loCAliZAtion As AdAptAtion in the WOLFENSTEIN frAnChise
223
that this game underwent, even if the reference to “Germania” remains
a critical lapse in this context that can only be accredited to a mistake
on the makers’ part. In the other installments of the Wolfenstein series,
heroicization can only be traced in the mythologizing depiction of the Nazis
and the function of computer game characters depicted as Nazi leaders.
These especially powerful “bosses” are hard to overcome. As a result, it is
justified to state that the Wolfenstein games emphasize “principal actors”
(i.e. historical and fictitious Nazi leaders) by depicting them as antagonists
that are more powerful than “regular” game characters.
The provision “incitement to hatred” might constitute the legal reason for
the “sanitization” of the Wolfenstein games beyond the removal of symbols
forbidden in Germany. That the legal framework is highly relevant for the
production company is often stated in interviews with the gaming press. 88
This is also underlined by a disclaimer shown on one of the start screens of
Wolfenstein: The New Order that states:
Wolfenstein®: The New Order is a fictional story set in an alternate universe
in the 1960s. Names, characters, organizations, locations and events are
either imaginary or depicted in a fictionalized manner. The story and
contents of this game are not intended to and should not be construed
in any way to condone, glorify or endorse the beliefs, ideologies, events,
actions, persons or behavior of the Nazi regime or to trivialize its war
crimes, genocide and other crimes against humanity. 89
That the camouflage resulting from “sanitization” might amplify mythologization is also implied in the developer’s statement. This statement can
be read as demonstrating awareness of the complex and often-unforeseen
effects of legal regulation, underlining the argument that Fischer et al. make
about the tabooing of forbidden symbols. They argue that such tabooing
hinders a rational argument against NS ideology:
A tabooing of symbols – abstracted from the communicative and performative context of their use – can hardly be considered legitimate
in a society whose legitimacy derives from the formal openness of its
communication. Such a tabooing carries the threat that a demonization
of the totalitarian regime’s symbols would mirror the regime’s absurd
88 E.g. Kogel, “Wolfenstein: The New Order – Interview mit Bethesda.”
89 The disclaimer is shown on the screen in several languages. The German version is not
sanitized of direct references to the Nazi regime, and is faithful to the disclaimer’s English text.
223
that this game underwent, even if the reference to “Germania” remains
a critical lapse in this context that can only be accredited to a mistake
on the makers’ part. In the other installments of the Wolfenstein series,
heroicization can only be traced in the mythologizing depiction of the Nazis
and the function of computer game characters depicted as Nazi leaders.
These especially powerful “bosses” are hard to overcome. As a result, it is
justified to state that the Wolfenstein games emphasize “principal actors”
(i.e. historical and fictitious Nazi leaders) by depicting them as antagonists
that are more powerful than “regular” game characters.
The provision “incitement to hatred” might constitute the legal reason for
the “sanitization” of the Wolfenstein games beyond the removal of symbols
forbidden in Germany. That the legal framework is highly relevant for the
production company is often stated in interviews with the gaming press. 88
This is also underlined by a disclaimer shown on one of the start screens of
Wolfenstein: The New Order that states:
Wolfenstein®: The New Order is a fictional story set in an alternate universe
in the 1960s. Names, characters, organizations, locations and events are
either imaginary or depicted in a fictionalized manner. The story and
contents of this game are not intended to and should not be construed
in any way to condone, glorify or endorse the beliefs, ideologies, events,
actions, persons or behavior of the Nazi regime or to trivialize its war
crimes, genocide and other crimes against humanity. 89
That the camouflage resulting from “sanitization” might amplify mythologization is also implied in the developer’s statement. This statement can
be read as demonstrating awareness of the complex and often-unforeseen
effects of legal regulation, underlining the argument that Fischer et al. make
about the tabooing of forbidden symbols. They argue that such tabooing
hinders a rational argument against NS ideology:
A tabooing of symbols – abstracted from the communicative and performative context of their use – can hardly be considered legitimate
in a society whose legitimacy derives from the formal openness of its
communication. Such a tabooing carries the threat that a demonization
of the totalitarian regime’s symbols would mirror the regime’s absurd
88 E.g. Kogel, “Wolfenstein: The New Order – Interview mit Bethesda.”
89 The disclaimer is shown on the screen in several languages. The German version is not
sanitized of direct references to the Nazi regime, and is faithful to the disclaimer’s English text.