Apocalypse Now the video game.

[FakeSympathy]

For anyone who has forgotten, or never knew the existence,

A small studio created a game based on the Apocalypse Now movie. You might say "Oh great, a movie-based video game. This is gonna suck". Well no, actually. The studio is using the license of the movie and they have complete freedom of what they want to do with the game as long as it does not ruin the spirit of the move.

You might now say "Wait, is this another generic military shooter game set in Vietnam?" Again, no. Unlike many recent military shooter games, Apocalypse Now will be a psychological horror fps game having the players to live the horror of the Vietnam war. Players will explore the unfamiliar land of Vietnam, delving into the creepy jungle and the temples within.

Now you might say "Well how come I've never heard of it?/I knew the existence, but what happened to it?" On Feb.15, 2017, the developers of the game left the kickstarter and created their now funding page. As of this post, they collected $851,015 of $5.9 million (Which is quite bold, IMO) with 241 days remaining.

Here's the trailer for anyone interested in this game.

 

[Kyrian007]

Isn't that Spec Ops: The line?

Yes, it is. Spec Ops is based on Heart of Darkness, the same book Apocalypse Now is based on.

 

[Squilookle]

Pretty sure Far Cry 2 was essentially Heart of Darkness too.

Also if you could tone down the patronising 'assuming we're arguing with you every step of the way' attitude that'd be great.

 

[Saelune]

Why do you need the rights to a movie title to make the game? Just make a game inspired by the idea of it and viola.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Spec Ops: The Line is probably as good an adaptation of Heart of Darkness as we're gonna get.

 

[FakeSympathy]

Spec Ops: The Line is probably as good an adaptation of Heart of Darkness as we're gonna get.

Which is unfortunate, because video games as a medium should be capable of far more effective storytelling than forcing the player to engage in inhumane activity, or even like with TWoM (This War of Mine), allowing choice, but forcing negative player side effects afterwards if you chose "wrong".

I think the more prevalent challenge would be to go completely unscripted, letting whatever consequences of player actions fall on the them more personally along with whoever they've grown to care about in their journeys. Because no one really cares until it gets personal. Finding out someone you have no personal connection to has died and it's like hearing there's rain in the forcast. But if any personal feelings were involved, completely different story.

That might be a bit heavy for entertainment's sake, but it would certainly make for a "hardcore" game.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Spec Ops: The Line is probably as good an adaptation of Heart of Darkness as we're gonna get.

Which is unfortunate, because video games as a medium should be capable of far more effective storytelling than forcing the player to engage in inhumane activity, or even like with TWoM, allowing choice, but forcing negative player side effects afterwards if you chose "wrong".

I think the more prevalent challenge would be to go completely unscripted, letting whatever consequences fall on the player and whoever they've grown to care about. That might be a bit heavy for entertainment's sake, but it would certainly make for a "hardcore" game.

I don't know what 'TWoM' is.
A lot of people seem to take a (weird) personal offense to Spec Ops and other games where the player's actions are questioned. Never quite understood why.

 

[TheFinish]

Spec Ops: The Line is probably as good an adaptation of Heart of Darkness as we're gonna get.

Which is unfortunate, because video games as a medium should be capable of far more effective storytelling than forcing the player to engage in inhumane activity, or even like with TWoM, allowing choice, but forcing negative player side effects afterwards if you chose "wrong".

I think the more prevalent challenge would be to go completely unscripted, letting whatever consequences fall on the player and whoever they've grown to care about. That might be a bit heavy for entertainment's sake, but it would certainly make for a "hardcore" game.

I don't know what 'TWoM' is.
A lot of people seem to take a (weird) personal offense to Spec Ops and other games where the player's actions are questioned. Never quite understood why.

In Spec Ops: The Line case, it's because they don't give you any choice, and then expect you to feel bad about what you did. But the game didn't let you do anything else if you wanted to progress, so it's hollow. And useless. Without even getting into how "the reveal" actually breaks the game and makes no sense due to an earlier gameplay sequence.

It was hyped to heck and back, but it's resoundingly meh.

On topic: I'm game for any more vidya set in 'Nam. And their homepage says "IT'S LIKE FALLOUT: NEW VEGAS ON ACID IN VIETNAM" which, if true, is just aces.

 

[FakeSympathy]

Spec Ops: The Line is probably as good an adaptation of Heart of Darkness as we're gonna get.

