-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
[Eurogamer] PlayStation, Xbox, and Valve called on to drop Six Days in Fallujah.
- Thread starter Rowsdower
- Start date
Also:
I never heard of this one. Sounds like something up my alley.
This game could work if it tried to tell actually objective tale about horrors of war or try to pull what Spec Ops did.
But as it stands it's more tactical CoD except actually based on real life war crime.
I am still surprised they dragged this game back to sunlight after so many years.
But as it stands it's more tactical CoD except actually based on real life war crime.
I am still surprised they dragged this game back to sunlight after so many years.
Yeah, I almost feel like you risk making them some sort of martyr. I mean, look at Hatred, it released, it sucked and people quickly moved on and forgot about it, best possible scenario if you ask me.
Sadly the controversy will make it self sustaining now, even if the game itself is mediocre trash. Mouth breathers in alt right media/4chan will insist the game is great just because of its politics.
See maybe if I wasn't afraid of this doing well simply to spite minorities I could kinda see this.
Then I'm reminded of how Trump almost got 50 percent of the vote in America, and just how badly people of color or queer folk are treated, with things like entire Hare channels dedicated to harassment actually thriving on YouTube.....
Honestly this thing could have the reverse effect and have more companies try this shit if it appeals to enough white nationalist scum bags.
I understand what you're saying and agree it's really insensitive and that it doesn't need to exist but I think that it can exist. The point more than anything I'm trying to make is that popular opinion shouldn't be the basis for what does or doesn't get made. Again there with you and almost everyone else on the thread that this is a POS game being made and really disrespectful.
I agree. So many games use 2 or 3 lazy stereotypes for the "bad" guys and it's almost always from the point of view of the American (and sometimes maybe Western European) viewpoint.
THIS! Oh my God if there was ever a game that was the definition of "They had us in the first half, not gonna lie", it's this.
Not sure Valve will care. If a game doesn't explicitly break guidelines they will not remove it. Sadly it leaves room for harmful revisionist propaganda like this...
It's good, I remember liking it a lot.
It's good, I remember liking it a lot.
They have a huge VR contract right now I think. Doesn't mean Xbox division will be affected by that, but I don't realistically see them (or any platform holder) dropping this game when they can argue that CoD (as fantastical as that is) and ARMA and other games of the like are around. I get the difference here but I'm not sure platform holders will move.
MS is "in bed" with the entire US economy. VR headsets aren't shit on top of what the military probably spends on Powerpoint.
No it couldn't. Not as a shooter. More importantly, despite whatever self-serving statements the developer has made, they aren't at all interested in telling a story about "the horrors of war".
Wow, you don't have to be a fucking dick. I was asking a question to try and learn why this in particular has caused more upset then any other game or movie that features Muslim characters as the enemy. Since when has asking questions and trying to understand become a bad thing? If the only input you are adding to this conversation is telling me to shut up, maybe listen to your own advice.
This is a game that likely isn't known to anyone outside of those that frequent gaming places on the net. It has no real market penetration outside of that sphere. This is important because it's scheduled to release in the 4th quarter, which means it's going head to head with Battlefield and CoD. Both of which are going to have marketing campaigns that'll swallow anything that the publisher of Fallujah can muster. So unless it's just a really good game, then it's not going to have much momentum from word of mouth either.
this is a good primer on why
https://www.ign.com/articles/six-da...ainful-for-those-connected-to-the-real-events
The problem is a matter of influence and the media having a message.
For example, Vikings never wore horned helmets. Never. However, thanks to costumes used in Wagner's Ring Cycle opera, now 70-80% of people associate Vikings with horned helmets.
I'm not saying that an independently-released first-person shooter based on events from a decade ago will have the same cultural advantage of one of the greatest operatic works ever made based on myths written more than a century before, but I'm saying that history is often written by the winners.
Good thing they're being pressured and I hope they drop it. It takes just one of them doing it to make the other two follow suit. Deep inside, I'm not very confident, though.
God, this game is so good. More people should play it.Also:
That's kinda my point. Whatever they are doing with this game is opposite of how this topic should have been handled.
You're in a thread effectively making the point that it must be further promoted/distributed on a wide range of private platforms, otherwise we're falling down a "slippery slope." To be clear, the "slippery slope" term defines a fallacy; The reasoning you're using isn't rational.
You're also conflating people [not wanting it distributed on major platforms] to mean ["cannot be allowed to exist"]. Whether you consciously want more of this slime to influence more people and are being coy, or just haven't thought it through, you should at least be aware when you're not adhering to rationale discourse.
Last edited:
It's not just popular opinion, though. It's not even an opinion.
The fact of the matter is that this "game" is trying to pretend that those people were some type of evil that needed to be extinguished, and they were NOT. And basing your game off of a lie wrapped in the flag of America and saying that it was a necessary thing that needed to happen and not once asking the Muslim community for even a sentence or paragraph on how they feel about the events or letting them give input on what transpired but wants to pull on heart strings for the poor American soldiers makes this a "game" that does not need to exist.
Also, this is being paid for by the United States Government; that should tell you right there that it doesn't need to exist. If there is any credit I can give to Activision (reluctantly) is that they never got a pay out for their bullshit.
That and a game that truly made me feel like a monster for killing.
I'm not fully against the idea of the slippery slope, oftentimes it does exist with regards to business practices, companies will just become more and more shameless because of how much they can get away with. For example when every American mobile provider suddenly dropped unlimited data, just to sell it back to their users later as a premium. Or microtransactions/lootboxes.
