- License Call of Duty celebrates its 20th anniversary with the release of a 20th opus: Modern Warfare III.
- With millions of copies sold around the world in two decades, Call of Duty has become a historic game whose violence has often been criticized.
- 20 minutes asked the followers of Call of Duty to find out how their relationship with the game had evolved.
For twenty years, the world of video games has been at war. We don’t talk about the war between Mario and Bowser, nor the events in Hyrule or the war against crime in Liberty City nor the conflict over which Pokémon is the cutest. No, we are talking about the real war, that of Call of Duty. The famous first-person shooter celebrated its 20th anniversary with the release of a 20th opus, Modern Warfare III.
Activision’s game has established itself as an absolute reference with shots in the heads of Nazi soldiers, and bursts of machine guns on communist troops. So much so that the game has often been singled out, and has become, despite itself, the symbol of the crusade against video games led by groups bringing together real violence and virtual games.
An “absurd” debate
A debate that tires Internet users of 20 minutes, questioned on the subject. “Ask again and again the question of violence in Call of Duty seems absurd to me, sighs Luc, 40 years old. It’s a first-person shooter, so obviously it involves shooting people… Is that shocking? No. Because it’s a game. In the same way as when you lose at Monopolyyou are not in debt and on the street, the dead in Call of Duty are fictitious and of no consequence. »
Julien, 22 years old, finds it important to carefully consider part of Call of Duty as entertainment. “The violence in games doesn’t bother me as long as there is a connection to the context of the game. It’s like watching a slasher film. Violence and gore, or horror and tension are essential to give a feeling, without that these games would not be memorable and would be flat. »
“We grew up with GTA, what do we care about morality? »
If a majority of players Call of Duty sees no problem with the violence depicted in the game, some still believe that it is better not to spend too much time on it. “I think that a thirty-minute session from time to time is fine,” explains Romain, 37 years old. But I don’t like spending hours in such a world. »
Likewise, fans of the game do not see why the question of the morality of their characters’ actions should be raised. While many games have recently introduced the question of the meaning of their characters’ actions, notably The Last of Us, Call of Duty continues to offer the role of unscrupulous soldiers. “We grew up with GTA, what do we care about morality? “, jokes G Lee. Joined by a teasing Peyo de la Mancha: “In terms of violence, I have the feeling that GTA And The Sims are not far from Call of Duty. And Lemmings, wasn’t that a cruel game? And Pokémon: poached animal fights organized by children…”
“The game does not at all glorify war”
While the war has been raging for almost two years in Ukraine and Israel invades and bombs Gaza, this news is not a hindrance for players of Call of Duty. “The news has no relation to playing the game. Playing Call of Duty is not a political act or support or commitment in any way. Correlating current events with a choice of game appears to me to be absurd,” says Luc.
“I learned a lot about the conflicts of the 20th century and even recent wars,” argues Romane, 27 years old and a tennis player. Call of Duty since the age of 11… When you’re in the game, you only think about the objective but afterwards, you can think. And the game doesn’t advocate war at all. »
Finally, only David, 25, joins the few Internet users tired of the game: “At the beginning yes, these games were nice, but now they are almost out of place. There is too much violence and wars everywhere, we no longer need these games unfortunately. And above all, there are plenty of them that are better today. »
Gn Fr tech