I agree - it's 1991, so they ought to be there. But I can also foresee caution around that. Simply put, if you put the twin towers in a game, you're going to get complaints. Silly but true. I wonder if the programmers might just forego realistic geography for the time period to avoid that.
The way I see it is if you were to make something wherein the towers were central to your plot, it would probably draw less flack then if they were just background. They're totemistic of something way beyond a recognisable silouhette now and I imagine it must be hard not to be drawn on the whoe ‘you’re trivialising it' thing. ie, “if they aren't central to the plot, there is no need to see them at all - you'll get more complaints for skyline accuracy than you will for a slightly revised version on this one”.
let me be absloutely clear. It's Ghostbusters, it's light-hearted, it'd 1991. If you turn and face that way on top of a building in the game you should ABSOLUTELY see the WTC standing there. That's my opinion. It doesn't take much of a stretch to imagine people getting themselves into a froth about it, though.
Genuine question. has any game released since that time been set in new york during the time period the towers stood for? if so, were they excluded? it's just a scholars interest, for want of a better phrase - i'm intrigued as to how much thought a programmer would give it? would they feel forced to include some kind of disclaimer? is it more trouble than it's worth to be hisorically accurate? After all, there is no weaver hall at columbia university - we're already in a very slightly skewed version of New York…