There has been a lot of hatred towards a particular country bumpkin in the upcoming Left 4 Dead 2 and honestly I've had just about enough.


He's essentially Gilligan...the show was named after Gilligan...
Consider Seinfeld or Gilligan's Island, the simple fact is that the characters in those show only worked as an ensemble. You could never have a show that is just about George, or Kramer, or the Gilligan, because their wackiness only works when it is contrasted with the straightman Jerry or the Skipper. The same principle is applied here as well. Ellis is awsome because he is the Kramer, or the Gilligan, or the Costello to our happy safe-house sitcom. What I'm basicly saying is that the only reason why Nick seems like such a sauve mother fucker is because Ellis is a bumbling redneck. Coach only seems like such a badass because Ellis gets smokered, jockied, and chargered. They have these values intrinsicly but they are brought to light because of a character like Ellis and for that fact alone he deserves respect.



Bumpkins are funny, and important to character development
The second point here is that he is genuinely funny. That 'sucking heads' bit is about the funniest segment in the whole demo, and after playing it through about ten times I can say with a degree of confidence that it is the only out of action soliloquy that we are given. So clearly someone thought Ellis was worth giving lines to, bumkin or not, in the demo that was intended to sell lots of copies of the game. What can I say, Rednecks sell. Related to my previous point it doesn't take a genious to figure out that what makes it funny is everyone else's reaction. The line was programed to be delivered so that a random character reacts to it every time. Ellis helps to builds characters through these interactions but is particularly effective in his interactions with Nick.



He's young and sympathetic...or so Nick might tell us
Ok settle down before you go quoting the 'sunsofbitches' bit to me. Ellis is ignorant and a cockly loudmouthed idiot, but much of that comes from his age. According to the Left 4 Dead 2 wiki Ellis is only 21 making him the youngest survivor to date.( Admittedly there have only been two games in the series but does it seem likely that they'll go much younger?) Ellis is a bumbling idiot, but it is that very fact that makes him so endearing. As far as character development is concerned all you need to do is look at the relationship between Nick and Ellis to realize that there is going to be a real meeting of worlds and changes in attitudes throughout the game. As players we only have 20 minutes of the game, and already the only person that gets any sympathy from Nick when they die is Ellis. He is like the family dog, sure he is irritating when he comes in and tracks mud in the house but for every instance of that there are three family photos of him infront of the christmas tree.



He's not Rochelle
A character not having personality is no excuse not to hate her just for that fact. Lets face it if there was one character to leave behind it is Rochelle. Dragging along a cardboard cut out of a human being will just slow us down.

For the most part only some kinds of villainy are acceptable by mainstream culture. Of course being allowed to be ‘the bad guy’ is something that with time has certainly become more and more prevalent. With games like, “Fable”, and “Infamous” one begins to wonder what exactly the game expects from us as real people. The choice to be evil is available and certainly taking that road requires some genuinely morally appalling (and often ridiculously black and white) choices to be made. Murder is something that is a part of being evil in “Fable” if you make that choice then that is where the road takes you. It seems according to the Modern Warfare 2 clip, violence against innocents is something that we as gamers do not particularly like, or are at least divided over. Is this repulsion consistent though? With the games previously mentioned the choice for evil is one that is up to the player, but games exist where this option is nonexistent and the game actually punishes a more ‘heroic’ route.




Ultimately, playing the role of a villain in a video game is reprehensible only in so far as the world of villainy does not reflect reality in a meaningful way. Looking at a game like Fable where being a villain is a realistic possibility, the consequences of that villainy are disturbing to us only in so far as they are removed from reality. Murdering the entire population of Bowerstone is not considered ‘media attention’ worthy because it happens in the context of a world that only vaguely resembles our own. I believe that it is this parody of reality that allows players to take that leap into the role of schemer, murderer, and criminal more fluidly. A game that leads us to believe that it is happening in the real world is somehow a different story. Of course this is a phenomenon that is not simply restricted to fantasy. The fact of the matter is that GTA is a game that is, at its core, about being a villain. There is a feigned attempt at a revenge plot, but at the end of the day there is no heroic or ‘good’ way to go about your business in Liberty City. You are a criminal for the duration of the game and your ultimate aim is a huge arsenal for tearing the city apart, a substantial bank account, and of course bloody satisfaction by the end of the story. I doubt there is anyone who hasn’t played the ‘obey the rules of the road’ meta game in GTA, but in your experience how long does that particular "game" really last? It is like playing through Mario but only jumping on Goombas and leaving the Koopas to mind their turnips. A substantial part of the game revolves around wanton destruction, and the game forces the player into that position. Acting ‘good’ is completely out of the question.

In my mind I keep coming back to the question of why the GTA franchise didn’t have more severe consequences in the outside world. I mean for all its build and all its ‘beating hookers to death after having sex with them to restore your health and keep your money’ the game came out and the worst it did was a sex scandal. For Christ's sake a game about killing demons on Mars got a worse rap in the end and you would think that would be a plus with the religious right. The only conclusion that I can think of is the fact that GTA is somehow just as surreal as Fable. It seems that for most, Liberty City is as mythical a place as The Shire, or Pallet Town. The rules that apply there are different than the rules that run real life and it comes through to the player and it uses its invisible hand to keep the whole thing at least moderately acceptable. You're still a villain, but somehow within the context of Liberty City that's just fine.



What this seems to mean is that in games like MW2 the sense of ‘otherworldliness’ is dissipating. The stage hasn't changed between what is going on in MW2 and what is going on in GTA IV. I for one have killed probably a hundred people in an airport in the world of GTA, without even batting an eye, but the world of GTA is such that the rules don’t seem to apply and the game forces your hand into that kind of characterization. The Modern Warfare 2 story hit a chord with so many people, and it is set apart, because as far as anyone could tell that scene is taking place in a world that plays by the same rules as the real world. This isn’t the ‘magical’ world of crime in a fake city somewhere in the continental United States, it is a military operation that is happening in an airport in a quasi-realistic situation, or at least more realistic than Fable or GTA. MW2 has not given the player any reason to believe that this is not taking place in an airport filled with real people. The mentality has changed in a fundamental way. Killing people in this way is reprehensible only because the world of MW2 is closer to reality and the game has not given us any significant reason to doubt its authenticity. In the end, what makes a game about villainy and the horrors that man can commit against man either perfectly acceptable both to the media and the gamer community at large, or completely reprehensible and subject of debate, is how attached it is to the rules and tropes of real life.