NARC

"A far-flung failure that frequently fails at fun."

The 1980s were a very humorous time period for the United States, from an unabashed point of view. Ronald Reagan was in power as the President of the U.S., implementing his infamous ''Reaganomics'' to try and booster the economy of the country. Tacky, synthesized music was in style, and to be heard everywhere. Ludicrous fashions abounded as people wore everything from leg warmers and headbands to multicoloured mohawks, each considering their style to be the superior. And, of course, there was the ''war on drugs'' which was implemented by Nancy Reagan, wife to the senile Pres. Nancy wanted to win her little war, and thus created a multi-faceted plan of attack to succession. The depths of this effort could readily be seen by the advertisements targeting children, through Television and the D.A.R.E. program.

I recall waking up early on Saturday Mornings, happily crunching my Cap'n Crunch cereal while awaiting episodes of Muppet Babies, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, and Captain N. Being a youngster, high from the excess sucrose intake I had just undergone, it was bad enough sitting through the commercials that played out between my shows. This sort of flagrancy was increased, however, when it covered a boring topic - that of how to ''just say no,'' the catch phrase of Nancy's war. The irritation compounded itself when the full 1 1/2 minute commercials with bad dancers and singers proudly proclaiming the horrors of drugs were created, forcing an already overactive youngster to move to another channel.

If this was the best of efforts to increase an awareness of drugs and to get children to avoid watching them, Nancy Reagan had clearly failed. Even the 30-minute cartoon dealing with drug use, featuring popular cartoon characters from a variety of shows, ultimately came off as both lame and disappointing. James Marsden (of future ''X-Men'' fame as Cyclops) played the impetuous boy who was lured into the world of drugs, George C. Scott (''Patton'') was the exaggeration of evil as a cloud of smoke, and a wide range of cartoon characters tried to convince the distraught boy otherwise about the usage of drugs. Anyone I know of who tuned in was watching to see their favorite Saturday Morning inhabitants coexisting with one another, not for the anti-drug message. When they found that their favored character was gone after a few scant seconds of airtime, they too changed the channel, thus leaving Nancy's war on the doorstep in favor of a few more minutes of bliss at the hands of Alf and Mighty Max.

Having blown their initial shot at leaving the youth of the U.S. with a fine example, the War on Drugs shifted to another popularly-visited facet of childrens' lives - video games. The ''Drugs Are Bad'' creed, while a fine and upstanding moral one, was being performed in an asinine way through television's attempts, so the next logical step would be to find another sector of entertainment that kids escape to, then cloud that area with thoughts of healthful and dandiness. The video game ''N.A.R.C.'' extended the ludicrousity of such actions by putting the ''war on drugs'' in a very literal sense. The game pits you as one of two Narc agents, sent out to stop the vile Mr. Big from the distribution of his wares. The method of halting the big-time drug perpetrator was a very brutal, very irrational one: your Narcs are outfitted with machine guns and rocket launchers, and proceed to gun down felons left and right. This is an absolute disaster for several reasons. Let us discuss them.

The first reason this should not have been conceived is the very style of the game itself; you move your characters about, shooting down drug users, drug pushers, psychopaths, and the like. Therefore, the game is both giving the impression that drugs are wrong, and that the best way to handle drug users - as demonstrated by the heroes of the game - is violence. Extreme violence, the kind of violence that gets you sent to the gas chamber because you exerted it. A video game that simply had you avoiding drug users for points might have been significantly lamer, but the game itself would have been much more feasible than demonstrating an equally morally reprehensible action of the drug use itself. Substance Abuse is a powerful addiction that many have had to overcome, and showing the easily-impressionable youth that it is perfectly acceptable to violently harm and/or kill these weaker-of-mind people is a poor omen. Narc is a demonstration to children everywhere that it is not only acceptable to harm others, but that in most cases death is the better, quicker, and easier alternative.

Let us examine this travesty of a game further. You move your Narcs around on the street, busting or killing any perps that come along your path. Since these nefarious villains are attacking you, it is often difficult to get close to them, pin them down, and bust them for their illegal activities. The game, therefore, gives you the easier, more methodical route of gunplay - instead of taking a perfectly good human life and saving it from the gallows that the drug-infested streets offer, you have the simpler route of shooting dead these ne'er-do-well lost souls. As the game progresses, you find yourself combating larger groups of such opponents, making it practically impossible to make any arrests. For these instances, shooting your way to safety is the only option. What's worse is that, upon your choosing, you can mow down these herds of weak-willed buffoons even quicker by unleashing missiles into their ranks, scattering the troops limb by bloody limb. Not only is killing people demonstrated as an acceptable means of disposing of drug abusers, but excessive destruction at their expense is encouraged as well.

And why stop there? The game features more nasty habits than the drugs that are simultaneously being condoned therein! Killing is ok, as is violence towards animals, soliciting prostitution, destruction of personal property, and even the more mundane act of speeding; they are all depicted as normal behavior in the lives of our own police force, if not necessary in some situations. The game is a huge promotion of the war on drugs, but it takes the concept too literally and too far, skewing its own principles by creating more problems than solving new ones. This game does not give the impression that drugs are bad, nearly as much as it shows you that the ugly, disfigured people of the world all indulge in drugs, and these very same people are to be put down like a horse with a broken leg.

It is discomforting to play a game that is geared towards children, who's message is jeopardizing their outlook on the future and one another by implementing such acts of cowardice and brutality. Children learn from what the see and hear, and they tend to emulate the things they enjoy or think are ''cool''. For every child that found this game to be ''cool'', we might have one less drug dealer or drug addict on the streets - but instead, we might have another mass-murderer on our hands. You tell me which is the greater evil, I've already made my decision: I would rather see Beetlejuice and Gonzo yack it up about puffs of smoke than play this waste of space. It's not even that good a game!

Reviewer's Score: 1/10, Originally Posted: 06/03/02, Updated 06/03/02