Medal Of Honor's War On Terror Hits Controversy City
Medal of HonorIt was bound to happen. In fact, we're honestly surprised it took this long.
Because the new Medal of Honor involves the current war on terror, and there is the option to play as the Taliban, it was inevitable that EA's title would garner plenty of controversy and criticism. The first to latch on has been a member of the Gold Star Moms, who voiced her displeasure on Fox News; you can watch the Fox and Friends video below and draw your own conclusions. A woman who lost her son in Afghanistan, Karen Meredith, had this to say:
"War is not a game period. Right now we are going into a really really bad time in Afghanistan. We've just come off the worst month of casualties in the whole war and this game is going to be released in October. So families who are burying their children are going to be seeing this and playing this game. I just don't see that a video game based on a current war makes any sense."
We find it interesting that she specified the fact that the war is "current," and that we never heard any such controversy during years and years of shooters based on World War II. ...as usual, time heals and somehow makes things okay for everyone. But anyway, EA has responded to this whole mess with the following official statement:
"Medal of Honor is set in today's war, putting players in the boots of today's solder. We give gamers the opportunity to play both sides. Most of having been doing this since we were seven. If someone's the cop, someone gotta be the robber, someone's gotta be the pirate and someone's gotta be the alien. In Medal of Honor multiplayer, someone's gotta be the Taliban."
Unsurprisingly, Meredith believes that's an unfair analogy and although the Fox reporter does mention that the average age of the gamer who will purchase Medal of Honor is in their mid-to-late 30s, Meredith doesn't budge. She simply says she doesn't see the need for such a game in the first place, and cites more sensitive publishers like Atomic Games, who decided not to publish Six Days in Fallujah and Sony, who didn't produce a game called Shock and Awe.
We will only add one additional bit of commentary: we would like to point out that, in our eyes, the most important individuals in such controversy are those who are risking their lives; i.e., the very individuals we are playing as (or against). That being said, EA collaborated with the military and Tier 1 operators to make Medal of Honor authentic and true-to-life; those directly involved with the war on terror voluntarily and enthusiastically lent their time. If they don't feel offended or uncomfortable about this - the very people we owe so much to, and those who really are respected in the campaigns of most games - then we're fine. How's about you?
Related Game(s): Medal of Honor
Tags: medal of honor, fox news, ea, moh controversy
8/15/2010 8:48:14 PM Ben Dutka
Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter
Comments (110 posts)
Killa Tequilla
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 1:28:43 PM
1 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 9:55:52 PM
Reply
Last edited by WorldEndsWithMe on 8/15/2010 9:56:11 PM
14 up, 4 down
Kangasfwa
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 10:33:14 PM
8 up, 2 down
booze925
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 10:47:49 PM
but i tend 2 avoid politics, especially after last time
4 up, 8 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 2:22:22 AM
3 up, 3 down
Jawknee
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 12:10:27 PM
That station is a mouthpiece for the democrat party and their cause. Most network news stations like CNN, ABC, CBS all lean left. Fox is the only one that has a slant to the right and they still have lefties on all the time to debate and discuss the issues. When was the last time Olberman had on a conservative to debate? Never. So...you can't really call Fox News "fixed" without saying the same about other news agencies.
5 up, 6 down
Alienange
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 1:10:26 PM
3 up, 2 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 5:32:59 PM
Ultimately though, they don't lie, ever. They don't accept false reports to ruin careers or show fake footage of crowds in an attempt to advance an agenda. They don't cowtow to radio pundits or play the Nazi card or put together conspiracy theories like Beck.
Furthermore, the news is actually separate from the commentary so you are allowed to think for yourself.
My comment about Fox News isn't because they are hard right, it was because they tout themselves as "News" when they are anything but.
3 up, 1 down
joeboo
Wednesday, August 18, 2010 @ 11:10:05 AM
This study shows an interesting thing about consumers of conservative news outlets which is they are the most misinformed. The most informed would be what are called "liberal."
Misperceptions, the Media and the Iraq War
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/international_security_bt/102.php
Also turns out that when you expose conservatives to more news, they become more misinformed. The opposite with liberals. Page 20 (22 in the Reader) shows this.
