Yesterday, we talked about Kaos Studios’ Homefront and the potential controversy that its “occupied America” narrative could cause. With that in mind, we asked general manager Dave Votypka if controversy is always good for a game, and if Kaos is counting on it for some free Homefront advertising.
“I think it depends on the tone and depth of the controversy,” he explains. “When you’re dealing with portraying real events, with real people that the public currently has a personal and emotional attachment to, there are sensitivities there that need to be respected and avoided. But when creating speculative fiction, that is based decades in the future, it’s just that, it’s fiction.
“Obviously, getting talked about in mainstream media is good for product awareness, but you don’t want it to be critical or inaccurate. If the result is a discussion of the fictional ideas and intellectual debate, that’s fine and healthy. Frontlines was also built from a ‘what-if’ scenario centered around peak oil, and the energy wars that could result when our finite supply of oil is no longer able to sustain our oil dependent existence. In that game, America and its Allies were fighting to control oil reserves in the Caspian Sea, which one could argue — and some have — that it puts America in a negative light; but it’s a story!
“The game and its premise was featured on FOX News, in the New York Times, USA Today, and numerous other mainstream media channels. At most, it was presented as a thought provoking discussion, and we don’t believe the view of Homefront’s fictional premise deserves to be taken any further.”
A very intelligent and interesting answer from Votypka. I can’t wait for The Daily Mail to get hold of this game though, as I’m sure their typically even-handed and open-minded view of the world will lead to an equally robust riposte.
