Manchester Cathedral’s
representatives expressed their affront in two ways. The first
appealed to intellectual property. They claimed that Sony did not
have the right to include the cathedral's name, image, or
architecture in the game in the first place.
Discussions of intellectual property
rights have become so common, they risk replacing talk about the
weather. An obsession with ownership used to characterize corporate
lawyers alone, but now organizations and individuals alike use
ownership as cultural currency. The video game industry is among the
worst culprits of this practice. We may squint when Disney lobbies to
extend copyright terms to cover the products they themselves adapted
from public domain fairy tales,
but we don't bat an eye when publishers issue press releases about
their "all new intellectual property" or when journalists refer to
forthcoming titles as "new IP".
If a movie studio had wanted to film a
scene for a post-apocalyptic action film in the Manchester Cathedral,
indeed they would have had to get the diocese's permission. But not
for the right to depict the cathedral — that could have been done
by shooting from the street outside. Rather, the film crew would have
needed to get the rights to be on location, including accounting for
any potential damage they might cause and covering insurance lest
anyone be injured during the shoot. What if the movie studio had
created a CG Manchester Cathedral, shot their scene on the lot with
green screens, and digitally composited the shots together? Then
would they have had to get permission? The answer is unclear, as
digital rights usage for landmarks is largely untested.
The Cathedral's second affront appealed
to media outrage. Manchester's bishop took the opportunity to issue a
statement against video game violence in the broadest sense,
connecting his objections to the city of Manchester's ongoing gun
crime problem and the church's record of youth support.
For once, let's leave the rights issues
to the attorneys. Let's instead focus on the cultural issues. What
does Manchester Cathedral mean in the game, and why might its
appearance support the cathedral's relevance more than it detracts
from it?
A cynic, unbeliever, or Internet troll
might point out the irony of the church pointing the finger, given
the millennia-old history of church-sponsored violence. A gamer might
rely on the title's status as fantasy fiction to nullify the validity
of affront. Such impressions are merely instrumental attempts to foil
the church’s parry rather than reasoned attempts to justify the
expressive ends served by depicting the cathedral in the game. And
despite its creators’ silence on the matter, the game does indeed
have one.
Perhaps the most interesting part of
Resistance is its depiction of repurposed spaces of 1950s
Britain. The game is set on an alternate timeline, but one that
shares much with our own history, making its environment very
familiar. This feature distinguishes Resistance from similar
games with wholly invented worlds, like Halo. For example,
early in the game the humans make a stand at a bus depot,
period-appropriate vehicles strewn asunder. Later a fish cannery
becomes a breeding ground for human-alien hybrids.
The military occupation of civilian
spaces is the reality of all war fought on civilian terrain, but
video games have a unique power to simulate the experience of this
estrangement. The first time the player cowers behind a bus or
encounters a destroyed bathroom, the reality of war surfaces in a
powerful way. The Manchester Cathedral level is the most powerful of
these moments, and also the subtlest in this otherwise barefaced
fantasy shooter.