1 up, 1 down
Victor321
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 9:55:53 PM
Reply
6 up, 1 down
Temjin001
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 10:21:46 PM
Reply
12 up, 2 down
jimdude99
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 10:23:11 PM
Reply
8 up, 2 down
booze925
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 10:43:26 PM
7 up, 3 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 2:16:06 AM
0 up, 3 down
Underdog15
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 8:38:25 AM
I personally think Americans and Canadians are equal with extremely similar societies, but when people do argue about whether canada or america is the greater country, I guarantee you the Canadian will simply say... "We don't have FOX."
3 up, 4 down
booze925
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 11:22:09 AM
so dont bring it on ok?
1 up, 1 down
Jawknee
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 12:14:15 PM
For the rest of you who want to harp on me for saying things you might perceive as political, I ask you to chill out before hand. Im not trying to start an argument, just offering a different take on all the Fox News hate. No one denies they slant to the right, but its one news station out of many that slant to the left and thats a fact.
4 up, 5 down
Underdog15
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 1:11:21 PM
It's unfortunate that it can be so hard to find a news station with no bias one way or the other. You guys need a C-Pac station like us! (They sell themselves on being non-biased. Do a damn good job too!)
3 up, 2 down
kraygen
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 1:46:39 PM
So called news isn't news, it's someone's perspective of how they see things.
2 up, 2 down
Jawknee
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 4:09:21 PM
Now as for the topic, i can certainly understand why this woman feels the way she does but shes feeding the politically correct mantra that i despise. So what if it's too soon, it's reality. People need to learn to deal with it instead of trying to make everyone feel warm and fuzzy.
2 up, 2 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 5:38:00 PM
2 up, 0 down
Jawknee
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 8:36:55 PM
As far as MSNBC, I do like Scarborough but I'd hardly consider him a right winger. As for liars, I do don't watch Fox so I can't say who lies and who doesnt but Olberman and Shultz have told their share of lies. My biggest problem with MSNBC is they have too many demagogues professing they have all answers while comparing their political opponents to Nazi's and Al Qaeda.
Last edited by Jawknee on 8/16/2010 8:48:05 PM
0 up, 2 down
Jawknee
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 10:28:20 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/25/business/economy/25social.html?_r=1&hp
Not known for their right wingyness. ;)
0 up, 1 down
telly
Tuesday, August 17, 2010 @ 6:26:17 PM
"The trustees did foresee, in late 2008, that the recession would be severe enough to deplete Social Security’s funds more quickly than previously projected. They moved the year of reckoning forward, to 2037 from 2041"
And, as World correctly stated, SS balance right now is $2.5 trillion, as the program has taken more in over several decades than it paid out. Again from the Times:
"The balance is currently about $2.5 trillion because after the early 1980s the program had surplus revenue, year after year."
SS is, this year, paying out more than it takes in, but that surplus is not going to disappear overnight as the right-wing fear-mongers would have you believe. That line of thinking is just patently false.
1 up, 0 down
Alienange
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 10:25:01 PM
Reply
As you say Ben, games based on history are ok. Games based on the present, not so cool.
7 up, 5 down
Underdog15
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 9:15:35 AM
EA has an opportunity to do something good. But you're right about one thing... they could potentially fudge this up.
1 up, 1 down
Alienange
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 1:26:13 PM
MoH is nothing more than a MW rip-off with a poor choice of settings. You want an insightful view into current affairs? Talk to Ms Meredith.
It's so easy to throw around the word "art" as an excuse for terrible things. If EA has screwed up by making a game with it's setting a little too close to home, then they'll get the poor sales they deserve for being so thoughtless.
1 up, 2 down
Underdog15
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 2:07:18 PM
As I said, if it glorifies war, it's a wasted effort on EA's part, and Meridith has a point.
As for the artistic view, I have a hard time believing it can accomplish it well, but it is a possibility. Whether the subject matter is tasteful or not is irrelevant, and you cannot deny a creative story that speaks a degree of truth the title of 'art'. I feel that 4 years of study is enough to give me, at the very least, a plausable and elementary view of what constitutes valid art.
