Robonazis A Go-Go In Wolfenstein: The New Order Trailer

By Alice O'Connor on April 9th, 2014 at 10:00 am.

Robonazis

We broadly accept space-Nazis and robo-Nazis in video games because they’re so fantastical, but Wolfenstein: The New Order‘s marketing strikes an odd note. Take this new trailer, which mixes Nazi robodogs with a Nazi referee gunning down a player in the 1950 Brazil World Cup. This is comic book villainy, certainly, but it’s a touch tone-deaf to have goofy Nazi atomic robomen while cracking jokes about what else the Nazi regime might have killed people for had it continued. The blurring of real and fictional is a bit off.

Curiously semi-serious plot aside, it is looking awfully pleasant, with chunky great guns, power armour, robodogs, and leaning to shoot around corners (leaning in a mainstream FPS! oh joy!).

Dan and Jim both enjoyed time they spent with The New Order, because they say it’s a really fun game for shooting men (and robots) in. That’s broadly what I want from it too.

Wolfenstein is due on May 20. It’s the debut game from MachineGames, which was founded by veterans of Starbreeze–a studio which has certainly delivered solid man-shooting.

, , .

71 Comments »

Sponsored links by Taboola
  1. Zekiel says:

    I agree – this marketing makes me uncomfortable. I think its very clever, but I can’t help but feel (a) That it probably won’t have much in common with the game (which will likely be 95% shooting Nazis, robots, and robot Nazis with a variety of silly weapons) and (b) That it feels a bit… insensitive? Disrespectful? Something? I’m not quite sure – I guess my feeling is that – in contrast with the earlier Wolfenstein games – they’re trying to make this all very realistic and that jars with the fact that in the real world there are still real neo-Nazis.

    • Volcanu says:

      Do you really get the feeling they are trying to make this realistic/plausible though?

      I dont get that sense at all. The whole thing seems deliberately schlocky – what with all the robo nazis, mechanical dogs and comic booky ‘giant villain’ buildings and so on. And all taking place in the 1960s. If that’s a realistic take on the ‘alternative timeline where the Nazis win WW2 genre’ then it’s a very silly one.

      I agree that the first bit of the advert, is a bit jarring compared to the tone of the gameplay they show. I imagine it’s down ‘to the boys in marketing’ not quite understanding the tongue-in-cheek tone the game developers are going for. Although I could be wrong….

      • Zekiel says:

        You are probably right about the ‘boys in marketing’ thing. Thing is, the first bit of the video (the serious, chilling bit) is the only bit that actually made an impression on me! The rest of it just looked like a potentially-fun, potentially-rubbish standard FPS.

        • Calculon says:

          Hello – you may remember me from such films as Inglorious Bastards, where I used a similar take on WW2 and the Nazi Regime in order to bring a different flavor to the movie industry, and entertain movie go-ers

          This Video Game Film, known in my day as a Gilm (Game Film) is a flattering take on an already much loved genre.

          • SirBubbles says:

            Calculon! I loved you in All My Circuits!
            I think that both the “high impact nastiness” could be a bit much in places, but I also think this game could be a blast to play. Dual wielding, not taking cover but doing oldschool things like leaning, etc. Could be good. Wait and see, says I.

    • SomeDuder says:

      it’s been a bilion years since WW2, lets move on already. if we still cant laugh about nazis then how are we accepting the brown-people manslaughter sims?

      • Kollega says:

        I don’t think you understand it fully. The problem is not the game inviting us to laugh at Nazis – the problem is that the game can’t decide if it wants us to laugh at Nazis or not.

        • Zekiel says:

          @Kollega – Yes you’ve articulated it much better than I could! Agree entirely

          @SomeDuder – I realise you’re being tongue-in-cheek but the problem is I DON’T accept the brown-people manslaughter sims…

          • SomeDuder says:

            Mm, only half-serious. I’m just wondering why RPS doesn’t scream murder and death everytime a CoD/BF/MoH is released where derkaderka akbar shouting masses are mown down by righteous US enlisted men (Surely, the highest class of common decency and standards any proud warrior hero should strive to).