Which is unfortunate, because video games as a medium should be capable of far more effective storytelling than forcing the player to engage in inhumane activity, or even like with TWoM, allowing choice, but forcing negative player side effects afterwards if you chose "wrong".

I think the more prevalent challenge would be to go completely unscripted, letting whatever consequences fall on the player and whoever they've grown to care about. That might be a bit heavy for entertainment's sake, but it would certainly make for a "hardcore" game.

I don't know what 'TWoM' is.
A lot of people seem to take a (weird) personal offense to Spec Ops and other games where the player's actions are questioned. Never quite understood why.

This War of Mine. Yeah it's weird, especially when it's scripted yet it's never a big deal choosing to run down pedestrians in GTA. Drama and irrationality are inherent weaknesses of the human race.

Wasn't it Stalin who said a single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Spec Ops: The Line is probably as good an adaptation of Heart of Darkness as we're gonna get.

Which is unfortunate, because video games as a medium should be capable of far more effective storytelling than forcing the player to engage in inhumane activity, or even like with TWoM, allowing choice, but forcing negative player side effects afterwards if you chose "wrong".

I think the more prevalent challenge would be to go completely unscripted, letting whatever consequences fall on the player and whoever they've grown to care about. That might be a bit heavy for entertainment's sake, but it would certainly make for a "hardcore" game.

I don't know what 'TWoM' is.
A lot of people seem to take a (weird) personal offense to Spec Ops and other games where the player's actions are questioned. Never quite understood why.

In Spec Ops: The Line case, it's because they don't give you any choice, and then expect you to feel bad about what you did.

Again, I don't know why people take it so personally. If a book makes me feel bad I don't roll my eyes and go "Well duh, what did they expect me to do, stop reading?". Spec Ops is essentially about how you can make horrible mistakes by getting caught up in the moment and thinking you can do no wrong in the name of a good cause. Who can't empathize with that?

 

[TheFinish]

Spec Ops: The Line is probably as good an adaptation of Heart of Darkness as we're gonna get.

Which is unfortunate, because video games as a medium should be capable of far more effective storytelling than forcing the player to engage in inhumane activity, or even like with TWoM, allowing choice, but forcing negative player side effects afterwards if you chose "wrong".

I think the more prevalent challenge would be to go completely unscripted, letting whatever consequences fall on the player and whoever they've grown to care about. That might be a bit heavy for entertainment's sake, but it would certainly make for a "hardcore" game.

I don't know what 'TWoM' is.
A lot of people seem to take a (weird) personal offense to Spec Ops and other games where the player's actions are questioned. Never quite understood why.

In Spec Ops: The Line case, it's because they don't give you any choice, and then expect you to feel bad about what you did.

Again, I don't know why people take it so personally. If a book makes me feel bad I don't roll my eyes and go "Well duh, what did they expect me to do, stop reading?". Spec Ops is essentially about how you can make horrible mistakes by getting caught up in the moment and thinking you can do no wrong in the name of a good cause. Who can't empathize with that?

The thing is, I can empathize with that, but it's not what Spec Ops: The line does. For one, I didn't feel bad during any part of the game. It's a game. But even beyond that, Spec Ops goes on a whole tirade at the end, directed at Walker but actually aimed at the player, about how we should feel like crap because of what we do in military shooters. The problem is, of course, that it falls flat on it's face, because what we did in the game wasn't our choice. It's all scripted. It isn't like we had the choice of a very,very hard firefight or dropping the wiley pete. No, you either use the mortars or you don't progress. And a game calling you out on something you had to do to progress while being incredibly preachy about it just sits wrong with a lot of people.

Or, to summarise: if all Spec Ops: The Line did was to incite emotions in the player due to it's premise and what you do, that's admirable. That's what games of that ilk should aspire to do. But you can't expect me to give a crap when my choices are "do horrible thing" or "stop playing this game you bought".

And, again, it was hyped to hell and back, and it was resoundingly meh.

 

[retsupurae yahtsee]

Spec Ops had a very simplistic take on war and human nature, a middle school level at best. Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance did it far better in one scene than the entirety of that game, as seen here about 10 minutes into this video: *https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=metal+gear+rising+revengeance+raiden+hearing+thought&&view=detail&mid=BFDCD7CC9D9626749C21BFDCD7CC9D9626749C21&FORM=VRDGAR*

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

Spec Ops had a very simplistic take on war and human nature, a middle school level at best.

Also the whole ghosts and talking corpses part really kinda ruined it for me. Way to slather a decent story in silly!