I could give you a huge list of well respected artworks of various mediums that were controversial to both government and war, many of which were brutal, sometimes exaggerated takes on reality.
If you've read any of my postings on this topic, you would know that I at least recognize Meredith makes a valid argument. I've said it a couple times, in fact. However, if MoH is indeed working with those who have been close to real action, you can't help but have a little hope for a somewhat realistic portrayal of what it's really like.
My mistake in causing you to wonder what I'm "going on about" was that I wrote with a tone that assumed everyone has experienced a good saturation of modern art. That was wrong of me, and perhaps I should have been more clear.
Last edited by Underdog15 on 8/16/2010 2:15:00 PM
0 up, 2 down
Underdog15
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 2:15:39 PM
3 up, 1 down
Underdog15
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 2:38:33 PM
How long until a game about the current war is ok to put in a game? I'm just not sure of the cut-off... Because... I'm pretty positive there are still people alive from WW2 who could be sensitive...
1 up, 0 down
Jawknee
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 4:02:34 PM
With your logic, any new shooter released that features modern day events and soldiers is a MW2 rip-off. GET OVER IT! It's just a damn game. You sure are insecure secure about it.
1 up, 1 down
556pineapple
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 10:25:25 PM
Reply
Anyway.
All the cable news networks annoy me. Especially FOX. Everything is so sensationalized these days it's unbelievable. Instead of reporting on world events, it's all worthless, trivial issues and opinion pieces passed off as news reports. That rant aside, that woman may have some valid points, but as everyone else has pointed out so far, nobody seems to want to know or care that the soldiers have not only allowed the game to happen, but assisted in the development. I never heard any controversy about The Hurt Locker being made, and it won the Oscar for Best Picture. But because this is a video game, it's all of a sudden a big issue. The hypocrisy in the world makes me sick. Sorry for the rant, but I'm tired of games being treated so poorly by the media.
5 up, 2 down
SerendipityDeus
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 10:33:53 PM
in the end the game is still gonna come out, and with this added media coverage even more people are gonna play it. what they're doing is just giving it free advertisement because people will want to know what exactly all the fuss is about.
Last edited by SerendipityDeus on 8/15/2010 10:34:34 PM
4 up, 1 down
BikerSaint
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 10:34:24 PM
Reply
Just make a good game even better & longer into two by giving me separate SP modes for Chimeras, the Halghasts, & even the talibans.
AND.... I still want some bally publisher to step up & give me "6 Days In Fallujah", dammit!!!(anyone except anti-vision)
5 up, 0 down
SerendipityDeus
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 10:43:33 PM
4 up, 1 down
BikerSaint
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 11:15:43 PM
R.I.P. Lt Ken Ballard, you ARE one of our fallen heroes!
3 up, 0 down
sawao_yamanaka
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 10:41:53 PM
Reply
1 up, 0 down
booze925
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 10:49:46 PM
dont u mean BC2?
0 up, 0 down
sawao_yamanaka
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 11:00:13 PM
0 up, 0 down
booze925
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 10:51:42 PM
Reply
from the invasion of china to the bombing of hiroshima...
i would buy it :P
Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 8/16/2010 12:49:06 AM
4 up, 2 down
Snicket
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 11:47:47 PM
3 up, 1 down
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 12:48:55 AM
4 up, 2 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 5:38:26 PM
1 up, 0 down
GuernicaReborn
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 10:15:30 PM
0 up, 0 down
booze925
Tuesday, August 17, 2010 @ 9:00:06 PM
@WorldEndsWithMe if its distasteful to you, then thats how i like it, and thats how I'll continue 2 b.
piss off, amigo
0 up, 0 down
GuernicaReborn
Wednesday, August 18, 2010 @ 1:11:01 PM
0 up, 0 down
animalmother
Thursday, August 19, 2010 @ 9:54:22 AM
As much as i respect and love the Japanese(im Greek) they did many atrocious things in the name of their genetic superiority up bringing but say they kill millions is a bald faced lie(not necessarily you but whoever told you).