            But you’re right, maybe I missed the point. I just figured everyone knew that Wolfenstein was about silly Nazi’s (3D had Hitler in a mech suit, Return just went batshit insane with magic, etc) and I don’t get this new controversy about an ad where some 3rd world country person gets shot in the head :S

            Also, it’s not about YOU accepting it, it’s about this site’s glorious posting legion.

          • SuicideKing says:

            @SomeDuder: RPS has been doing that for some time now, read the last MoH review they bothered doing.

        • LennyLeonardo says:

          Why does it have to pick one? Lots of great pieces of fiction use radical shifts in tone to produce drama. I’m trying to think of a really good example which isn’t Inglorious Basterds. anyone?

    • Kollega says:

      I agree with the idea that you can’t really have “comic book villain atomic robot get-me-ze-Fuhrer Nazis” and “serious representation of Nazis killing and torturing people” in the same game, or in the same promotional material. To take an example of a game with camp Nazis, Freedom Force vs. the 3rd Reich understands what it wants to be, and doesn’t try to shock the player with gruesome torture scenes and the grimdarkness of Nazi oppression. As I’ve said, you can have either camp or grimdarkness in the same narrative, but not both.

      • Sheng-ji says:

        Done well, you can – think of the batman comics, they were really really dark but also very, well comicy too!

        • Kollega says:

          I think I articulated my idea wrong. Originally, I said that Batman isn’t a good example because it doesn’t try to do darkness and camp at the same time (well, AFAIK) even if the general idea of a man dressing like a bat to beat up criminals is inherently campy, but now I realize that I didn’t say clearly enough what I meant. And what I meant is: you can’t have “those wacky Nazis” do a silly musical number about the swastika and then go off to massacre inferior races. It just doesn’t work.

          • Sheng-ji says:

            I completely agree that this marketing doesn’t get it quite right, I personally believe that it is possible, in the hands of more talented writers!

      • DarthBenedict says:

        I’m not sure, some jokes work very well when told deadpan and I think it’s worth finding out if atomic robonazis are one of them.

        Plus 40k, the setting which gave us the term grimdark, was full of cheesy humor.

    • Loyal_Viggo says:

      What’s wrong with Nazis? Quite frankly I think the way the ref handled that player at the start of the video was superb.

      Currently, only North Korea would be in the same league (pun intended) as Nazi referees.

    • Screamer says:

      Oh ffs! Get that stick out of your arse, the lump in your neck is showing XD

  2. SkittleDiddler says:

    Looks good. The silly marketing doesn’t bother me.

    • SillyWizard says:

      Indeed. The more I see of this, the more I like it.

      In fact, I’d go so far as to say portraying an alternate history with a victorious Nazi party is a great addition to the genre.

      Everybody loves an underdog-vs-pure-evil story.

  3. soldant says:

    It’s odd marketing, for sure. You can’t have goofy robot Super Nazis and then try to take a serious tone.

    That said, this looks kind of fun, and I’ll quite happy kill some time with a fun FPS that doesn’t take things too seriously.

    • LennyLeonardo says:

      “You can’t have goofy robot Super Nazis and then try to take a serious tone”.
      But why not? I think that there are some great movies, comic books and games that walk this line very effectively. I’d like to know what others think of this.

  4. Squirrelfanatic says:

    Hah, the video isn’t available in Germany. Why am I not surprised.

    • Premium User Badge

      RedViv says:

      It is advertising the version that is going to be indexed just as it is, thanks to the swastika and video games totally not being art but sort of art but not enough art and stuff. Since indexed games are not to be advertised, this is only a logical way to proceed.

      Oh, in case anybody is interested: The German version will not mention the opposing force being Nazis at all, they will be the “Death’s Head Regime”, the swastika replaced with some generic eagle symbol (I think), and all direct Nazi gestures removed.

    • dE says:

      It’s also not available in Switzerland. The hell? Folks, listen. Switzerland is where the nazi’s gold is. Not the Nazis. Well, technically.

    • FFabian says:

      It’s available, just the embedded one does not work (there is even a german version), reason is probably GEMA (music rights) than iconography:

  5. Dominare says:

    Given that anyone who was an adult when the war ended is now at least 86, I think we can safely say the statute of limitations is up for getting offended about WW2 stuff. Nazis are comic-book villainy for everyone at this point, because very few people who experienced their horrors firsthand are still alive.

