Episode 8: Morality in Strategy and War Games – Do Games Have a Responsibility to Teach History?

Strategy games offer players control over entire nations, armies, and even civilizations, raising critical questions about morality, ethics, and historical accuracy. In this episode of the Critical Moves Podcast, Al, Nuno, and Timothy tackle the controversial subject of morality in war and strategy games. From playing as the Axis powers in World War II simulations to making life-or-death decisions in Frostpunk, the conversation dives deep into the responsibility of game developers, the impact of historical settings on gameplay, and whether games should serve as educational tools.

One of the main topics explored is whether it is ethical to play as historically controversial factions, such as the Nazis in World War II strategy games. Nuno argues that it is acceptable as long as players approach it with an understanding of history and recognize that it is just a game. He emphasizes that the issue arises when players romanticize or glorify these regimes. Tim takes a slightly different stance, arguing that not all players will have the historical knowledge required to understand the implications of their in-game actions, placing an obligation on developers to include accurate historical context within their games.

The discussion then shifts to the concept of historical omission in gaming. Games like Hearts of Iron, while offering deep strategic experiences, often abstract or completely omit the atrocities committed during the conflicts they depict. The hosts debate whether developers should be obligated to include these aspects of history to provide a fuller picture, even if doing so risks alienating certain players or affecting commercial viability. They compare this to games like Frostpunk, which actively push players into difficult moral dilemmas, forcing them to weigh survival against ethics.

Another thought-provoking point raised is the difference between historical war games and entirely fictional strategy games. While World War II strategy games must navigate real-world history, titles like Stellaris allow players to enslave entire species, purge populations, and engage in intergalactic warfare without any real-world moral considerations. The team explores how mechanics and narrative presentation shape player engagement with these decisions. Does reducing a population to a mere number on a spreadsheet make it easier to commit atrocities in a game? Would players react differently if every individual in their empire had a name, a face, and a story?

The episode also touches on the role of realism versus abstraction in war games. Some games, such as The Great War: Western Front, attempt to accurately depict the sheer scale and devastation of war, forcing players to make tough tactical decisions with heavy consequences. Meanwhile, games like Rome: Total War allow players to enslave or exterminate conquered populations, but do so with minimal emotional weight, reducing these decisions to mechanical choices rather than moral ones. The hosts reflect on how these different approaches affect player immersion and moral engagement.

The conversation then pivots to modern war games like Drone Perspective, which simulates the role of a modern military drone operator. This raises further ethical considerations – does a game like this provide a valuable insight into modern warfare, or does it risk desensitizing players to the horrors of war? Al suggests that, when done well, games can foster empathy by allowing players to experience difficult situations first-hand. However, the team agrees that glorification of atrocities crosses a line that games should avoid.

Ultimately, the discussion raises an essential question: should war and strategy games prioritize historical accuracy, moral lessons, or pure entertainment? Nuno argues that developers should not shy away from difficult topics, but they must handle them responsibly. Tim suggests that games should offer players choices while ensuring they understand the consequences of their actions. Al points out that while strategy games can serve as powerful educational tools, their primary purpose is still to provide engaging gameplay.

This episode of the Critical Moves Podcast offers a fascinating exploration of how strategy and war games navigate complex ethical terrain. Whether you’re a dedicated strategy gamer or just interested in the intersection of gaming and history, this discussion sheds light on how player agency, game design, and historical context come together to shape our experiences in virtual battlefields.

Why You Should Listen: If you’ve ever questioned whether playing as a historically controversial faction is ethical, wondered about the responsibility of game developers in portraying history, or debated the impact of morality systems in games, this episode is for you. The conversation offers a thought-provoking look at how strategy games tackle moral dilemmas, providing insights into historical realism, player agency, and the fine line between education and entertainment. Whether you’re a Hearts of Iron veteran or just dipping your toes into Frostpunk, this episode will make you think twice about the choices you make in games.

Listen on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, or search your alternative preferred podcast provider.

Ahh, we’re on YouTube too!