0 up, 0 down
GuernicaReborn
Thursday, August 19, 2010 @ 7:02:31 PM
China wasn't unified, they were too busy fighting between themselves to form any semblance of a national defense system. It made Japans invasion that much easier. I can pull dozens of credible sources from around the web, and I have a few books that I've read on the subject that I can quote from.
Lets see you pull one credible source that says there were only a few thousand killed, or even only 500,000 Chinese killed in the Second Sino-Japanese War. I guarantee that any information you find on deaths in this invasion will tell you there were MILLIONS of Chinese killed in this war.
AnimalMother, next time you tell someone to calm down, then call them a liar, do some effing research. You just sound like a damn fool. Get out of here. You're the liar.
Last edited by GuernicaReborn on 8/19/2010 7:08:55 PM
0 up, 0 down
animalmother
Friday, August 20, 2010 @ 7:58:54 AM
"Find a credible source to back up my claims" ?
I don't owe some odd character like yourself anything so i couldn't careless if you believe me. If you want to keep being a gullacalf, thats fine, its your choice as a living being.
Me...20-30 million is garbage...even the Nazis with their camps killed just 5million and im going to believe the Japanese did 4 times that? Sure.
0 up, 0 down
GuernicaReborn
Friday, August 20, 2010 @ 12:04:46 PM
Do you know that in one night, the Doolittle Raids killed 100,000 Japanese people? Over the course of eight years, that would be equal to 2.9 Billion. 20 Million only equals 7000 people a day over eight years, not much by any standards concerning WWII.
Have fun being ignorant the rest of your life. Oh, and read a history book.
0 up, 0 down
GuernicaReborn
Sunday, August 22, 2010 @ 10:02:13 PM
Also, Russia lost 20 million people in WWII as well. Keep in mind that WWII was half the length of the Second Sino-Japanese war.
0 up, 0 down
bigrailer19
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 11:01:58 PM
Reply
"That being said, EA collaborated with the military and Tier 1 operators to make Medal of Honor authentic and true-to-life; those directly involved with the war on terror voluntarily and enthusiastically lent their time. If they don't feel offended or uncomfortable about this - the very people we owe so much to, and those who really are respected in the campaigns of most games"
What you said there is basically what I've been trying to tell people who have problems with these games. Obviously I dont get in arguments, it is a sensitive subject. But some people are just looking for something to argue about it seems, or trying to find something in everything to complain about.
3 up, 0 down
Snaaaake
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 11:06:55 PM
Reply
By the way Ben, that vid ain't working.
Last edited by Snaaaake on 8/15/2010 11:17:59 PM
0 up, 0 down
Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 12:10:16 AM
1 up, 0 down
Nickjcal
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 11:12:59 PM
Reply
1 up, 0 down
Xombito
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 11:22:11 PM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
Nickjcal
Tuesday, August 17, 2010 @ 9:02:00 AM
0 up, 0 down
Snicket
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 11:45:26 PM
Reply
But I understand the argument, but I still chose not to buy this game, the main reason being I did not find it very good, second, I don't like the idea of the Taliban vs. US.
3 up, 0 down
johnld
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 1:24:57 AM
1 up, 1 down
DeadReaper
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 11:50:53 PM
Reply
4 up, 1 down
animalmother
Thursday, August 19, 2010 @ 9:59:25 AM
People forget that these war games they've so gladly played as the Americans in are two sided conflicts. Now i don't pretend to Justify what the Taliban does but they ARE the other side and alot of them(watch your own 60 minutes) are just soldiers who fight for a paycheck and NOT truly the Taliban way of life. Ltes keep things in context.
