U.S. Military Bans Medal of Honor From On-Base Stores

[Romidude]

Oh no we can't play as brown people that would just be horrible to kill a few Americans(Models textured to look American), sure we have invaded numerous countries killing thousands upon thousands of people just trying to live their lives and now we can play as the people who opposed that? That's just horrible!

This pretty much sums up my opinion.

And it's funny, because if they proposed banning the game in Iran or something (for mercilessly gunning down muslim stereotypes,) then westerners would cry that the country's being oppressive and backwards.

Yeah, and being half Arabic myself I find this slightly offensive (not because of the Muslim hatred, I happen to be an Atheist) because of just how dumb they make Arabic people look too, you know, what they are doing is letting you play as the stupid Redneck and almost suffering a heart attack at the idea of letting you play as the people who fight back in self defense, but in the game all Arabs are suddenly horrible evil people who cause the problems.

 

[lijenstina]

What argument? There is no argument there, that was a back-burner to my main point about what gamers see as fun being fucking horrifying if you actually do it and what looks like an AAA game to an average gamer can look like an automatic flashback generator to a traumatised soldier.

That is a generic argument against violence in video games. Portraying violence can affect traumatized victims or family members.

 

[Speakercone]

Or think about if people decide the game is a 100% accurate portrayal of the conflict and take it out on soldiers freshly discharged? And yes people that moronic exist.

Obviously it should still be released but not on a base and not to soldiers who do that shit for real.

Is there any part of human existence that isn't, at some point, misused by morons ? That argument is invalid.

What argument? There is no argument there, that was a back-burner to my main point about what gamers see as fun being fucking horrifying if you actually do it and what looks like an AAA game to an average gamer can look like an automatic flashback generator to a traumatised soldier.

True, but perhaps the decision should be borne by the soldier in question.
More to the point though, the military has a right to decide what products are sold on their bases in the same way that I'd have the right to decide what I'd sell in my own store. I think the basis for their decision is a bit dubious, but hey, their house, their rules.

 

[Lawyer105]

Well... I do kinda see the point. I think everyone's overdoing the rage (on both sides of the debate!).

TBH, the best system I saw was in America's Army (although it could do with a tweak). Let the players set a 'good' side and a 'bad' side in any given conflict. Their character always belongs to the 'good' side (regardless of whether it's team A or B), and is skinned that way. All the enemies are always from the 'bad' side. Since it's just a local skin, it won't really affect network resources or anything, and shouldn't place any load on the GPU that isn't there in some form already.

That way, those that WANT to play as Americans (or whatever) can always look like that while they shoot up the evil Nazi's/terrorists/space aliens or whatever.

It'll also save on those "Oh wait... switched sides. That skin is an ENEMY now! Damn. !" moments.

 

[Orcus The Ultimate]

I don't know why, but i feel that Gamestop is Bulls/hitting us with a giant turd of Hypocrisy...

 

[Orcus The Ultimate]

They do this to honour the soldiers who died defending freedom and the freedom of speech.

Oh, the irony.

i like the way you put it XD

 

[lijenstina]

What argument? There is no argument there, that was a back-burner to my main point about what gamers see as fun being fucking horrifying if you actually do it and what looks like an AAA game to an average gamer can look like an automatic flashback generator to a traumatised soldier.

That is a generic argument against violence in video games. Portraying violence can affect traumatized victims or family members.

Fun experiment: try showing someone who fought in WW2 'Saving Private Ryan' and see what they say.

They'll say: It's a movie and not reality. If they can't distinguished it then they have probably became senile.

 

[skywalkerlion]

I dunno. It's just a little inconvenience. If they really wanted it, just go somewhere else and get it, is it really too big a deal? They're just saying they themselves won't sell it. And to me, if I were in that god damn hell-hole, playing a war game would just depress me even more.

But like I said, if they want it, and they have every right to it, they could go somewhere else or order it online.

 

[lijenstina]

To add this i totally agree with anyone who said that this is going to be free publicity for EA.
They are crossing fingers for more controversy around the press and enraged Jack Thompsons. Maybe even some Fox news

 

[sam13lfc]

I suppose it wouldn't have been as controversial if real soldiers had helped to make the game, or if you could play the Taliban in every other modern shooter just under different names.

