On November 8, 2019, a game named “Death Stranding” was released to a mixed reception. Based on the title of this article, you may think the controversy would have to do with the topic of abortion. In reality, the negative reaction largely surrounded the title’s inconsistent gameplay.
The game was revealed in 2016 with eerie imagery of umbilical cords connected to sea creatures, a fetus stranded on a beach, and a naked Norman Reedus, star of “The Walking Dead” TV show. Needless to say, this game had people turning their heads as soon as it was announced, but a lot of faith was placed on it because it was being directed by Hideo Kojima, one of the most respected names in the video game industry, namely for his work on the “Metal Gear” series of games.
Once the game was released, however, a fair amount of criticism was placed on it for being boring. In fact, about 80% of the game entails walking from place to place delivering packages. However, I think this negative press surrounding the gameplay made people overlook many of the subtleties in its story-telling, most notably in how the game treats the unborn.
It is admittedly very hard to talk about the game without spoiling it or overexplaining the nuances of the world that it takes place in. So from here on out, there will be spoilers for this game. I do recommend playing it for yourself, despite its many flaws in its gameplay and pacing, so be warned.
The story takes place in a post-apocalyptic version of America where an occurrence known as the Death Stranding essentially connected the world of the dead and the unborn, causing ghosts with umbilical cords known as BTs to appear. Most people cannot see the BTs, and getting caught by them causes a massive explosion. But due to the supernatural connection of the dead and the unborn, fetuses have the ability to see the BTs, so the government decided to develop pods that contain unborn fetuses (called BBs) and allow other people to see the BTs.
Throughout the game, the player is made aware that the BB unit you are in possession of is just “a piece of equipment” and will eventually need to be retired, causing the unborn baby inside to die, and one character will remind you of this often throughout the game. It is also forbidden to try to save the babies due to the risk of their death and conversion into a BT, causing an explosion. But over the course of the game, your character grows an attachment to his BB and even the character who is forced to remind you that the BB is “equipment” also begins to grow an attachment to it as well.
At the end of the game, the player’s BB seemingly dies within its pod, and the player is given the order to incinerate it before it turns into a BT. The player is encouraged to try and save it despite the illegality of doing so by the other character who used to remind you that the BB is just “equipment.” The player character breaks protocol and is able to save it with the last shot of the game being the player character of the game holding the hand of his BB now as his son.
It’s very possible that this was all an accident by the writers. I haven’t heard people discuss the pro-life argument in regards to this game, likely due to it being overshadowed by the actual “game” part of the title. The writer/director of this game has been known to make commentaries on sensitive topics such as child soldiers in foreign countries. This may be why he made a game where the consequences of death are so great, and I think it’s significant that that extends poignantly to the life of the unborn as well. I believe that this aspect of the game is an example of common grace from God, showing the value of life even in the unborn. And in a video game, no less.