0 up, 0 down
Sol
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 11:56:27 PM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
bigrailer19
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 12:01:20 AM
0 up, 0 down
Kangasfwa
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 12:03:14 AM
Reply
(1) Technology based on video games called Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy (VRET) helps soldiers with post-traumatic stress disorder:
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2719363/video_game_technology_being_used_to.html?cat=19
(2) A specialized VRET option, also based on video game tech, is called "Virtual Iraq":
http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/health/2009/09/30/2009-09-30_virtual_iraq_video_game_helps_treat_military_veterans_for_posttraumatic_stress_d.html
(3) Video games in general could help too:
http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2009/01/07/Video-game-may-reduce-PTSD/UPI-17101231382573/
I feel sorry for this woman for losing her son, but for her to dismiss a game out of hand that is being developed in collaboration with soldiers still serving is an act of ignorance on her part. A big act of ignorance considering this game is being developed with respect to the soldiers. A game that wants to tell the soldiers' story in the right way--not all flashy and stylized like in Hollywood movies.
I understand the point about the taliban in multiplayer. But what would she rather have? US soldiers shooting each other in a civil war fashion? How is this different than seeing soldiers die in a movie? Or when these things are discussed on the History channel?
I can understand not wanting to be reminded of a loved one's death. I drive the truck my Grandfather left me when he died. I avoided driving it at first because it reminded me of him. It hurt. All these people can do is to try to avoid the reminders until they have been able to heal. Video games usually aren't big news outside the dedicated media. So calling for this game's cancellation is unjustified to me, especially considering the care and respect that went into making it.
3 up, 0 down
BTNwarrior
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 12:15:10 AM
Reply
2 up, 1 down
Jawknee
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 1:05:50 AM
Reply
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/08/14/fox-news-whoa-multiplayer-video-games-put-some-people-on-the-enemy-team/
1 up, 2 down
johnld
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 1:17:21 AM
Reply
as for playing as taliban, i havent heard this before. all i remember is that they said you would play the game from 2 perspectives, the tier 1 operators (the scalpel) and the rangers/marines (the sledgehammer).
On a side note, when can it be considered a good day/month considering both sides. whenever theres a crime that can be related to videogames, its pretty much they cant tell reality and videogames apart. I could say this is only a game and not reality, althought there are actual people that were consulted about the subject.
Last edited by johnld on 8/16/2010 1:20:53 AM
2 up, 1 down
sawao_yamanaka
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 2:54:06 AM
0 up, 0 down
Lawless SXE
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 2:04:15 AM
Reply
I believe that the people who are planning to buy this will be individuals that are capable of rationalising and not just wanting to kill off Americans as the Taliban. These are very likely people who will be genuinely interested in the story that EALA and the soldiers that they are working with want to tell.
As Ben brought up, what difference does it make whether the war it is based on is current, or a hundred years old. War is war, and conflict is gaming. If a developer thinks that they are able to craft a good game, with a story in any particular time period, there will be a war to base it off. I really hope that people don't buy too heavily into this nonsense and boycott the game, because such an action is not deserved. If it doesn't appeal to you, fine. If you are offended by it, fine, but don't you dare going and forcing your close-minded beliefs on the rest of us, 'cause I'll tell you where to go real quick.
/rant
Peace.
3 up, 1 down
sawao_yamanaka
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 2:50:13 AM
Reply
3 up, 1 down
JAMES M
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 3:13:20 AM
Reply
0 up, 1 down
Zorigo
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 8:20:38 AM
0 up, 0 down
___________
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 3:24:12 AM
Reply
let the shitstorm commence!
why cant these people leave these things alone?
they dont like violent video games fine, DONT PLAY THEM!
i dont like motorcycles because there so freaking loud!
i dont like trucks because they dont obey the road rules, and think there the only ones on the road everyone has to move over for them.
but do you see me b*tching trying to get them banned?
nope, so fudge off and leave peoples pleasures alone!
0 up, 2 down
Underdog15
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 8:59:55 AM
I don't fully agree with her either, but I wouldn't just blow her off. She makes decent enough arguments to have a meaningful debate about it.
0 up, 1 down
___________
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 9:10:49 AM
if there ok with it than why do their mothers have to intervene?
its not because of insensitivity, 50 bucks says if they made this game but did not have the taliban in it, if they had a fictional enemy there would be no problems!
there just using that BS as a lame excuse to start whining, as a shoe horn to get violent games banned.
they have no problems with the moral side of things, its just they dont like violent games and there using this as a lame excuse to get what they want.
manipulation at its finest!
