So, Destructive Creations (the minds behind Hatred) announced a new game

[Dragonlayer]

Like Diablo pointed out, I was just about to say that this is basically Command and Conquer: Generals anti-GLA campaigns with the guts to present the GLA as the Islamist paramilitary they obviously were. Looks like a high-quality Newgrounds game at best, but I'm sure it'll be able to rake in the controversy votes on Greenlight.

Also:

The player takes the role of NATO?s stationary machine-gun operator,
deployed to defend the shores of Europe. His task is to blast as many of
the invaders as possible, until his glorious death.

I can't but feel this is a masterfully done jab at the modern European distaste for conflict and the rise of the Far-Right across the continnent, as in the grimdark future of 2020 those filthy liberals have not only invited ISIS to our shores without even banning their guns, but also cut NATO's budget to a single MG. Fortunately that gunner will stand his ground and martyr himself in defence of Western civilization!

 

[Diablo1099_v1legacy]

Like Diablo pointed out, I was just about to say that this is basically Command and Conquer: Generals anti-GLA campaigns with the guts to present the GLA as the Islamist paramilitary they obviously were. Looks like a high-quality Newgrounds game at best, but I'm sure it'll be able to rake in the controversy votes on Greenlight.

Personally, I actually kinda like the GLA, they are the kind of people who go on about how mighty they are before having to rob UN Supplies to keep their army going, the kind of bad guys that seem to be unaware how terribly they are doing the "Bad guy" thing.
The main reason I give the GLA a pass is they weren't going to compliment Islamic paramilitary, they were making fun of them.
In this game, ISIS invades mainland, something that even Russia can't do (Try telling that to COD: Modern Warfare but that's another story) while one of the GLA's gameplay gimmicks is the fact that zero of their buildings even have any electrical power and the only way to get some is to steal it from another player.

Even in the campaign, the only reason they get anywhere at all is because they stole from other, much better equipped military forces.
Hell, in the expansion, one of the upgrades you can get is to give your workers freaking shoes.
Now, again, C&C: Generals was part-serious, part-satire but any game that un-ironically states that ISIS will one day invade Europe is basically helping their asinine cause.
Kinda like when cable news masturbating over social media posts they make, either stop giving them attention or at least take the chance to poke holes in their image, like with ISIS-Chan.

 

[EyeReaper]

I think I heard about this in my Horus scope. The ending has a big Set piece battle against Isis, right? I wouldn't buy it online though, you might feel e-gypped. Heard the soundtrack was pretty solid though. It prominently features the hit single "loser." It's So Beck.

I think these guys need to close their doors. Maybe they should try opening anubis-ness?

 

[Dragonlayer]

Like Diablo pointed out, I was just about to say that this is basically Command and Conquer: Generals anti-GLA campaigns with the guts to present the GLA as the Islamist paramilitary they obviously were. Looks like a high-quality Newgrounds game at best, but I'm sure it'll be able to rake in the controversy votes on Greenlight.

Personally, I actually kinda like the GLA, they are the kind of people who go on about how mighty they are before having to rob UN Supplies to keep their army going, the kind of bad guys that seem to be unaware how terribly they are doing the "Bad guy" thing.
The main reason I give the GLA a pass is they weren't going to compliment Islamic paramilitary, they were making fun of them.
In this game, ISIS invades mainland, something that even Russia can't do (Try telling that to COD: Modern Warfare but that's another story) while one of the GLA's gameplay gimmicks is the fact that zero of their buildings even have any electrical power and the only way to get some is to steal it from another player.

Even in the campaign, the only reason they get anywhere at all is because they stole from other, much better equipped military forces.
Hell, in the expansion, one of the upgrades you can get is to give your workers freaking shoes.
Now, again, C&C: Generals was part-serious, part-satire but any game that un-ironically states that ISIS will one day invade Europe is basically helping their asinine cause.
Kinda like when cable news masturbating over social media posts they make, either stop giving them attention or at least take the chance to poke holes in their image, like with ISIS-Chan.

