Ok, i wanna preface this by saying that i dont support the decision to cut the taliban from the game. i think it was stupid but it was their call. now on to the main point.
it seems like every other thread is someone complaining about metal of honor or encouraging people to boycott it or something like that. i understand your upset because you hate to see your games changed by ignorant soccer moms and politicians who want something easy to attack, to gain support. maybe your even worried that this will mean that that future game companies will be quick to cave when under pressure from the media. i get it, i do. but can we please think about this another way?
everyone here knows that video games are facing their first significant threat soon, and we all know that the argument is that video games corrupt kids or some bullshit like that. do you really think a highly controversial game is what we need right now? do we really need to give opponents more ammunition? maybe the willingness to change will make game companies appear easily manipulated, or maybe, just maybe, it will make them seem more understanding and reasonable and willing to address concerns of parents. i mean honestly, why are you THIS upset, was the taliban really going to be the deciding factor? maybe its just me, but i havent played a really good metal of honor game, since allied assault.
point is, something like this would have probably just pissed off opponents of video games and it seems like gamers are only pissed because developers were pressured to change something. i dont get the feeling there would be this much outrage if the designer just decided he wanted the story to go a different way or something, and cut out the taliban purely because he wanted to. im sorry, but im not willing to piss off the people who hold the future of gaming in their hands, purely out of principle. things are too delicate right now. i know you are upset about it but this isnt helping
it seems like every other thread is someone complaining about metal of honor or encouraging people to boycott it or something like that. i understand your upset because you hate to see your games changed by ignorant soccer moms and politicians who want something easy to attack, to gain support. maybe your even worried that this will mean that that future game companies will be quick to cave when under pressure from the media. i get it, i do. but can we please think about this another way?
everyone here knows that video games are facing their first significant threat soon, and we all know that the argument is that video games corrupt kids or some bullshit like that. do you really think a highly controversial game is what we need right now? do we really need to give opponents more ammunition? maybe the willingness to change will make game companies appear easily manipulated, or maybe, just maybe, it will make them seem more understanding and reasonable and willing to address concerns of parents. i mean honestly, why are you THIS upset, was the taliban really going to be the deciding factor? maybe its just me, but i havent played a really good metal of honor game, since allied assault.
point is, something like this would have probably just pissed off opponents of video games and it seems like gamers are only pissed because developers were pressured to change something. i dont get the feeling there would be this much outrage if the designer just decided he wanted the story to go a different way or something, and cut out the taliban purely because he wanted to. im sorry, but im not willing to piss off the people who hold the future of gaming in their hands, purely out of principle. things are too delicate right now. i know you are upset about it but this isnt helping
