I recently just replayed a game called Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty for the PS2. It originally came out in 2001, and (obviously) is the second game in a series. The 4th installment, titled Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots, is coming out for the PS3 next year. I rarely return video games after I have completed them, because there is always a point where I get nostalgic and want to go back and replay them. Also, the collector in me wants to be able to have all the Metal Gear Solid games together in my catalog. So, in preparation for the upcoming 4th game and to refresh myself with the overall story, I have replayed and completed the first two games. I'll be starting the 3rd one again shortly.
I'm not going to get into the main story line of the game here, but I am going to mention certain plot points and characters without spoiling anything for those who may want to play the game and find out on their own. But for those who would like to know more about the game's story and have no plans to play it, here is the wikipedia page for Metal Gear Solid 2 (MGS2).
The Metal Gear Solid series is known for intertwining real world issues and themes into its story line including the morality of soldiers and the consequences of war, but it mostly focuses on the threat of nuclear proliferation and the maneuverings of those in power in order to achieve their own ends. Metal Gear is the name of a heavily armored, bipedal walking tank that is capable of firing a nuclear missile from anywhere in the world. As the story progresses from the first game to the next, the specifications of Metal Gear, which was secretly being developed by the U.S. government and captured by a renegade group of special forces turned terrorists, have been sold on the black market and are available to anyone with the funds and resources to build one. The main character of the game, who goes by the code name Solid Snake, is the one man the government turns to in order to prevent the terrorists from using Metal Gear to make good on their threats.
In the second game, the threat of nuclear attack is still a prevalent theme, but the concept of the control of information in the digital age as another and almost equally frightening abuse of power is brought up. I find this to be extremely interesting, because a case is made around the fact that all information, no matter how trivial, is constantly accumulating and being preserved and is therefore actually slowing down social progress and reducing the rate of evolution. Liken it to the genetic code and natural selection - in genetics, "unnecessary information and memory must be filtered out to stimulate the evolution of the species." But the fact that now practically all information in its various forms is recorded and available, much of it pointless, there is no real context for what is "valuable truth." For example, humans have always kept records of their lives throughout the course of history - writings, images, symbols, etc. But, in the past, not every mundane event was preserved. Only a "small percentage of the whole was selected and processed, then passed on." This is very similar to the passing on of genes.
Darwinism. Survival of the fittest. The natural order of things. In nature, those with the strongest genes survive to pass them on to their children. In society, those who are the strongest beat out the competition and succeed. Human nature and behavior is predicated on these basic instincts. But as we plunge ever faster into the digital age, have these instincts eroded away? What can we learn and and how can we grow when we are inundated with the concepts that success is contingent upon nothing anymore. Britney Spears is no longer famous because she sells tons of albums and fills up arenas around the world. She's famous now because everyone wants to know how she'll screw up next, not because she continues to be successful. Her albums have steadily declining sales with the most recent being the worst selling by far. Her fans have thinned, and her appearances on music awards shows are mocked by the media. She has two children that had to be taken from her by the legal system due to her erratic behavior and unsafe parenting. In another day and age someone like her would have faded away into obscurity, but now anyone with a camera phone can take a video of her running through stop signs in her car and post it to YouTube in a matter of minutes for the whole world to see. And this is why she's still relevant.
So if it really is the case that all of this unnecessary and trivial information is accumulating and eroding away the instincts that help us to grow, adapt, and evolve, does there need to be some way to control what information is received by the masses? That is the question that the game asks which, in the context of its story, is motivated by the antagonists and their lust for power that you as the hero are battling against. I'm not posing that question myself (my lust for power is not as great as that). What has made me stop and think is the reality that information - every little bit of it - is no longer ignored. Even though we have the ability to decide for ourselves what is important to each of us, how many of us really do that? As technology becomes faster and more powerful, are we progressing less and less? I would say, if anything, that the advent of such amazing technology is testament to how far we've come, what we've accomplished, and what's on the horizon. But the trick is how we use what's available to us. Sometimes we know so much, yet really have learned so little.