BlueHighwind said:
Woodsey said:
BlueHighwind said:
"Its just a game". Yeah, it is. But don't be surprised when people are protesting what is "just a game". Being "just a game" doesn't mean that it cannot be massively insulting and insensitive to the victims worldwide of this horrible evil organization. I thought playing as the Terrorists in Command and Command Generals was bad... this is worse.
It's being developed with the aid of soldiers.
This is why I never bought into the protests against 6 Days in Fallujah; the soldiers played a very large part in the game's development. In fact, if I'm not mistaken weren't the soldiers the ones to approach the devs? I can't remember now.
Either way, there are books written on the subject, and there are films on the subject. The only time you play as the Taliban is in the multiplayer. It doesn't promote terrorism, or support of the Taliban, etc. etc.
Oh, and wasn't the terrorist group in C&C: Generals fictional? You just sound hyper-sensitive.
That's what I meant. The Generals faction was a fictional organization for a reason - they didn't want to offend anybody by using the real Al Qaeada or Taliban. It isn't MUCH better, but it is. The game was more or less a ridiculous parody too, it never once tried to take itself seriously. You can't really get angry at a game where the Chinese blow up the Three Gorges Dam just for laughs.
And how exactly is using a fictional organisation less offensive? Given, that doesn't really matter in Generals, considering the entire game is an intentionally exaggerated take on modern/near-future warfare and it's participants. But if you are aiming for a somewhat realistic potrayal, trying to potray the opposite side as something else then it actually was is an insult to the soldiers who fought a very real threat as well as an insult to the intelligence of the player. Quite frankly,
Modern Warfare's "
Unspecifiedstan" was more insulting than anything the
Medal of Honor reboot has produced so far.
Plus, a name change doesn't suddenly change the fact that the OPFOR are the Taliban, at least by concept if not name. In that case, anyone who is going to be insulted by the inclusion of the Taliban in a game is still going to be insulted. So why bother changing the name in the first place? It doesn't change anything and only serves to insult the intelligence of people who know better.
Also, I wasn't talking about the soldiers when I said that people would be offended. Remember a certain event in NYC and the Pentagon back nine years ago?
Even if the people responsible for the attacks came from the same organisation, this game isn't a potrayal of that event, so the relevance is minimal at best. Plus, potraying a Taliban in the mountains of Afghanistan is hardly a glorification of said events.
The only people that could be insulted by the game are the soldiers who participated in the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan...and as it was already mentioned, they are not only not insulted, but are even helping the development by sharing their experiences.
Is there any particular GOOD reason to have a playable Taliban character? This game isn't making any kind of political statement or trying to make people understand the conflict, they're just a bunch of stupid developers who thought "man, wouldn't being a Taliban fighter be cool?" If this game was attempting realism there would be a mission where you throw acid in the face of schoolgirls (which really does happen).
And how exactly do you know that they aren't trying to make people understand the conflict? Isn't that the whole reason why they are putting so much effort into the campaign, trying to get the firsthand experience of those involved? Plus, it's good that they are not making any political statement...beacuse, quite frankly, abusing the actions of others to convey a political message is
the most insulting thing they could do.
Anyway, it doesn't really matter, since the Taliban aren't playable in the campaign. They are playable in the multiplayer, beacuse there are always at least two sides in a conflict and the US Army certainly didn't fight against fighters made out of thin air in Afghanistan.
I never did understand the appeal in a video game of playing as an evil person doing awful things. Don't you want to simulate STOPPING these people? Hearing about what the Taliban has done is enough to make you want to volunteer for military service to punish them for their crimes. Is doing the opposite supposed to be fun?
...and I never understood the appeal of having a (semi-)realistic video game potray the opposition as Saturday morning cartoon villains. -_- The Taliban aren't some organisation filled with identical robots; they are a fighting force with real people and real beliefs. If we want people to understand what the conflict in Afghanistan is and was about, it is important that we show that other facet as well. If we don't, then not only are we doing a disservice to historical accuracy and thus to everyone involved in those events, we also end up being just as narrow-minded as the Taliban themselves.
Many books, movies and other art forms have dared to explore "
the other side" and came out better for it. If we want gaming to grow as an art form, then it needs to grow up and explore controversial subjects as well...the Taliban being one of them.