1 up, 0 down
KNG201
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 6:03:40 AM
Reply
0 up, 1 down
Bloodysilence19
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 8:14:37 AM
Reply
1 up, 0 down
Zorigo
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 8:18:13 AM
Reply
It also annoys me that they think its unsuitable. yes it could be but there not exactly idiots. they know a thing or two about sensitivity surely. Its not like they're gonna make it a fun house to play as taliban. im pretty sure everyone realises that the taliban are bad people. EA isn't gonna make a game where they glorify the 'robbers' is it.
1 up, 0 down
Underdog15
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 8:49:30 AM
Reply
However, that chick at least makes a good argument. Even if you disagree with her, at least she isn't using mindless drivel to support her stance. I don't fully agree, but I do respect her standpoint. She presents a useful argument.
I sit in between the two sides. Being a theatre major, I fully support the idea of accurately depicting things the way they really are and showing characters truthfully. I also think if video games want to truly be considered artistic, they need to address world issues in the NOW and less in the THEN.
Now, that being said, this video game could go too far to the side that supports Meridith's argument. I don't mean to suggest that war should be watered down in games, but I do think it needs to be a realistic portrayal. In other words this:
--This game goes too far if it glorifies war.--
If it makes it cool or funny, then it's not a realistic portrayal, nor is it artistic. (Why I personally dislike GTA series.) If, however, it depicts war as a brutal reality with all the heartache it causes, then it's good. If, say, it leaves us with the feeling that we just wish it would end, then it will succeed.
We need a game that comments on war in the now. Movies do it... this game can really help people understand the brutality of war through interaction. If done tastefully with respect to the emotion of the soldiers (IM NOT SUGGESTING WAR BE WATERED DOWN!!), this game could be a tremendous artistic experience! Especially if you get to see it through the eyes of taliban... both the ones who believe in what they fight for and those forced into it.
I hope they work hard on this title.
3 up, 2 down
Alienange
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 1:35:58 PM
Nobody is going to buy MoH and be amazed at the accuracy of its campaign. Did gamers hit the encyclopedia after playing W@W ? Nope. This game will be no different.
Perhaps the only thing that'll be unique here is that people won't buy it because of the poor taste in setting.
Of course that is yet to be seen.
1 up, 2 down
Underdog15
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 2:32:25 PM
Other than that, I don't see what the difference is between an American, a Taliban, a Russian, a Brazilian, etc. They're all people... and FPS's kill them all. No one stood up for the pain my grandparents went through in WW2 when WW2 games came out.
And hey... even if some Americans find it distasteful, most other countries don't have much invested into that war in a way that would affect many civilians. The best man at my wedding is in Afghanistan right now. I guarantee you we'll play MoH when he gets back.
0 up, 0 down
shaydey77
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 10:19:03 AM
Reply
However, if i lost a son at war the last thing id care about was getting a game stopped. Fair enough to campaign against war itself but this is just plain silly.
3 up, 0 down
Mornelithe
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 10:32:14 AM
Reply
I didn't really get a chance to experience the single-player, but the multi-player definitely didn't seem to be based on actual events. Just a random place where a firefight can happen.
I liked the game, but it was definitely something I was thinking about while playing it.
2 up, 0 down
mike rlz
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 1:02:18 PM
Reply
MOUNTAIN DEEEEW AND CHEEETOOOOS!!!!! (anyone get it?)
3 up, 2 down
Tom_Robertson
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 1:30:02 PM
Reply
FYI...the video wasn't working when I clicked on it
0 up, 1 down
kraygen
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 2:03:40 PM
Reply
I'm not really sure there is a right answer to this. People this game is aimed towards probly won't be offended, but that doesn't mean everyone will like it.
0 up, 1 down
Underdog15
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 2:35:43 PM
Reply
1) CoD doesn't do it for me.
