Animal Lovers Bite Back at Dog Killing in Call of Duty: World at War
- Thread starter ae86gamer
- Start date
Recommended Videos
So what? COD4 doesn't count or something?
Those dogs are bastards. Grenades and dogs are the most deadly enemy weapons in COD4.
Humans and dogs are interchangeable in this scenario. Nothing will come of this.
Those dogs are bastards. Grenades and dogs are the most deadly enemy weapons in COD4.
Humans and dogs are interchangeable in this scenario. Nothing will come of this.
Do you think it would put a spanner in their works if they found at that in World War 1 (or was it 2) that dogs were used as anti tank weaponry?
something about them being trained to find food under a tank and being half starved and sent into the front they would sprint under a tank and ka-blewy, or the fact that dogs have been used by armies in medieval times, e.g (Romans)
So why is it not okay to shoot dogs in the view point that they have been a weapon in the past, and a fucking effective one at that?
no one cares about the grenades :C i mean they sacrifice themselves but no one cares
*sheds a tear for the humble nade*
something about them being trained to find food under a tank and being half starved and sent into the front they would sprint under a tank and ka-blewy, or the fact that dogs have been used by armies in medieval times, e.g (Romans)
So why is it not okay to shoot dogs in the view point that they have been a weapon in the past, and a fucking effective one at that?
no one cares about the grenades :C i mean they sacrifice themselves but no one cares
*sheds a tear for the humble nade*
I'm a huge dog person. Huuuuge dog person. I have an American Pit Bull Terrier so I have heard all the horrid debate over dogs including bites, aggression, etc. With that said, even I think this is dumb. This is a historical game. It is a fact that in WW2, dogs were used to scout, sniff for bombs, and used as companions. If the enemy showed up, and their masters were in a fight for their life, those dogs would be doing the same damn thing. So, if you are the enemy and you have a vicious dog coming at you...what do you do? You do the same thing you would do to a person with a gun...kill them.
If there was a game were you went around killing harmless animals, yeah, they would have a point, but not this.
If there was a game were you went around killing harmless animals, yeah, they would have a point, but not this.
I dunno. Personally I think the fact that I commit genocide every time I play the game would be a bit disconcerting in a very general way. To feel bad that I'm shooting/stabbing an animal when I more frequently bathe in the blood of my human foes seems kinda silly. That said, it's basically following the same lines that the general argument against game violence uses.
Don't forget that the dogs in the game want you dead, very much dead, and it's nothing more then reasonable to kill something that wants you dead (whatever species, humans, dogs, aliens).Eclectic Dreck said:
I imagine the high-schoolers who came up with this also banned reading Old Yeller because a dog gets shot. Shot for the safety of the family/farm but shot none the less.
These types of things lead me to believe that Mass. schools aren't assigning enough homework to these people.
(What, no love for infected dogs of Resident Evil or the demon dogs of Silent Hill? Infected/demon dogs are dogs too!)
These types of things lead me to believe that Mass. schools aren't assigning enough homework to these people.
(What, no love for infected dogs of Resident Evil or the demon dogs of Silent Hill? Infected/demon dogs are dogs too!)
My sentiments exactly.Kukul said:
A quote from said retards which I found particularly noteworthy
"Killing animals should not be a form of entertainment..."
So why are they complaining about a video game and pestering Activision, and not bothering hunters and people who enjoy sports fishing?
You don't even kill real animals in COD:WAW, and even if it was an issue, shouldn't they be bothering the makers of those Cabela's Hunting games before atticking the makers of a WW2 game?
Apparently murdering Germans and Japanese people is fine, but don't 'hwurt the liddle doggies'.
So the issue here is killing dogs? Killing people is totally OK to kill, but dogs are not? How does that make any logical sense?
So..this person isn't at all angry that you kill people on a regular basis in Cod, but about the killing of savage attack dogs. Well, at least its a different argument then what they usaly bring up. Oh well. Won't stop me from playing CoD. Hell, now I'm going out of my way to kill every dog any game that I play.
Oh, you know, just ignore the human killing, animal killing is worse.
If they really cared about death in games they'd target death of humans in games. If they want to be like that, it's all or nothing.
If they really cared about death in games they'd target death of humans in games. If they want to be like that, it's all or nothing.
I just reread the article and saw that it was high school kids. Hell, missed that the first time. That makes this even more ridiculous. They probably needed to do some project or support some "just cause" and picked up on this. They have no idea what they are talking about and when they all plan to meet up over the weekend to go to the developers building, half will be hungover and not show up, some more won't be able to get their mother to drive them, and the remaining bunch will realize no one else showed up and walk home with their head in shame...
...with their dogs.
...with their dogs.
