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.I would rather the game release and be a financial failure tbh because I feel it would put a cooling effect on future titles like this.
See maybe if I wasn't afraid of this doing well simply to spite minorities I could kinda see this.I would rather the game release and be a financial failure tbh because I feel it would put a cooling effect on future titles like this.
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.It absolutely will suck. 100%.
I disagree with your opinion here, and I'll explain why.
There is a difference in making a game that, while military propaganda, is set in an alternate reality universe and have bang bang shoot 'em up stylized action and have me and others say that we don't agree with this type of game, and making a game that the developers themselves say is based in reality on an actual event that happened but then pretty much LIE about what happened, how it happened, and not give one iota of a fuck about how the other HUMAN BEINGS that lived through it felt or still deal with the aftermath.
This isn't freedom of speech and expression. This is flat out LYING. Lying to recruit new members into the US Military. So while I'll continue to side eye and disagree with the narrative that COD pushes out every year, I will not just 'side eye' this piece of shit game.
It doesn't need to exist. Period.
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.
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.
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".This game could work if it tried to tell actually objective tale about horrors of war or try to pull what Spec Ops did.
This is one of those times when, if you are so uneducated, unopinionated and ignorant about the issues of something and feel like you're "not for or against" it, then maybe just shut up and listen when others are talking.
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.
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.
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.
God, this game is so good. More people should play it.
That's kinda my point. Whatever they are doing with this game is opposite of how this topic should have been handled.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".
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 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.
This x1000.I would rather the game release and be a financial failure tbh because I feel it would put a cooling effect on future titles like this.
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.
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 through this through, you should at least be aware when you're not adhering to rationale discourse.
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.Hmm..I understand voting with your wallet and not purchasing the product, which to be clear I will not pay nor play this game when it's released or ever, but stating that something shouldn't be made because you don't agree with it is a slippery slope.
It's like saying all the people that assumed diablo shouldn't be released because it has the devil or GTA for a number of reasons shouldn't be released or non-gaming related but recent, the outrage over the 'Montero' video should've gotten their way.
That the game (6 days) is vile and disrespectful doesn't mean it should be banned/not sold.
Again, I 100% in agreement that this is disgusting and insensitive but freedom of speech and expression can't be used only when it benefits the views one person believes in but not the other.
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.
Yeah sadly don't think thats happening with any of these publishers especially Microsoft.
I would rather the game release and be a financial failure tbh because I feel it would put a cooling effect on future titles like this.
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.
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.
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.
Thats a solid point, I typically play the campaigns in CoD and over the years I've felt more and more dirty.
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.Yeah sadly don't think thats happening with any of these publishers especially Microsoft.
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.
That is a fair point I had not considered.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.
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.
I still think in most cases the best thing is to let something fade into obscurity, but it is a personal opinion of course.
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 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.
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.
"Tonight on Gutfeld!"I can already hear a few complaining about the cancel culture new victim, oof