But when it comes to morality, it doesn't exist, because generally people have a clear stopping point about what is good and just. Part of the reason why conservatives railed against gay marriage and LGBTQ rights for so long is not because they had a problem with them, but because doing so would create a slippery slope leading to the legalization of pedophilia. Note that in every country with legalized LGBTQ rights, pedophilia is illegal, because we generally all agree as a culture that pedophilia is bad. It's the same thing with free speech. Restricting hate speech doesn't create a slippery slope where all speech is restricted. It's that we generally agree that these views are incredibly unpopular and falsified.
These companies are private, not public, so there is no "freedom of speech" arguments to be had here. Not only that, hate speech shouldn't be protected by freedom of speech, and people should ask for more games to be removed from these stores, for how they depict minorities. The developers are always free to sell their games in their own private store.
Threshholds certainly exist, but this was someone paying lip-service to the game appearing to be slimy propaganda, but their main point was a by-the-book Slippery Slope fallacy about how "we can't permit storefronts to take this reasonable action here, because it will certainly cause a separate, unreasonable thing to happen." That gets serious side-eye from me.
Last edited:
I think the best thing that could happen is that the game reviews like shit. In 2007/8 everyone was up their own ass about how violent Manhunt 2 was (coupled with the Wii's motion controls) that it was getting a ton of attention and many thought with the Streisand Effect, it could be a huge hit. It turned out to be the same gimmicky waggle-fest that made up most of the Wii's third-party library, and as such, was a critical and commercial flop.
The same Xbox that is owned by a company that is making active deals with the United States military?
I still don't understand how this got greenlit for release. Even back then it was highly questionable but nowadays after everything that's happened? That's like making a game before and in WW 2 where you play as a nazi and invade other countrys. It's just so ignorant and disrespectful.
Man what a weird discussion. We definitely don't see the same response for bay of pigs scenes in CoD.
I feel the defining factor leading to the backlash is time, and the fact that they said it wasn't political, because war crimes are literally what military shooters are based off of.
I feel the defining factor leading to the backlash is time, and the fact that they said it wasn't political, because war crimes are literally what military shooters are based off of.
Actually, there's been growing discussion and frustration with the way CoD titles have played into pro war (and often war-crime) talking points, paying to feature real-world criminals like Oliver North, and attributing crimes committed by US forces to other factions.
Thats a solid point, I typically play the campaigns in CoD and over the years I've felt more and more dirty.
I think with Black Ops at the very least there's shades of grey with the level of morality within the game, even though it can be borderline. It's the same with No Russian in MW2.
Six Days in Fallujah is the video game equivalent of "USA, A-OK", while Black Ops is more "Cesspool on the Potomac"
You're totally right that stuff along the same lines that we're criticizing in Six Days already permeates other franchises in gaming. I do think that if a platform were to make an editorial choice to not sell it, it's probably be in their best interest to have a specific rationale ready, and be willing to apply it more broadly.
I have my issues with military games in general. I love history and learning about it, but part of me doesn't get why other military games are not more panned as propaganda, because even when they use "fake" narratives they are still propaganda in some way as they support or celebrate American Imperialism. This specific game is a lot worse on that scale for sure, but like others have said they should just let them release it with bad reviews and no fanfare.
There are hundreds if not thousands of games released each year. Letting this one go out and ignoring it seems a lot better than bringing it into the spotlight to shame it because it will attract the wrong kind of attention. Letting it fade into obscurity seems to me the better route.
There are hundreds if not thousands of games released each year. Letting this one go out and ignoring it seems a lot better than bringing it into the spotlight to shame it because it will attract the wrong kind of attention. Letting it fade into obscurity seems to me the better route.
I sincerely think doing this would cause some kind of Streissand effect and amplify the game's audience. I hope I am wrong for sure.
The controversial marketing and soundbites they've been releasing are intentionally provocative. The game itself has a history of being cancelled and they're well aware of this context. And games media have been happy to play both sides, so theres a snowballs chance in hell its not getting Streissanded.
That is a fair point I had not considered.
I personally have not seen a lot of the marketing content they have released so that is my ignorance there.
I still think in most cases the best thing is to let something fade into obscurity, but it is a personal opinion of course.
Eh, it wasn't bad but the MP shat on its themes (and I know it wasn't Yager's call) and had a lacking characterization of the squad.
Depends - I sometimes think pushing back helps stop precedents. People have already (and understandably) raised COD in this whole discussion. If we complained about COD way back, maybe people would think twice before attempting something so bombastic as this.
A lot of negative stereotypes have proliferated in the online and gaming space because there the status quo doesn't do enough to push back against it. People have to talk and have to raise awareness. We don't get to having more representation, more women and POC in our games simply by not saying anything when games keep featuring the same protags each time.
I think it'd be better not to torment victims over and over about these atrocities and should be banned outright, thus sending a message to all. De-platforming works, real life war crime simulator shouldn't be tolerated.
I'm at the point where I basically avoid all "war is awesome lets shoot some dudes" games that are based on anything resembling real-life war. Its just not something at my age that I get any joy out of.
This game is another level of "holy shit awful" given that it is not only set in a somewhat grounded reality but actual events that it misrepresents.
This game is another level of "holy shit awful" given that it is not only set in a somewhat grounded reality but actual events that it misrepresents.