Don't get me wrong, I wasn't screaming for the GLA to be instanta-removed from the game because they were offensive or inappropriate (and personally very much enjoy employing terrorist tactics and strategy in games that will allow it, complete with bombastic calls for glorious martyrdom for the cause over Steam chat). I just always found it amusing, in a spineless sort of way, that the GLA were so blantly ripped-from-the-headlines but the game did everything in its power to assuredly not call them Islamists: they were generic Middle-Easterners who *just* happened to be the Taliban and Al-Qaeda on steroids (I bet Bin Laden wished he could have been as liberal with SCUDs as the average Generals game). This Destructive Creations crap, on the other hand, is at least honest about its intentions: kill ISIS. Don't think about it, don't worry about it, just shoot ISIS - just like all those other flash games that popped up after 9/11 about killing Bin Laden.

As for the "un-ironic" bit, I wouldn't worry about it. Idiots who are capable of believing a full continental invasion by a conventional ISIS army don't need this game to confirm their fears, and ISIS is hardly going to convince the waverers and not-quite-believers to defend the Caliphate with this 'amazing' propaganda tool. The developers have simply decided to latch onto a slightly topical controversy than school-shootings to grab all the attention they can.

 

[Diablo1099_v1legacy]

Don't get me wrong, I wasn't screaming for the GLA to be instanta-removed from the game because they were offensive or inappropriate (and personally very much enjoy employing terrorist tactics and strategy in games that will allow it, complete with bombastic calls for glorious martyrdom for the cause over Steam chat). I just always found it amusing, in a spineless sort of way, that the GLA were so blantly ripped-from-the-headlines but the game did everything in its power to assuredly not call them Islamists: they were generic Middle-Easterners who *just* happened to be the Taliban and Al-Qaeda on steroids (I bet Bin Laden wished he could have been as liberal with SCUDs as the average Generals game). This Destructive Creations crap, on the other hand, is at least honest about its intentions: kill ISIS. Don't think about it, don't worry about it, just shoot ISIS - just like all those other flash games that popped up after 9/11 about killing Bin Laden.

As for the "un-ironic" bit, I wouldn't worry about it. Idiots who are capable of believing a full continental invasion by a conventional ISIS army don't need this game to confirm their fears, and ISIS is hardly going to convince the waverers and not-quite-believers to defend the Caliphate with this 'amazing' propaganda tool. The developers have simply decided to latch onto a slightly topical controversy than school-shootings to grab all the attention they can.

Ahhh, now I see what you mean.

Well, there was already a fair bit of blowback at the time against the game, seeing how it was not only a rather different kind of game to the Tiberium series or Red Alert but because it was released right in the middle of the Iraq invasion IIRC.
Odds are the guys at EA figured it might be best to avoid giving it the Islamist rubber stamp for sales and marketing reasons.
Besides, I think when you go to do something like that, it's best to try to make your own spin on them rather then just copy directly from real life.
That way, you not only get to avoid being clumped in with literal terrorists but it also allows you WAY more creative freedom, Hell, if I remember the ending, I think the US got it's shit wrecked and China of all people save the day and becomes the new dominate super-power.
I'd imagine if they went REALLY Ripped-From-Headlines, the military experts working on the game would be foaming at the mouths XD
Now, should EA have had the balls to just come out and say it? Perhaps but I kinda like the mix of both actual terrorist tactics with well placed jabs at the sheer foolishness of it all.

That and the bonus of not giving those groups credit, after all the shit they pulled, they don't deserve the free publicity.

 

[MCerberus]

This is going to be really awkward since ISIS is currently pinballing between total collapse events recently. Between the ongoing complete inability to govern its territories, the sudden lack of funds, and the resurgence of Asaad-allied fighting capacity there's a chance there won't be an ISIS by this summer, and the name can go back to marketing cat and/or Egypt-related items.

 

[CaitSeith]

That concept of defending until you, inevitably, die reminds me of Missile Command. If the gameplay is something more than just an interminable turret section, I may give it a try.

EDIT: I think it would had been more controvertial (and interesting) if, instead of being a NATO's stationary machine-gun operator defending the shores of Europe against ISIS invasion in 2020, the game had been about being a Nazi machine-gun operator defending the shores of Normandy on D-Day.

 

[Something Amyss]

The vicious cycle has almost continued, but we can still stop it! Just ignore this shitty game, just like we should have with Hatred, and it will be dead without any of the internet drama and before they pick up the controversy sales.

