>Imagining yourself in the shoes of an evil person is a fundamental part of fiction. As long as it's fiction, and you know they're evil. While I've personally

>Imagining yourself in the shoes of an evil person is a fundamental part of fiction. As long as it's fiction, and you know they're evil. While I've personally greatly enjoyed Panzer General and its sequels, on a moral level the game differs very little from questionable post-war spin and propaganda. There is particularly an entire genre of problematic, self-serving Nazi general memoirs with themes such as: - Minimizing, or even completely ignoring, the Wehrmacht's essential contribution to war crimes and the Holocaust: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wehrmacht#Criminal_and_genocidal_organization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wehrmacht#Criminal_and_genocid... - Effectively promoting the myth of the superhuman Aryan soldier defeating vast hordes of subhumans. The original Panzer General takes this to a new extreme by making German units vastly superior throughout the war, down to the point where it's practically impossible to win the Battle of Berlin scenario as the Allies. - Generally treating the entire war as an abstract Kriegsspiel that they'd have won through superior strength of intellect - if it wasn't for that bumbling incompetent at the top. PG is an ultimate fantasy in this regard, with Hitler being hardly mentioned and almost inconsequential (spend a little prestige and you'll easily get over his "bad" decisions at Kiev and Gibraltar). It is actually possible to do better in a computer game. For instance, I've heard good things about Decisive Campaigns: Barbarossa. Apparently it lets you stand up to Hitler about war crimes at risk of losing essential resources and/or being dismissed, or choose to be complicit; and, at the end, runs you through the Nuremberg trials accordingly.