The article only seems to be using FH3 as a jumping off point. A gaming site isn't where I would expect that kind of commentary (or it to be received well), but eh - who cares.
I've read the article (despite the ban message, but as Dennis said, they were just looking for an excuse - there's dozens of posts like mine, only 3 bans) and also that argument made in the thread.
I mean the author literally says "I felt uncomfortable when I got the review code". Like, seriously?
Regardless, the way it's "using the game" is yes, as a platform, but also becuse it just got out. So it's a way to bait people into reading that stuff.
But even if you ignore that and the fact that it could just have been the same article about Australia on the "regular" VICE site, with no mention of FH3, the premise is dumb as fuck. Even with its shitty politics, you could go to Australia, rent a car, drive around, and have the exact same experience than the game offers you. It's not idyllic. It's not "underserved", or embellished. Because the political climate is entirely irrelevant to the game.
It would make sense in a game like Watch_dogs or whatever. But in this particular case, it's just nonsense. I mean, imagine if a sports commentator starting talking about the political shitstorm in Brazil while covering the 100m finals at the olympic games. People would go "huh wtf?", and rightfully so.
