforeit, is damnednot
byitsactualpolitics,butitsprofessedlack
ofthem.Theissueis notwhatgotmade–
thoughwe’ddearlylovewhatevercomes
nexttohavea storyworthstickingwith- butwhatwassaidaboutit bythesenior
developerstaskedwithgettingthrough
anotherroundofpressinterviewswithout
anotherroundofcontroversy.Politicsis
justanotherwordformarketing,in other
words.If youpretendtobesomething
you’renot,whenthetruthcomes out, you
risk losing by a landslide.
UBISOFT SAYS ITS GAMES AREN’T
POLITICAL – BUT WHEN VIEWED
THROUGH A SNIPER SCOPE, WHAT ISN’T?
The Division 2 is the latest in a long line of the developer trying to have its cake and eat it too.
THECLANCY
NAMEDOESN’T
IMPLYSOMUCHAS
GUARANTEEA TALEOF
MODERN-DAYMILITARY-
INDUSTRIAL
FETISHISM