Well, except you don't really even need to give it any attention. All it takes for controversy these days is for someone to use some dogwhistle term about Ess Jay Dubyas or censorship or whatever. Christ, I didn't have to go very far to find people already ready to buy this because "fuck SJWs," essentially.

This isn't even particularly a new thing, thought most of my examples would be better suited for R&P. Point remains, the reaction is expected and will be railed against whether it comports with reality or not.

 

[Fox12]

Next on the list: Abortion simulator 2016!

Good job, everyone. You bought their shitty game, Hatred?, and really stuck it to the man! Now hurry up and buy their new game, like a good little rebel.

 

[Worgen]

its beach head, its a modern version of an old game called beach head. In the old game you just defended shores from an invading force.

 

[Tohuvabohu]

Part of me almost admires these guys for caring so little about the controversy of Hatred and pushing forth with their release of such a forgettable game. Like they didn't even care that their game sucked. It's like a videogame form of Insane Clown Posse.

That being said, I am disappointed by this effort. At least Hatred was amusing with its edginess. But what's really there to talk about here? Even less than with Hatred based off. A turret game built from a totally throwaway idea of no importance.

They could replace every mention of "ISIS" with "Rampaging Scottish Soccer Hooligans" and it wouldn't make a fucking difference. Not very "destructive" or "creative" in any way.

 

[The Lunatic]

Just looks boring. Not really sure why people would be offended by it.

Unless it's "Offensively boring", I suppose.

People are just going to be all uppity about it because of Hatred, I imagine.

 

[Amaror]

You know what people loooove? Turret Sections! Let's make a whole game out of it!
I mean seriously? Seriously?! I know these guys are mainly relying on controversy to sell their games, but with hatred, a twin-stick shooter, it had a chance of being good had it been designed by someone better.
But not even Jesus, Cthulhu and Gabe Newell, with all their powers combined, could make a freaking Turret-Section good. Noone can.

 

[McMarbles]

They should just cut all pretense and title the next game "Shameless Controversy Cash-In".

 

[Fappy]

I feel like the people who plan to buy this game simply because "fuck SJWs" are the same demographic of people that won Trump New Hampshire. Evolution has failed us.

 

[Diablo1099_v1legacy]

I feel like the people who plan to buy this game simply because "fuck SJWs" are the same demographic of people that won Trump New Hampshire. Evolution has failed us.

Nah, I think they are just focusing on standard racism on this one with a bit of Islamiaphobia and making fun of Europe.

Besides, the whole """""""""SJW""""""""" has kinda ran it's course by now, namely because a lot of the people who went "Fuck """""""""SJW"""""""""s" proved to be FAR more annoying then any actual """""""""SJW"""""""""s.

 

[Thyunda]

Y'know, I feel I should be outraged by this, but here, I just can't. Because in all honesty, in the modern day, ISIS is practically the equivalent of Nazis in regards to them being the closest approximation to "evil" that I can say. Honestly, you could choose more morally questionable foes to mow down in the game.

To be fair, most of the people ISIS use as cannon fodder are radicalised teenagers who've come from various other countries to fight for their beliefs. Most of al-Baghdadi's effort and money apparently went into his social media department, including such stunts as praying in the wrong direction to they could accuse the CIA of staging the whole thing. If you really thought about it, the 'terrorists' being mown down by these turrets aren't the Yezidi-slaughtering, child-raping monsters we see on the ISIS propaganda videos. They're the optimistic little shits lured in by those monsters and then used as meat-shields. Or they're farmers, whose houses are currently occupied by ISIS commanders. With their families still in the house, of course. Or maybe their homes were destroyed in one of Russia's, or the West's, very enthusiastic bombing runs on Raqqa, and they were left no other choice.

ISIS differ from the Nazis because the Nazis had a very clear uniform policy and put swastikas on stuff. Government building? Swastika it up. Soldiers? Get some iron crosses up on those jackets. Nazi politicians? Swastika armbands. ISIS, on the other hand, worked out the easiest way to court anti-West sentiment and outrage was to dress up exactly like regular civilians, and then point out how eager the West is to shoot regular civilians.

I think my point with this post is that a game where you fought ISIS needs a whole lot of thought - otherwise it's just a generic 'shoot the darkies' sim, and nobody wants that.