 

[skywolfblue]

From what I remember, Black Ops 1 was essentially "Apocalypse Now the video game". How is this any different?

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Spec Ops had a very simplistic take on war and human nature, a middle school level at best. Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance did it far better in one scene than the entirety of that game, as seen here about 10 minutes into this video: *https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=metal+gear+rising+revengeance+raiden+hearing+thought&&view=detail&mid=BFDCD7CC9D9626749C21BFDCD7CC9D9626749C21&FORM=VRDGAR*

"Middle school level understanding of human nature" and you post a game about a samurai cyborg wearing a sombrero and building up combos against SWATs while screaming HEEEEYO. Or was that the joke? Spend enough time on the internet and the line between sarcasm and seriousness starts to blur.

Spec Ops: The Line is probably as good an adaptation of Heart of Darkness as we're gonna get.

Which is unfortunate, because video games as a medium should be capable of far more effective storytelling than forcing the player to engage in inhumane activity, or even like with TWoM, allowing choice, but forcing negative player side effects afterwards if you chose "wrong".

I think the more prevalent challenge would be to go completely unscripted, letting whatever consequences fall on the player and whoever they've grown to care about. That might be a bit heavy for entertainment's sake, but it would certainly make for a "hardcore" game.

I don't know what 'TWoM' is.
A lot of people seem to take a (weird) personal offense to Spec Ops and other games where the player's actions are questioned. Never quite understood why.

In Spec Ops: The Line case, it's because they don't give you any choice, and then expect you to feel bad about what you did.

Again, I don't know why people take it so personally. If a book makes me feel bad I don't roll my eyes and go "Well duh, what did they expect me to do, stop reading?". Spec Ops is essentially about how you can make horrible mistakes by getting caught up in the moment and thinking you can do no wrong in the name of a good cause. Who can't empathize with that?

The thing is, I can empathize with that, but it's not what Spec Ops: The line does. For one, I didn't feel bad during any part of the game. It's a game.

It's a book.
It's a movie.
It's a canvas.
It's a hunk of marble.
It's all just there and it only means what it makes me feel.

It's all scripted.

Every game is scripted. Every book is written. Every movie is shot. Every song is recorded. That doesn't mean the subject and pain of (ill) choice is taboo for the arts. You don't get to downplay their effect because the artist wanted you to feel that effect, even if the effect is lost on you.

 

[TheFinish]

It's a book.
It's a movie.
It's a canvas.
It's a hunk of marble.
It's all just there and it only means what it makes me feel.

It's all scripted.

Every game is scripted. Every book is written. Every movie is shot. Every song is recorded. That doesn't mean the subject and pain of (ill) choice is taboo for the arts. You don't get to downplay their effect because the artist wanted you to feel that effect, even if the effect is lost on you.

I get to downplay their effects when it doesn't work. And it doesn't work, in this case, precisely because there is no choice. Walker makes a mistake, an ill choice (as you call it) in using white phosphoruson civilians (and in many other parts of the game as well, but that one is the biggest and the one that breaks him). Walker does. The player cannot. By the very nature of the game, it is impossible for the player to make story-related mistakes, the player has no choice.

Therefore, when the game attempts to superimpose Walker's mistakes on the player during the last speech, it falls flat. That's my main problem with Spec Ops: The Line. Well, that, and how the story makes absolutely no sense with the last reveal. The mediocre gameplay didn't help, either.

And I never said "the subject and pain of (ill) choice" is taboo for the arts. Just that it doesn't work in Spec Ops' particular case.

 

[Pseudonym]

Reportedly the apocalypse now game is by the same people who made Rambo: the video game so it might just be an awful on rails shooter with QTE's to break up the shooting. The graphics don't look all that great either.

As for spec: ops. (spoilers, I guess) Its a while back but I never really took it to blame the player in any overly direct sense. In fact, I felt the game went through great lenghts to alienate the player from our avatar. I thought that was the point. Make a game with all the linearity and spectacle of a call of duty or battlefield campaign and then have the main charactar be the bad guy and hallucinating. All the while displaying the horrors of war without trying to glamourize them. It worked best when it came out, on the back of a long list of call of duty sequels and clones, preferably without the player knowing what they were getting into too much.

It might not make sense that you would feel guilted by what happened but it makes equally little sense to feel cool when playing call of duty and yet call of duty sort of has that effect despite of all its linearity. You aren't Soap anymore than you are Walker and you shouldn't really want to identify with either.