    • Zekiel says:

      Yes, you’re quite right, no-one has the right to be offended by this. Even if their grandparents suffered or even died under under Hitler. /sarcasm

      You’re also ignoring the fact that neo-Nazis are still a thing NOW.

    • Premium User Badge

      RedViv says:

      Yeah, and unless you’re multiple centuries old, no being weird about Europeans taking over your native lands either, dear American natives! I mean come on! This is just political correctness GONE MAD!!!!!!!11!

    • Sheng-ji says:

      I think it’s nothing to do with them using nazi’s and everything between a slight misfire between grimdark and kitch, which it’s difficult to cram into the same product.

      • GallonOfAlan says:

        Grimdark And Kitsch … the all-action vampire-hunting cops who take stakeouts seriously – in cinemas NOW.

    • PointyShinyBurning says:

      Fun fact: In WWII, bad things only happened to grown ups!

  6. Sinnorfin says:

    The fantasy of ‘what if a loosing side in history won anyway by using extra-human help’?
    Commies and Nazis ruling over the world.
    How about an alternative world where native Americans drove away Conquistadors with the help of occult gods and possibly aliens and invade europe?

  7. Low Life says:

    This game has somehow managed to go from “So why are they making a new Wolfenstein game?” to “Huh, this new Wolfenstein game looks pretty good”. Not because of their approach to marketing, but because of their approach to weapons. Two guns are better than one.

  8. almostDead says:

    Iraqi football team- the videogame. Uday would be proud.

  9. P.Funk says:

    I don’t get it. Everyone thought Inglourius Basterds was brilliant for making us uncomfortable by mixing absurd exaggerations of Nazis with brutal violence like the forehead-swaztikas…. but this is in poor taste?

    Pffft. Come on people, its a game that is clearly trying to be as trashy and tone deaf as a latter day Tarantino flick. If anything I commend it making us uncomfortable. We laugh, we giggle, we smirk, then we also get a weird feeling in our stomach. Seems right to me. I always want my Nazis to be complex entities. I want to be half inclined to either laugh and giggle or be fixed with awesome horror. Why must we live by only one of the two sides of our perception of Nazism, either the silly or the serious? Why can’t we mix the two? Is nobody here capable of taking on that kind of bitter complexity?

    I love the trailer.

    • Faxanadu says:

      100 bucks says people are just trying hard to get offended even tho they have zero legit reason to. It’s an instinct to strive for the higher moral ground. Competition.

  10. Carlos Danger says:

    Future Nazis in an alternate universe? Man that is some ground breaking story they got there.

    ****Spoiler Alert****

    Hitler did it.

  11. notenome says:

    Here’s some bizare irony:

    The 1950s world cup is actually considered to be a traumatic event in Brazil’s history. The Getulio Vargas regime invested heavily in the event, which was supposed to be a landmark in the country’s history. The Maracanã, the largest stadium in the world with a maximum capacity exceeding 200,000 was built specifically for the World Cup, and the final was the first nationally televised event in Brazil’s history. There was, in short, a significant symbolic investment.

    The result, of course, was that after going up 1-0, Brazil lost the final to Uruguay. After the defeat, Nelson Rodrigues, a famed (if awfully aristocratic) novelist would write that Brazil was incapable of shaking the ‘mutt syndrome': the country was doomed to always feel inferior to our pure-bred counterparts. Paulo César Vasconcellos, a sports writer, has oft commented that the trauma of 1950, the Maracanazzo, is continuously transmitted from generation to generation.

    As such, the image of a Nazi ref shooting a player during the 1950 World Cup, well let’s just say that has an odd subjective resonance with how Brazilian collective memory portrays that event.

    • SkittleDiddler says:

      Jesus Christ. Some nations just take their soccer way too seriously.

      The Brazilians need to find a more uplifting pastime, one that’s not going to trigger some form of PTSD every time a match takes place.

      • Volcanu says:

        I think they have had more than their fair share of ‘uplifting’ football moments thank you very much. Replace Brazilians with ‘The English’ and you’re onto something

        • notenome says:

          Hah! In a way Brazil and England are polar opposites. England only managed to win the World Cup it hosted, whilst Brazil could *not* win the only World Cup it hosted.

  12. Blizniak says:

    Regardless of quality of the final game I really enjoy those trailers.

  13. Mhorhe says:

    Yeah, I can’t say I understand RPS’ fixation with “Nazis, man, Nazis..” they consistently showed regarding The Newest Wolfenstein.

    They’re not the Combine. They’re Nazis. In an alternate future where they enslaved the world. You’re going to see bits and pieces of a Nazified world.. Like P.Funk said, I don’t see much difference from Inglorious Basterds.

    Also, a referal shooting a player is in about the exact same class as Nazi robodogs.. if you want chilling, there are absolutely chilling stories out there broaching this very subject – The Man in the High Castle and Fatherland spring most prominently to mind. Deeply unsettling and no mistake.

    This one? Comic book over the top violence and not that much more. Certainly nothing that justifies a polemic.

  14. MrUnimport says:

    Am I the only one who thinks a Nazi ref summarily executing a player on the field for disputing a foul is black comedy, not grimdarkness? I mean for heaven’s sake they’d need to pull on a substitute, clean the body and brains off the field.

  15. JohnnyPanzer says:

    My wife just peed a little in her pants, the trailer was that good.

    I can see how it could offend some people, but then again I can’t think of any one thing that no one is offended by. It’s tounge in cheek, over the top and balls out insane.

  16. Dale Winton says:

    This looks a bit like shadow warrior but with Nazis instead of demons

    Very much looking forward to it

  17. GROM says:

    oh please get of your high horse, this looks like the bastard child of man in the high castle, and Ilsa : she wolf of the SS, wich both predate inglorious bastards by decades. Can we only show nazi’s like allo allo or the producers and should we ignore that they were part of a violent and savage warmachine?

    maybe look up Uday Hussein and see how football players were treated in a dictorial regime. Art imitates life you might say.

  18. JohnnyPanzer says:

    While we’re on the subject, could we all just agree that painting the nazi regime as comic book villains has been the accepted norm for history- and school books alike, ever since the war ended, and thus it should come as no shock when a game does it as well?

    The accepted view on WWII is this: Germany, the only antisemitic country in the world at the time, elected an actual, physical incarnation of the purest form of evil as supreme ruler in an open attempt to bring about the end of the world. While Germany buildt concentration camps out in the open, with gleefull support from 100% of it’s nazi-loving population, the rest of the world put their foot down and said “NO!”, throwing past differences and financial concerns aside in a joint effort to save the jewish population of the world.

    Honestly, in a world where a great movie like ‘Der Untergang’ became widely criticized for showing a scene where Hitler spoke kindly to his secretary, I think we’re way past the point where over-the-top vilification of the (very evil indeed, but still only human) Nazi regime can be frowned upon.

    • Mhorhe says:

      You must admit, you’ll be hard pressed to find villains as worthy of the name..

      ..that is, if you ignore the OTHER Evil Empire building concentration camps at the time, which was allowed to gleefully squat over half of Europe and go on making life miserable for everyone for another half a century.

      It’s almost as if the world never really got over the ga-ga of the Soviets beating the stuffing out of the Nazis and realize they were every bit as downright evil.. and also came closer to either taking over the world or blasting it to pieces.

      I mean, this is the 4th incarnation of Wolfenstein, but I’ve yet to see an equivalent Bolshevik Rampage or something.

      • notenome says:

        There are dozens of Russian Kill games. As a matter of fact, there’s one very popular game that has you gunning down Russian civilians in an airport.

        On the other hand, the United States was responsible for the genocide of millions of native americans, enslaved millions of blacks, put the Japanese in concentration camps, invaded every neighboring country it has ever had, forcibly sent the Cherokee to the middle of the desert and during the last hundred years has spent… 3 not actively engaged in a war or military intervention.

        But I’ve yet to see an equivalent American Rampage or something.

        • Mhorhe says:

          That’s interesting. I said “Soviets” and “Bolsheviks”, you replied “Russians”. Bolsheviks were anational. The formation of the Soviet Union was basically a declaration of war to the entire world, with the avowed and acted upon intention of “exporting” revolution everywhere. I consider Russians as being the first victims of that particular regime.

