One series that will never, ever get mentioned in the video games as art argument is Call Of Duty, and that's sort of a shame. EA's all-conquering FPS series, which have simulated so many different wars that now they're having to make them up, in a lot of ways epitomises the worst excesses and artless tripe of mainstream, triple-A titles. They're the gaming equivalent of stupid popcorn blockbuster movies. But those movies can be picked apart and analysed like any other, and the context in which they're produced is particularly important. Call Of Duty's message is an inherently jingoistic one war must be good (or at least necessary), cos you're playing, and you're the hero, and you're fighting in a war. Has that always been the case with these games, though? The early titles were inspired by Band Of Brothers and Saving Private Ryan, and took interviews with real war vets in order to replicate an experience that was mostly horrifying, traumatic, and ultimately left you feeling powerless. Black Ops III is about as far as its possible to get from that. The entire Call Of Duty franchise can be seen as commentary on how our attitudes to warfare and violence have evolved over the years. But also how history changes our perspective on things, and how video games have evolved too. If they're not art, then at the very least, Call Of Duty's not a bad shout for an example of the Great American Novel...except, it's a video game.
Tom Baker is the Comics Editor at WhatCulture! He's heard all the Doctor Who jokes, but not many about Randall and Hopkirk. He also blogs at http://communibearsilostate.wordpress.com/
