The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
someones making a 9/11 game, which is pretty sick, but check out
www.spong.com for news
www.spong.com for news
Page:
someones making a 9/11 game, which is pretty sick, but check out
www.spong.com for news
www.spong.com for news
This looks excellent. I was expecting a little website game like the Diana one. Will it be deadly serious or full of black humour I wonder?
I'm sure it will just be a piece of rubbish propaganda.
With levels such as 'kill the middle-eastern one - he looks a bit shifty'
and 'put out a fire whilst waving a flag and singing the national anthem backwards'
With levels such as 'kill the middle-eastern one - he looks a bit shifty'
and 'put out a fire whilst waving a flag and singing the national anthem backwards'
How is it pretty sick? They made a vietnam game.
Maybe he's a surfer or something?
Judah Ben-Hur wrote:
> How is it pretty sick? They made a vietnam game.
My thoughts exactly. Although it is a BIT soon games have already opened up the 'history books' for use in games.
Medal of Honor: Frontline's first level any one?
> How is it pretty sick? They made a vietnam game.
My thoughts exactly. Although it is a BIT soon games have already opened up the 'history books' for use in games.
Medal of Honor: Frontline's first level any one?
It's an Unreal MOD not a game in itself.
Delta Force Task Force Dagger was effectively 9/11 inspired, as were numerous Rogue Spear mods, and others. Ultimately it's a game, and I suspect not a very good one at that. Who wants to run around a building when stuff like Half Life 2 is coming out eh ?
Practical Magic wrote:
> Delta Force Task Force Dagger was effectively 9/11 inspired, as were
> numerous Rogue Spear mods, and others. Ultimately it's a game, and I
> suspect not a very good one at that. Who wants to run around a
> building when stuff like Half Life 2 is coming out eh ?
I'm sure HL2 will feature some buildings...
> Delta Force Task Force Dagger was effectively 9/11 inspired, as were
> numerous Rogue Spear mods, and others. Ultimately it's a game, and I
> suspect not a very good one at that. Who wants to run around a
> building when stuff like Half Life 2 is coming out eh ?
I'm sure HL2 will feature some buildings...
This is something I wrote a while ago ::
~~~~~~
While watching the TV the other day, the advert for Medal of Honour: Frontline came on. If you’ve seen it, you’ll know that it starts off with footage from the real D-Day Landing in 1944 and then goes on to show Frontline’s rendition of it. This got me thinking, is it really right to make games based on real wars?
The main argument I have against the making of games about actual wars is the fact that real people fought and died. The World Wars weren’t a rather nasty argument with a bit of pushing and shoving; they were, as the name suggests, World Wars. People died, innocent civilians, not only soldiers (most of who were conscripted anyway). Is it fair to trivialise these people’s lives by pixel-ating them and paying people to give them their voices? Really, I think you’d have to be insane to say “Yes” to that.
In the same vein, your actions don’t really have consequences. Sure the person you’re controlling may die and you’ll have to do the level again, but that’s not what I mean. Imagine the scene: You’re in an evacuated civilian house defending against an attack and trying to hold this territory. Suddenly, a grenade comes flying in through the window and explodes. You somehow survive but the house falls to the ground. In the game, this doesn’t matter, but in the real war, that would be a real persons house and when the war is over, they’d have nowhere to live. This all trivialises the fact that this war was real; it did happen, as did the killing. But not the killing of pixels, the killing of a people who most probably left a family behind too. This war destroyed thousands of people’s lives, but Frontline turns it into a highly enjoyable experience in which people dying doesn’t really matter.
Now, for the counter argument.
This game is just that, a game. True it’s based on real events, but none of the people in it (to my knowledge) are based on real people who fought and died. If the soldiers in it were real soldiers, then I would not hesitate in proclaiming it quite sickening. But it’s not; the soldiers contained within it are made up characters whose actions are dictated by human programming. In my mind, this makes it quite acceptable.
Also, the two World Wars were incredibly historic events, if the outcome of them had been different, then we would probably be living in am entirely different world right now. It is important to educate children about them and that is done, not only, in schools but also in other forms of media. The amount of films and books made and written about the two World Wars and actually pretty much any other war that has taken place, is quite astonishing. Yet people don’t complain about these despite them containing the same concept as war-based games.