          “Dozens of Russian Kill games”, what? My point was it’s ridiculous to worry (as RPS is doing here) about the trivialization of the Nazi villain archetype when it’s been about the most constant – while other “villains” equally deserving are really thin on the ground. Besides the goofy Red Alert series, there really aren’t many games focusing on THAT particular Evil Empire.

          And.. excuse me..did you just equate actions of the USA with the Soviet Union? I think that makes me choke, and I’m neither US nor living in 5000 km of it.

          Yes, the fate of the native americans is a blight on US history.. it’s also what Europeans were doing just about everywhere at the time. Central and South America, Africa, Asia.. and if you want to go into it, how did the Tatar population in Crimea go from the Golden Horde’s base of operations to 10-12 % in the Soviet era?

          Yes, the US enslaved millions of black.. and serfdom was completely abolished in Russia at the end of the 19th century.

          Yes, the US put Japanese in concentration camps, which was, to put is simply, monstrously injust. But does that even scratch the surface of the Gulag system? Which covered tens of years, with millions upon millions dead of exposure, starvation, exhaustion, or simply executed? The Japanese war camps were a singular black instance in the history of the US, the Gulag was a central and essential tenent of the communist regime – and continues to be in those Communist states to this day is sattelite imagery and witnesses are to be believed.

          The US conducted more invasions of foreign territory than any other nation fullstop. But at least it left its genocidal resettlement/starvation/nationalization campaigns firmly in the 19th century. GIs did not randomly shoot an estimated 100 000 German ethnics, starve a few million Ukraineans and Khazakstani, nor rape a few million German women.

          Tl; dr – my essential point is not “hey let’s stop demonizing Nazis and let’s start demonizing Soviets”, but rather that the worry of turning that demonization trivial is.. kind of silly. But not as silly as comparing USA to USSR.

          • Hemoglobin says:

            Nope, bolsheviks were national, but they were international. Every bolshevik had his nationality and was proud of it, but it was obligatory for him not to put it above equality of all peoples of the Earth. A-national are americans, who pretend they have come from nowhere.
            Export of revolution stopped slightly after Trotsky was expelled, but at the same time our beloved democrats did everything not to let communists win through legal parliamentary elections in europe, which only depicts them as patheric hypocrits and their supporters as those who do not see the beam in own eye. Democracy is rule of ‘democrats’, not what ancient greeks meant then said these words. So once commies decided to play your rules, you suddenly stop playing the game fair.
            “how did the Tatar population in Crimea go from the Golden Horde’s base of operations to 10-12 % in the Soviet era?”
            They are nomads, so its laughable to hear about ‘base of operations’, they live where its comfortable for them, and it hardly correlates with amount of population. Crimean khanate was Ottomans puppet and was involved into slave trade of russians with Genoa, before it was dealt with by Catherine II. Southern europe was freed from Ottomans by ‘Evil Empire’ Russia.
            ‘Gulags’ dead throughout 26 years of its existence took hardly about 1.7 million dead of all causes, including WW2 famine and famine right after it where they obviously could not recieve proper supplies. “Simply executed” were simply executed for crimes the committed according to soviet penal code. Witnesses are to be believed as much as criminals are to be believed that they are not guilty, so everything should be double checked at least, instead of again listening to laughable talks about ‘bolshevik hordes’ that would built gulags for everyone, its just laughable, since overall population of evil gulag was slightly bigger than population of modern russian penitentiary system, and in most ‘populated’ years was close to amount of prisoners in state penitentiary system of USA, keeping in mind soviet population was 100 million smaller than modern american, but this happened 70 years ago too.
            Peaceful wehrmacht did not cause deaths of 30 millions slavs in USSR, Yugoslavia and Poland. In Iraq and Afghanistan people are not being killed at all after glorious american intervention for fake reasons. And Dresden, Munich and Tokyo were carpet-bombed just for lulz, not to mention more famous achievements of american human-loving policies.
            How came that famine of 1933 suddenly starved only ukrainians and kazakhs, you obviously have proofs of soviet state checked passports (that peasants did not have as it was not necessary, ha-ha-ha) and fed those who were russian, while starving their kazakh and ukrainian neighbours? Such policy is more common for democratic west, where people are divided into sorts accoring to colour of their skin. Raping of few million women should mean that half of german population are russian now? Or where is statistic of a few million abortions made? Do germans know they are not german? Or you with ‘professor’ Beevor who was born after WW2 witnessed everything sitting on your ass in a chair?

