Battlefield 2042: Controversy over "non-political" content

Battlefield 2042

The number in Battlefield 2042 does not mean the number of games already released in the military shooter franchise, but the year 2042 in which the title is supposed to play. For this purpose, DICE has come up with a gloomy future vision in which the advancing climate collapse leads to regular natural disasters. The devastating storms, tidal waves and other disasters not only claimed numerous lives, but also robbed many people of their homes forever. These climate refugees are used by the world's superpowers as armed forces in the battle for the planet's last available resources. In multiplayer battles you slip into the role of any such No-Pat, the in-game name of the refugees, and fight for one of two superpowers who are currently fighting for supremacy on a map. Storms and oil spills are just a few of the things that will affect gameplay on the battlefields and aim to bring a whole new dynamic to the flow of the game.

Recommended editorial content At this point you will find external content from [PLATTFORM]. To protect your personal data, external integrations are only displayed if you confirm this by clicking on "Load all external content": Load all external content I agree that external content can be displayed to me. This means that personal data is transmitted to third-party platforms. Read more about our privacy policy . External content More on this in our data protection declaration.

"Just a multiplayer game"

IGN reporter Luke Winkie was not (only) interested in the effects of the setting on the gameplay, but asked Design Director Daniel Berlin in an interview whether the dystopian world of Battlefield 2042, whose problems certainly have parallels with current world problems, can be understood as a commentary on this political situation. Or more precisely:

"[Battlefield 2042] deals with emigrants who are recruited from other countries (de-patriated people). We are talking about citizens who have been displaced by climate change and war these topics? Is there any social comment anywhere in what you do? Or is it just a multiplayer game? "

What Berlin replied:

"It is definitely just a multiplayer game for us. The reason we took this path is that we can create such a narrative with this world through the eyes of the no-pats. We wanted to bring in more spectacle, bigger events. The setting fits perfectly. It fits this scale and gives us an opportunity to travel the whole world. [...] It's all about gameplay -Reasons."

Winkie put Berlin's statement in an article and questioned DICE's position regarding the political content in Battlefield 2042 (buy now € 59.99). In his opinion, Berlin couldn't really believe what he was saying. The nightmarish world of the shooter is closer to a prognosis than to an unrealistic science-fantasy setting. He is of the opinion that the declaration of the game as apolitical implies a very dark worldview on the part of DICE:

"Think about what the company ultimately means when it explains this political weakness. If Battlefield 2042 actually does If it were apolitical, it would mean that DICE was inspired solely by the likelihood of the coming apocalypse and that the collateral human suffering, failed states, and biospheric collapse appeared to them only as unbelievable arenas for gun fights and nothing more. That is dark as hell! "

Winkie's article triggers heated discussions in the comments column below and also in those of other publications that have taken up his interview. Many voices are of the opinion that the question about the political content shows that the IGN editor has his own agenda and that he is the one politicizing the setting, not DICE. The extreme opinion here is that discussing politics in video games in general is annoying or pointless and reporting should only focus on the graphics, gameplay, and features of the title. Still others are disappointed with DICE and compare Berlin's statements with those of Ubisoft's Navid Khavari, who first described Far Cry 6 as apolitical, but then rowed back.

It can be seen from Berlin's statements that DICE is at least not interested has to position itself politically or to make a clear statement about power relations or climate change. Since it is a pure multiplayer title and no real story is told in Battlefield 2042, but the setting is actually only used as a scene for firefights, it is easy to deny the title's political dimension. It may even be that DICE has set Battlefield 2042 in the future precisely for this reason, in order to avoid any discussions about falsification of history or political statements. However, this might be impossible for the simple reason that many people think it is absolutely impossible to make a game about war that is not inherently political.

Recommended editorial content Here you will find external ones Contents of [PLATFORM]. To protect your personal data, external integrations are only displayed if you confirm this by clicking on "Load all external content": Load all external content I agree that external content can be displayed to me. This means that personal data is transmitted to third-party platforms. Read more about our privacy policy . External content More on this in our data protection declaration.

Politics in games: The old grief

The discussion about such content is really old hat, but it still flares up every time a reporter asks the P-question. I'm sure Winkie knows that too. Therefore, one cannot assume that the man is merely pursuing his own political agenda or planning to spark a controversy in order to push his article. The setting of Battlefield 2042 is quite exciting and questions about the inspiration for the background story or its meaning are really not uncommon. For some it may be silly to see a message in a multiplayer shooter like Battlefield or to equate the setting for multiplayer battles with a narrative work. But the description of the game world reads as if you had at least thought about the current situation. That cannot be dismissed out of hand. And just because DICE is not interested in dealing with these topics itself in the game doesn't mean that others shouldn't.

It is definitely clear that a nuanced discussion on such topics is one Comparison of extreme opinions is preferable. Politics in video games will likely haunt us for a long time to come. So we should at least try to contribute something sensible instead of repeatedly declaring it null and void.

Source: IGN