2) I want a game that shows current affairs. I don't need a WW2 game, a futuristic game, or a vietnam game. I wasn't alive during Vietnam, and none of my friends or relatives were involved at all. So... don't care.
But THIS MoH game... I would love to get a look into what my friends and family see over in Afghanistan. At the very least, I'd like to understand a few things better.
1 up, 0 down
booze925
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 4:04:06 PM
ur relatives must've lived under rocks
0 up, 4 down
Jawknee
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 4:11:03 PM
1 up, 0 down
ps3sownsxbox360
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 4:41:20 PM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
WorldEndsWithMe
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 5:44:17 PM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
CharlesD
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 6:38:01 PM
Reply
1 up, 0 down
THEVERDIN
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 7:08:32 PM
Reply
Last edited by THEVERDIN on 8/16/2010 7:09:35 PM
0 up, 0 down
BikerSaint
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 8:41:08 PM
Reply
Not to me, you weren't!
And I salute you for giving your service!
0 up, 0 down
Kowhoho
Monday, August 16, 2010 @ 10:15:49 PM
Reply
Don't take my word for it, watch the E3 trailer.
Think it's insensitive to portay "real" combat? Look back at Modern Warfare. You played as a terrorist countless times and killed hordes of American soldiers. Does that bother you? Think about what you're proposing. This complaint could be made about every war game, but then again not every game is labeled as "controversial," and you don't have to worry about those. All you would have to do is change a few dialogues and slap on a couple more desert scenes and wham bam you're playing the Afghanistan war.
If it bothers you that people die in war, that they get shred to pieces and left for the maggots, tough. That's your reality. Get used to it.
And isn't it strange to say that this game in particular sets off negative emotions and grief over lost loves when every little thing from the stores you visit to the other people in your life can set off the same reaction?
The game isn't making light of War. It's not a "game," not a joke. The game takes war seriously and so should you.
1 up, 0 down
Kingharris
Tuesday, August 17, 2010 @ 5:19:17 AM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
GuernicaReborn
Tuesday, August 17, 2010 @ 9:06:16 AM
0 up, 0 down
SmokeyPSD
Tuesday, August 17, 2010 @ 9:30:36 AM
Reply
If it's ok to make war films on current wars, it's ok to write books, it's ok to make games. Not much more to it really.
0 up, 0 down
SmokeyPSD
Tuesday, August 17, 2010 @ 9:34:18 AM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
redruM
Tuesday, August 17, 2010 @ 5:02:06 PM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
animalmother
Thursday, August 19, 2010 @ 10:10:45 AM
Reply
This somewhat ignorant woman, who i do feel sorry for, its never easy to lose a child, comes out with nothing more than her PERSONAL opinion. Everybody has one like everyone has an A-sphincter. I can't understand her pain but while i respect it, its largely ignorance which isn't her fault.
If you don't like the game...don't play it. I watch the Military channel up here in Canada and you will see TRUE war footage, of Russian, German and other soldiers being killed or lying dead on camera. Massive wounds, bodies torn...
Many families of these people would likely hate to see this footage, as it would cause them great pain. However the same that applies here, applies to MoH...if you don't like it, don't order or watch the channel and in MoHs case, buy the game.
I find it funny though as usual certain sects of America find this game horrible, twisted and evil but only because it will be American soldiers being killed virtually by Taliban. If it was any other race like the Russians who fought Muhadjedin(spellcheck) everything would be okay.
For the strongest country in the world, no sarcasm intended, it amazes me how sensitive you are...
You(Meredith) still barely care about Hiroshima and the 70+ thousand that died JUST on initial blast let alone all who died/affected by radiation sickness...yet you can't bare the thought of a G.I.s being killed in the virtual world.
0 up, 0 down
Amazingskillz
Thursday, August 19, 2010 @ 3:19:32 PM
Reply
0 up, 0 down
animalmother
Thursday, August 19, 2010 @ 4:53:43 PM
0 up, 0 down
GuernicaReborn
Thursday, January 13, 2011 @ 1:13:53 PM
0 up, 0 down
B-RadGfromOV
Reply
Sunday, August 15, 2010 @ 9:41:14 PM