      • Hemoglobin says:

        For sake of education. “Evil empire” appeared only after south korean planes interferred into soviet airspace twice with obvious aim of provocation, since same could not happen twice, especially with aircrafts of the same country that for some reason is a puppet of USA, and of course both were warned and asked to follow soviet interceptors course. First place was downed with 2 victims, it landed in soviet territory. Second time destroyed in air. Before that, until ‘evil’ USSR was uncapable of destroying american U-2 recon planes, ‘kind’ USA kept barraging over soviet airspace with all the respect to territorial borders of USSR. So ‘kind’ empire USA used korean passengers as cannon fodder in their reconaissaince operations and false-flag provocations.

        Number two. USSR had no concentration camps ever, except for pow camps during and after WW2. Prison where criminals are put into for corrective labour where they live in conditions better than in ordinary jail are hardly a concentration camp, its a penal colony for those who committed crimes. And they were built not for sake of ‘building concentration camps’ but for sake of developing unsettled territories so honest people could come and work there. Something like Roosevelt did in USA with men who lost their jobs, but for criminals.
        When crying about europeans you probably forget how europeans make lives miserable for billions of people around the world just for sake of growing own fat. There were two types of countries in soviet sphere – nazi collaborant states that cry the most now, after they sold out all industry USSR sponsored to germans. And states that were occupied by nazis, that are also divided, like eternal foe of Russia – Poland, that cant into anything, except serving to Russia’s foe. Czechoslovakia, that was forcefully divided and thrown into german sphere, once again they’ve bought all production potential, making it fully dependent territory. And Yugoslavia, that was shown all kinds of western democracy in last 20 years, with bloodbath, religious conflicts and NATO bombings, Yugoslavia as a leader of informal leader of non-aligned movement deserved to see this kind and prosperous attitude from wonderful NAZI, pardon, NATO pacifists from defensive bloc that appeared before ‘offensive’ ‘evil’ Warsaw pact would be created. But yea, your life is miserable if you dont eat chips and drink coca-cola after.
        Also USSR never was close to blowing world into pieces, it was again american psychopathic anger, that after they placed ICBMs in Turkey, so they could reach USSR, suddenly it became all unfair when similar weapons were placed on Cuba. Every american action and every story about evil USSR is filled with tonns of hypocricy and lies. You speak of Bolshevik rampage and you make me laugh. Exploitatoirs would stop robbing their workers, everyone suffers! Bolshevik rampage only meant that whole 7 billions of the worlds population would finally live like humans and would earn according their effort, not their financial stance or what their family managed to rob or even earn through unfair competition to usurp power forever. When you say ‘bolshevik rampage’ you cry for your hamburgers, that rich would never eat, because they prefer healthy food, not the one they sell to you. You are just pathetic, i feel sorry for ones like you.

    • notenome says:

      I sympathize with you viewpoint, though personally I agree with Bernal’s thesis (in Black Athena) that Nazism was the ‘logical’, extreme apex of 19th century romanticism. The German concept of volk (folk), of immutable characteristics of a people (the Germans are like this, the Egyptians are like that etc) would lead to mid-19th century ‘racial science’. This belief in immutable racial characteristics tended to view intermixing as an aberration (thus the concept of racial purity). By the mid 19th century these ‘scientific’ differentiations were placed into a power structure (Indo-European ‘true-Germanic’ Aryans at the top, blacks, Semites etc at the bottom) and with every passing generation, ‘refine’ itself further and further. By the mid 19th century It is depressingly common to discover calls for the extermination of the Jews even from so-called ‘leftist’ opponents of tyranny, like Proudhon.

      And here, I think, is the part where turning Nazis into cartoons is so very convenient, because this was a global process. Many American and European universities had quotas for Jews even after the war was ended, not to mention that Romani Gypsies, to this day, are still widely discriminated in much of Europe. As such German Nazis appear to have become a sort of global/’West’ sacrificial goat, whereupon the collective sins of an entire edifice of discrimination are concentrated on one symbolic persona (Hitler).

      Just to make clear, I’m not at all trying to deny Nazi crimes or saying that they weren’t the evilest of evil bastards. It’s just very clear to me that the Nazism was the culmination of a collective, inter-continental, multi-generational intellectual effort.

      • JohnnyPanzer says:

        I agree completely, you just said it better. NSDAP allowed every other nation to wipe their slate clean and walk away from one of the scariest times in modern history without a scratch on their collective golden armour.

        This is also why I dislike the way german soldiers are constantly mocked and spat upon, even though the vast majority of them were no worse than the vast majority of soldiers elsewhere. One of he greatest influxes of new recruits happened when Germany was on the ropes, and it was mainly because those who had no love for Hitler felt that they now had no choice but to join the wehrmacht and defend their neighbours and loved ones. Hitler had caused the catastrophy that was barreling towards them, sure, but every German had a fresh memory of exactly how the allied powers treated a defeated Germany after WWI, and there was no reason to not assume that it would be waaaaay worse this time around.

        The greatest blame for Hitler’s rise to power falls, not on the German people as one would suspect, but on the victors of WWI. Germany had no greater blame for the outbreak of The Great War than any other nation involved, yet the country was humiliated, ransacked, stripped of all sense of pride and bled financially dry out of pure spite. NSDAP gained popularity during a time when one dollar was worth 23 MILLION D-marks, and Germans were starving to death on the streets.

        But I digress…

        • notenome says:

          Though I agree that the Peace of Versailles was instrumental in creating the sociopolitical conditions for Hitler’s rise to power, I still find that even then it is used to distract from the broader and wider construction that was ‘racial science’. A few examples:

          “Anyone who doubts this would dow ell to compare the dignified narrative by the… (Aryan) Darius on the rock at Behistu with the bombastic and blatant self-glorification of the inscriptions of the (Semitic) Ashurbanipal or Nebuchadrezzar.” – Gordon Childe. Childe wrote an entire book called ‘The Aryans’, and his anti-Semitism is especially striking given his marxist background (due to the fact that Marx was jewish, marxist historically tend to not be ardent anti-semites).

          -John Myres, Professor of Ancient History of Oxford who believed that ‘ancient peoples come upon the stage of history… in a certain order… each with a make-up congruous with the part they will play” characterized Mongols, for example, as ‘parasitic’, ‘infantile’, and like ‘a quadruped seen from behind’. Negros for their part had ‘a carnivorous looking jaw’. Professor S A Cook, who wrote the semitic chapter in the ‘Cambridge Ancient History’ saw Jews as having little concern for ethics or morality ‘Personal feeling is the source of [their] action, not common sense, or plan or morality.’

          – Stobart on the Minoans in 1911 ‘I, for one, decline to believe that this fine fellow [a Minoan depicted in a fresco] is a Semite or Phoenician, as has been suggested. We know that these people were extraordinarily gifted, especially in the sense of form, and that they were capable of very rapid development.’

          -The American Journal of Archaeology ‘The Phoenicians [a semitic people closely linked to the Jews in ‘racial science’] so far as we know, did not bring a single fructifying idea into the world… their arts… hardly deserve to be called arts; they were for the most part only traders. Their architecture, sculpture, painting were of the most unimaginative sort. Their religion, so far as we know it, was entirely an appeal to the senses.

          -Matthew Arnold ‘Bunsen used to say that our great business was to get rid of all that was purely Semitic in Christianity and to make it Indo-Germanic, and Schleiermacher that in the Christianity of us Western nations there was really much more of Plato and Sokrates than of Joshua and David…’

          This not considering people like Proudhon who considered publishing an article calling for ‘ the expulsion of the Jews from France… The Jew is the enemy of the human race. This race must be sent back to Asia, or exterminated.’

          Now who was most responsible for the rise of Nazism is a debate I refrain from entering because I don’t see it as academically relevant: it’s impossible to quantify participation. I just think it’s very important to situate Nazism with the timeline of ‘Germanic Romanticism’ (Germanic here referring to concept of a Germanic people, who were the pure-blooded descendants of the Aryans, not necessarily inclusive or reducible to citizens of Germany).