If only they'd thought to do that.

 

[Denamic]

"Out of respect".
Sure, respect the people who fought and died for freedom by imposing censorship.
That's not ironic at all.

 

[whaleswiththumbs]

Again, these are GROWN ADULTS who should be able to buy whatever content they think they can handle. Bans seem pointless.

This is the same military that doesn't let you be gay. To them you are not people, you are their playthings.

The military doesn't forbid you from being gay, as that's quite impossible. You just can't be open about it, which is still pretty bad.

The people in charge of this "Dont ask, don't tell" policy really should read up on the Sacred Band of Thebes.

As for other countries suddenly going on banning sprees, I wouldn't be surprised if Russia has banned such games from their military establishment.

According to US military law, it is not a constitutional right to serve in the Armed Forces, and, well here is quote i read:
"The prohibition against homosexual conduct is a longstanding element of military law that continues to be necessary in the unique circumstances of military service."

And the point below it says they can remove you from service if you are a risk of endangering soldier moral, unit cohesion, and good order and discipline.

 

[fat american]

Man, I bet Activision were wishing they had gotten this much free press for MW2.

Like they needed it.

Military life doesn't work like the rest of american civilization. You follow orders and do what you're told. You're basically a tool for the brass to use however they please. For instance, one of my friends went through boot camp and people DIED of TB. An easily treated illness if I'm not mistaken. All because the army can just get a couple more people to replace them easily. The way I see it this is just another way for the top brass to exercise their rule over our troops with the disguise of helping them. It's just silly if you ask me.

 

[dangdiggityderek]

This isn't that big of a deal. They are just keeping it from being sold on their bases. It sounds reasonable to me.

They could be a more strict about this and completely prevent soldiers and airmen from playing this game in their barracks. Or, a more shortsighted base commander could perhaps ban video games on bases altogether. And I rather it not come to that, but they are completely entitled to make such dictations. Ever worked for a company that banned music in the workplace just because the boss didn't like what you were playing?

yeah this isn't like the British ban. These are real soldiers who are fighting against the Taliban. Not just regular teenage consumers

 

[Tdc2182]

I kinda understand this one, but still...

Funnily enough, I actually kind of respect the nature of this decision to.

"Out of respect to those we serve, we will not be stocking this game," Army & Air Force Exchange Service Commander Maj. Gen. Bruce Casella told Kotaku. "We regret any inconvenience this may cause authorized shoppers, but are optimistic that they will understand the sensitivity to the life and death scenarios this product presents as entertainment. As a military command with a retail mission, we serve a very unique customer base that has, or possibly will, witness combat in real life.

This really sold me.

To all you people out there saying that this is just a video game, this is one of the better complaints out there. The general isn't saying this an evil game, who just is looking at for his troops. This isnt like the idiotic British governors excuse, this one actually has some foundation.

I just want the escapist to know, Let this one slide.

 

[Tdc2182]

"Out of respect".
Sure, respect the people who fought and died for freedom by imposing censorship.
That's not ironic at all.

We dont just respect the dead soldiers in this country, we still have to worry about the living ones.

And, little known fact about soldier life, you don't have the same freedoms as every one else.

 

[RebelRising]

Again, these are GROWN ADULTS who should be able to buy whatever content they think they can handle. Bans seem pointless.

This is the same military that doesn't let you be gay. To them you are not people, you are their playthings.

The military doesn't forbid you from being gay, as that's quite impossible. You just can't be open about it, which is still pretty bad.

The people in charge of this "Dont ask, don't tell" policy really should read up on the Sacred Band of Thebes.

As for other countries suddenly going on banning sprees, I wouldn't be surprised if Russia has banned such games from their military establishment.

According to US military law, it is not a constitutional right to serve in the Armed Forces, and, well here is quote i read:
"The prohibition against homosexual conduct is a longstanding element of military law that continues to be necessary in the unique circumstances of military service."

And the point below it says they can remove you from service if you are a risk of endangering soldier moral, unit cohesion, and good order and discipline.

To be fair, I didn't know the exact wording of the law, but then again, I don't see how it disproves what I said. The "Don't ask, don't tell" policy is basically that, unless I'm missing something crucial.

I can understand their not wanting any sexual conduct period, but whatever.