One of MOH:F’s main selling points is its realism and historical accuracy; it depicts many events that really happened, albeit not with real people. This same sort of thing has happened in films, most notably “Saving Private Ryan” the events in which are real; indeed, Saving Private Ryan is sometimes used as a classroom aide when learning about World War II. So if this happens and is accepted, then I really see no reason why games in the same vein shouldn’t be treated in just the same way.
The only real modern comparison that can be made to this subject is the September 11th attacks. If a commercial game were made about these (and I think that actually a flight-sim has been produced and is available for download) there would be a mighty uproar of people branding such a game as “sick” and “horrifying”. Again this would probably happen if a film were made about it too, yet films and games about the World Wars don’t receive that much backlash (do they? I’m pretty sure they don’t…) Why is this? I think it’s because the World Wars happened relatively a long time ago, but the September 11th attacks happened only last year and the consequences of them are still very fresh in people’s minds. But when you look at it, the World Wars *weren’t* that long ago, they were in fact in people’s lifetimes who are still alive today, but films and books about these wars are deemed acceptable, so I really see no reason why the games shouldn’t be.
~~~~~~
While watching the TV the other day, the advert for Medal of Honour: Frontline came on. If you’ve seen it, you’ll know that it starts off with footage from the real D-Day Landing in 1944 and then goes on to show Frontline’s rendition of it. This got me thinking, is it really right to make games based on real wars?
The main argument I have against the making of games about actual wars is the fact that real people fought and died. The World Wars weren’t a rather nasty argument with a bit of pushing and shoving; they were, as the name suggests, World Wars. People died, innocent civilians, not only soldiers (most of who were conscripted anyway). Is it fair to trivialise these people’s lives by pixel-ating them and paying people to give them their voices? Really, I think you’d have to be insane to say “Yes” to that.
In the same vein, your actions don’t really have consequences. Sure the person you’re controlling may die and you’ll have to do the level again, but that’s not what I mean. Imagine the scene: You’re in an evacuated civilian house defending against an attack and trying to hold this territory. Suddenly, a grenade comes flying in through the window and explodes. You somehow survive but the house falls to the ground. In the game, this doesn’t matter, but in the real war, that would be a real persons house and when the war is over, they’d have nowhere to live. This all trivialises the fact that this war was real; it did happen, as did the killing. But not the killing of pixels, the killing of a people who most probably left a family behind too. This war destroyed thousands of people’s lives, but Frontline turns it into a highly enjoyable experience in which people dying doesn’t really matter.
Now, for the counter argument.
This game is just that, a game. True it’s based on real events, but none of the people in it (to my knowledge) are based on real people who fought and died. If the soldiers in it were real soldiers, then I would not hesitate in proclaiming it quite sickening. But it’s not; the soldiers contained within it are made up characters whose actions are dictated by human programming. In my mind, this makes it quite acceptable.
Also, the two World Wars were incredibly historic events, if the outcome of them had been different, then we would probably be living in am entirely different world right now. It is important to educate children about them and that is done, not only, in schools but also in other forms of media. The amount of films and books made and written about the two World Wars and actually pretty much any other war that has taken place, is quite astonishing. Yet people don’t complain about these despite them containing the same concept as war-based games.
One of MOH:F’s main selling points is its realism and historical accuracy; it depicts many events that really happened, albeit not with real people. This same sort of thing has happened in films, most notably “Saving Private Ryan” the events in which are real; indeed, Saving Private Ryan is sometimes used as a classroom aide when learning about World War II. So if this happens and is accepted, then I really see no reason why games in the same vein shouldn’t be treated in just the same way.
The only real modern comparison that can be made to this subject is the September 11th attacks. If a commercial game were made about these (and I think that actually a flight-sim has been produced and is available for download) there would be a mighty uproar of people branding such a game as “sick” and “horrifying”. Again this would probably happen if a film were made about it too, yet films and games about the World Wars don’t receive that much backlash (do they? I’m pretty sure they don’t…) Why is this? I think it’s because the World Wars happened relatively a long time ago, but the September 11th attacks happened only last year and the consequences of them are still very fresh in people’s minds. But when you look at it, the World Wars *weren’t* that long ago, they were in fact in people’s lifetimes who are still alive today, but films and books about these wars are deemed acceptable, so I really see no reason why the games shouldn’t be.
Page: