As you can see I have the Umbrella Corporation logo as the background to this blog. For those who don't know Umbrella is a fictional pharmaceutical company from the game Resident Evil. In the game Umbrella, in their attempts to create a drug to produce super soldiers made the t-virus that would vastly change the host DNA without killing it. It consistently made humans more aggressive along with a few other changes specific to the individual. A few unforeseen side effects from the virus were decomposition of the hosts skin and reanimation of dead tissue. This of course led to hordes of zombies you have to hack and slash your way through to beat the game.
The virus originated from a natural virus in Africa called the Progenitor virus and when combined with leech DNA creates the t-virus. I haven't the slightest idea what part of leech DNA can reanimate dead tissue and the creators of the game don't bother explaining their thoughts of how this would work.
So, to the creators of the Resident Evil game I ask why base the game on a virus that you can't even begin to explain how it works. You just coped out and said it changes the hosts DNA. All viruses change the hosts DNA in the cells they infect but they do not all lead to zombies. What is different about this virus? How is able to reanimate dead tissue? Viruses are not alive and need living tissue "take over" and help it replicate. Dead tissue can not perform this function and therefore the virus can not infect it. If the virus can not even infect dead tissue how could it possibly reanimate it? I enjoyed playing the game but the creators just ignored so many biological questions. I think the game could have been much better if the actual premise of it would have been more plausible or if they would at least try to explain it. I know most people don't care what makes the zombies they just want to shoot them, but there are a few others like me that would like to know why and how these zombies were made making shooting them all the more enjoyable.
I really like posts that connect science to popular culture--I post on this a lot myself! But I find myself wondering if you're being too literal here. The point of the game isn't science communication, is it? If it isn't sci comm, what is the point? Or, you could reflect on what impact this game might have for how we think of viruses (that screen shot/image is pretty telling there--the white guy blowing away the sick zombie Africans? Jeesh!). If the point isn't to be literal, what other points could you make?
ReplyDeleteI really like this post. And I agree that games are more fun when it becomes realistic and more plausible.
ReplyDelete