          • JohnnyPanzer says:

            Wow. You’ve given me a lot of food for thought. Thank you! :)

    • Hemoglobin says:

      Its obviously not like it, but what i read is an attempt to whitewash germans as the people who supported nazi ideology. First of all nobody was elected, Hitler was appointed and nazi party became ruling after staged burning of Reichstag and blaming everything on commies, before that country was obviously divided, due to various reasons, including, obviously, poor life conditions in Germany after WW1, that mostly were caused by attitude of WW1 victors. There were two ways of developing – fair, basing on own power that commies suggested, and unfair, through robbing others, turning them into slaves for sake of improving your life above average – which was suggested by nazis, other alternatives were least important, since those were ‘democratic’ states that turned Germany from a great power into a shithole. Nevertheless, after nazis came to power quite little men tried to oppose them. Majority did agree with them, silence is sign of approval too. They agreed with the fact that their state would execute certain unworthy kinds of people for sake of german people, nothing can be done with this fact, thats why all these stories distracting attention from it appear. Germans did not support Hitler, they did not kill anyone, just served in wehrmacht, they did not know and such hypocritical bla-bla. Who killed 30 millions of slavs in europe? They killed themselves? Took rifles and shot themselves into pits they themselves digged?
      Of course its laughable that people become crazy when Hitler is being shown polite, thing is, he probably was quite polite, but at the same time he did not see half of the worlds human population like humans at all. Its nothing new about such point of view, but in context of the movie its probably about how film director presents it. There are quite many pictures of happy Hitler, playing with his dog, with children he met, happy and smiling, problem is, when this happens Hitler is humanized, and of course he was a human, and all germans were, did they or did not support nazi ideology, but here comes a choice, are you ready to treat humans as cattle or not, do you think that a guy standing next to you is not worthy just because he is smaller than you, or has different hair colour. We judge people according to their personal qualities, i think it is logical and sane, and when a person appears trying to show good Hitler, there is a real danger that he wants to show a good Hitler for real, for nazi fanboys this evidence about nazis playing with cats and dogs, or that Hitler smiles to children is more than enough of an evidence, that nazis were all good, that Hitler was a nice man. It probably comes out of this ‘comic’ way of depicting, but it mostly exists in the west, because neither Britain nor USA never actually saw nazi crimes, some of them might have seen results, but for them its mostly like a joke. For slavic population of europe its not a joke at all. When you speak of how unfair it is to demonize nazis or Hitler you should keep in mind what happened in one eastern european country this year, in which for last 20 years children were taught that nazis were not that bad, they now believe that nazis are GOOD. And that killing people is just ok. And they deny they support nazis or do anything bad. Even people they killed are not seen as people by them.
      There’s a movie “Come and see” which ends with a scene when a boy, who carried a rifle for the whole film not making any shots at germans (not because he’s a pacifist, he hates them though in the beginning just as an enemy, and through the movie he is filled with actual proved hatred) decides to avenge Hitlers portrait laying in the mud, and while he shoots at it, he imagines that Hitler becomes younger, not fuhrer, but already a young painter, than a teenager, a boy, until he becomes an infant. And at this point he stops. He was not born ‘a Hitler’, he was born as a boy Adolf, and circumstances created this evil. And this is the only thing that divides you from being a nazi at this point. Are you ready to kill a child just because child is german? Why did germans allow themselves to kill children of other peoples? Thats the simple difference, thats what happens in most wars, Third Reich just showed purified and most human hating version of how it could happen (in 20th century, as i guess it could have been much worse before, but thing is, that nazi reign is return to the dark ages, so such behaviour is quite logical even in context of 20th century). This is just the last step that holds you before becoming a human-hating animal. Germans made this step, some of them did not step back yet, majority did, but its not a reason to say now that most of germans did not support Hitler, they were fooled and such. Every 10th german was a member of NSDAP by 1945. Probably every 10th German was in consecutive opposition. But majority did support Hitler by silence. By not opposing, which means – they accepted this way of life, dont you think? It was acceptable for them to have a polish slave and that instead of paying credits their country attacks another one to rob it.

  19. Ludomation says:

    I wonder if the Doom beta thing means it’s going to be a multiplayer game, or at least have a sizeable multi component. Why else would they do a beta for a single player game?