The Division 2

No politics please; this is Clancy.

There’s been some discussion about The political stance of the Division 2. Less about what message it’s trying to convey, more just along the lines of ‘is it actually saying anything?’ As with the first game, The Division 2 is set in a post-apocalyptic America, wiped out after a virus (initially spread via the handling of cash) has eliminated much of the population. The sequel takes things to the nation’s capital. Washington DC. And it’s based on the literary world of one Tom Clancy, who was never a man to shy away from politicising his work, regardless of the message it inherently carried.

It shouldn’t be a point anyone has to argue, and it shouldn’t be something Ubisoft feels the need to play down or deny – political statements in games are a sign of the medium maturing and should be welcomed with open arms. Frankly, this is all something we want to get into in more detail and you can read our thoughts about it on page 42 of this very issue.

Still, let’s put that debate to one side for the moment and soldier on into the world of The Division 2 – what is Massive Entertainment doing to make this sequel a cut above the surprisingly long-tailed original? Largely, it seems, sticking to the script, but at the same time incorporating all the lessons it learned working on the first game and how ut turned that into something people played – and continued to play – for years after its release. On first play it feels less like an out-and out sequel, and more like an update built on solid foundations, which given the series connection to being a living game experience, makes a lot of sense.