focuspark, on 05 November 2013 - 12:41 PM, said:
Given that there are no "good guys" in war and we're the combatants, it's generally better to take a light hearted approach to the fictional combat we participate in. Otherwise, given that we fight in the cities, you sir are responsible for countless refugees, dead children, and shattered families. You are a monster.
Happier?
Well, first of all, I'm not sure that's a given, but let's skip that part. Second of all, if there are no good guys, I'm not sure that means it's automatically better to take a light hearted approach to war. If anything, I would say that some of the best pieces of art and fiction out there, that do deal with war, have precisely this in common. They show that war is hell, and that most people do turn into monsters in such conditions. Some of the greatest novels and movies out there do illustrate that quite clearly, that even the "good guys" fall short and show their weaknesses.
I do think that one of the few redeeming qualities of the Battletech universe, which is otherwise based on unrealistic and silly concepts such as "samurai vs vikings in space", is the fact that it's hard to identify the 'good guys'. It's also one of the redeeming qualities of the Warhammer 40,000 universe, another ridiculously unrealistic sci-fi universe which has a distinct lack of 'good guys'.
You'll notice that I wasn't actually complaining about this little piece of fluff that Garth apparently wrote (I wasn't aware). I was merely pointing out the "light hearted approach". There's no need to justify it, as I'm not asking for it to be changed.
That being said, it can be quite interesting to play games where you are, in fact, the bad guy. Did you ever play the TIE Fighter games? It was basically like playing a German Luftwaffe pilot of WW2, a soldier in a vast and evil empire. Certainly a nice break from other games where you're always saving the galaxy.