Journal sections
Archive and statistics
Log in

Печатный вестник PRINTED
Издательство МГОУ Publishing house the

Our address: 105005, Moscow, Radio street,10a, office 98.

+7 (495) 780-09-42 add. 1740,
+7 (495) 723-56-31


Work schedule: Monday to Thursday from 10-00 to 17-30,

Friday from 10:00 to 16-00,

lunch break from 13:00 to 14-00.



BK Facebook Telegram Twitter Instagram

Bulletin of the MRSU / Section "Politics" / 2019 № 3.


S.N. Fedorchenko,  . Dmitry O.,  . Konstantin V.,  . Robert A.



UDC Index: 327; 32.019.5

Date of publication: 19.09.2019

The full text of the article

Downloads count Downloads count: 15


The aim of the work is to analyze the threats and potentials of computer games to implement the memory policy, understood by the authors as a set of tools and techniques used by political actors to assert in the mass consciousness an advantageous interpretation of historical facts and political events. The article shows that the multiplayer nature of modern computer games gives the researcher the right, first, to define their part as a network, and second, to consider it as a special format of political communication. The principles of content analysis, archetypal analysis, comparative studies and the case study are used as methodological opticians. It has been revealed that, despite the existing debate in the scientific community about the degree of manipulative influence of computer games on the mass consciousness, most researchers recognize the importance of the subculture factor of gamers, which various actors, including political ones, are trying to influence. Evidence of this impact is the fixation of archetypes, political stereotypes, historical myths and fakes. The conclusions indicate that if the state in the conditions of modern digitalization does not pay enough attention to such a channel for implementing the memory policy as computer games, then other political actors will take advantage of it for their own purposes. The work is focused on the increment of theoretical knowledge in the Game Studies segment on the memory policy in computer games.

Key words

computer games, memory policy, Game Studies, online games, political stereotypes, fakes, digitalization, legitimacy

List of references

1. Abramov A. V. [On the issue of spiritual regulators of the political life of modern Russian society]. In: Zhurnal politicheskikh issledovaniy [Journal of Political Research], 2017, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 136–148.
2. Alekseev R. A. Grazhdanskoe obshchestvo. Problemy stanovleniya i razvitiya v Rossii (pravovoy aspekt) [Civil society. Problems of formation and development in Russia (legal aspect)]. Moscow, MRSU Ed. off. Publ., 2013. 94 p.
3. Belov S. I. [Computer games as a tool for implementing the policy of memory (on the example of the display of the events of the Great Patriotic War in video games)]. In: Vestnik Rossiiskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriya: Politologiya [Bulletin of the Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia. Series: Political Science], 2018, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 96–104.
4. Grishin O. E., Iglin D. A. [Computer games as an element of mass political culture and communication]. In: PolitBook, 2015, no. 1, pp. 127–145.
5. Demin K. A., Pushkareva I. N., Tagil’tseva Yu. R. [Computer games of the military genre as an element of propaganda in the information war of Russia and the United States]. In: Politicheskaya lingvistika [Political linguistics], 2016, vol. 5, no. 59, pp. 110–116.
6. Zhukov D. S. [Problems and possibilities of big data for studying self-organized criticality in social media]. In: Zhurnal politicheskikh issledovaniy [Journal of Political Research], 2019, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 27–39.
7. Alekseeva I. A., Sidorov A. Yu., eds. Informatsionnaya epokha: vyzovy cheloveku [Information Age: challenges for a man]. Moscow, ROSSPEN Publ., 2010. 335 p.
8. Kurylev K. P., Kurbanov R. M. [The concept of “international terrorism” according to the constructivist school of international relations]. In: Zhurnal politicheskikh issledovaniy [Journal of Political Research], 2019, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 76–82.
9. Matyukhin A. V. [Russian anarcho-federalist utopia: “Free City” by A. A. Karelin]. In: Zhurnal politicheskikh issledovaniy [Journal of Political Research], 2018, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 41–47.
10. Huntington S. Stolknovenie tsivilizatsiy [The Clash of Civilizations]. Moscow, AST Publ., 2018. 640 p.
11. Shmitt K. Ponyatie politicheskogo [The concept of the political]. St. Petersburg, 2016. 568 p.
12. Shomova S. A. Ot misterii do strit-arta. Ocherki ob arkhetipakh kul’tury v politicheskoy kommunikatsii [From mystery to street art. Essays on the archetypes of culture in political communication]. Moscow, Higher School of Economics Publishing House, 2016. 262 p.
13. Eliade M. Aspekty mifa [Aspects of Myth]. Moscow, Academic project, 2017. 235 p.
14. Jung K. G. Struktura psikhiki i arkhetipy [The structure of the psyche and archetypes]. Moscow, Academic project Publ., 2015. 326 p.
15. Al-Rawi A. Video games, terrorism, and ISIS’s Jihad 3.0. In: Terrorism and Political Violence, 2018, vol 30, no. 4, pp. 740–760. DOI: 10.1080/09546553.2016.1207633
16. Angeli D. de, Finnegan D. J., Scott L., Loe N. St., Bull A., O’Neill E. Agonistic Games: Multiperspective and Unsettling Games for a Social Change. In: CHI PLAY’18 Extended Abstracts, 2018, Oct. 28–31, pp. 103–108.
17. Bogost J. Videogames and Ideological Frames. In: Popular Communication, 2006, no. 4 (3), pp. 165–183.
18. Bogost J. Persuasive Games: The Expressive Power of Videogames. London, The MIT Press Cambridge, 2010. 464 p.
19. Chapman A. Digital Games as History: How Videogames Represent the Past and Offer Access to Historical Practice. New York, Routledge, 2016. 302 p.
20. Kahne J., Middaugh E., Evans C. The Civic Potential of Video Games. London, The MIT Press Cambridge, 2009. 94 p.
21. Lakomy M. Let’s Play a Video Game: Jihadi Propaganda in the World of Electronic Entertainment. In: Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 2019, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 383–406. DOI: 10.1080/1057610X.2017.1385903
22. Pötzsch H. Selective Realism: Filtering Experiences of War and Violence in First- and Third-Person Shooters. In: Games & Culture, 2017, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 156–178.
23. Raessens J. Homo Ludens 2.0: The Ludic Turn in Media Theory. Utrecht, Universiteit Utrecht, 2010. 36 p.
24. Saber D., Webber N. This is our Call of Duty’: hegemony, history and resistant videogames in the Middle East. In: Media, Culture & Society, 2017, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 77–93. DOI: 10.1177/0163443716672297
25. Schulzke M. Military videogames and the future of ideological warfare. In: The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 2017, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 609–626.
26. Spokes M. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Procedural Rhetoric and the Military-Entertainment Complex: Two Case Studies from the War on Terror. In: Media, War & Conflict, 2019, May 23. Available at: (accessed: 07.06.2019).
27. West G. L., Konishi K., Diarra M., Benady-Chorney J., Drisdelle B. L., Dahmani L., Sodums D. J., Lepore F., Jolicoeur P., Bohbot V. D. Impact of video games on plasticity of the hippocampus. In: Molecular Psychiatry, 2017, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1–9. DOI: 10.1038/mp.2017.155
28. Zamaróczy N. de. Are We What We Play? Global Politics in Historical Strategy Computer Games. In: International Studies Perspectives, 2017, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 155–174. DOI: 10.1093/isp/ekv010
29. Zamaróczy N. de. Are We What We Play? Global Politics in Historical Strategy Computer Games. In: International Studies Perspectives, 2017, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 155–174. DOI: 10.1093/isp/ekv010

Лицензия Creative Commons