surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
send message
follow
followers
I didn't read your article because I can already tell you didn't read Hamza's. In which he clearly states its a personal tie to the situations that causes his uneasiness.
Seriously. The premise of your letter is stupid. That's my opinion, hopefully it doesn't give you an aneurysm. Though I'm sure it will ruin your life somehow.
Seriously. The premise of your letter is stupid. That's my opinion, hopefully it doesn't give you an aneurysm. Though I'm sure it will ruin your life somehow.
I don't know where to start.
"...your loose ties to Afghanistan..."
"...at least research your shit."
I'm assuming you researched Hamza's family and personal history before you wrote this post? Who are you to judge how personally and emotionally connected to the country he is?
"...you don't give a lucky fuck until something affects you then everyone else has to know about it and how wrong it is."
This happens all the time. Many Americans didn't give a "lucky fuck" about helping Europe during WWI and WWII, but when something affected them (Lusitania/Zimmerman Telegram, and Pearl Harbor), they finally took part. A lot of people didn't care about security and international terrorism before 9/11, and see what happened, for good or for ill, afterward.
"I thought I'd be beheading journalists and killing civilians similar to CoD's portrayal of an airport massacre, but no, I'm going to be playing another faceless soldier in an endless circle of kill, respawn, kill."
That's the very problem right there. As uncomfortable as it made people feel, at least No Russian was specifically made to contextualize the experience of terrorism and civilian killing. In a singleplayer campaign, narrative allows the developer to provide context and explanation for the motivation of each side in a conflict. Multiplayer deathmatch never does that; that gametype is explicitly about having two equal sides, where the differences are usually superficial (skins, audio cues, etc.). Multiplayer inherently trivializes much of the nuance of conflict and warfare, and boils it down to that basic circle of killing you describe. So, it would be disconcerting if this was done to a modern conflict that one has a personal connection to.
As for Nazis, take a game like Battlefield: Heroes. It used a lighthearted, cartoon graphical style for a game set in a WWII environment. However, by simply making the two factions generic (National Army vs. Royal Army) rather than being Nazis vs. Americans, it was less likely that players would feel uncomfortable with playing as cartoon Nazis. That's the same thing that was done in the Modern Warfare games.
In any case, did you notice that the article was Hamza's personal reaction to the game? Did he say "This game shouldn't have been made." or "This was a bad idea by the developers."? No he didn't. He simply explained why he felt uncomfortable playing the game, but his opinion was not supposed to be a generalized one for all gamers. It's the same thing as if someone who is arachnophobic said they couldn't play through Limbo, or someone whose friend or family member was killed by gang violence might be uncomfortable with parts of GTA. They're called "personal reasons".
"...your loose ties to Afghanistan..."
"...at least research your shit."
I'm assuming you researched Hamza's family and personal history before you wrote this post? Who are you to judge how personally and emotionally connected to the country he is?
"...you don't give a lucky fuck until something affects you then everyone else has to know about it and how wrong it is."
This happens all the time. Many Americans didn't give a "lucky fuck" about helping Europe during WWI and WWII, but when something affected them (Lusitania/Zimmerman Telegram, and Pearl Harbor), they finally took part. A lot of people didn't care about security and international terrorism before 9/11, and see what happened, for good or for ill, afterward.
"I thought I'd be beheading journalists and killing civilians similar to CoD's portrayal of an airport massacre, but no, I'm going to be playing another faceless soldier in an endless circle of kill, respawn, kill."
That's the very problem right there. As uncomfortable as it made people feel, at least No Russian was specifically made to contextualize the experience of terrorism and civilian killing. In a singleplayer campaign, narrative allows the developer to provide context and explanation for the motivation of each side in a conflict. Multiplayer deathmatch never does that; that gametype is explicitly about having two equal sides, where the differences are usually superficial (skins, audio cues, etc.). Multiplayer inherently trivializes much of the nuance of conflict and warfare, and boils it down to that basic circle of killing you describe. So, it would be disconcerting if this was done to a modern conflict that one has a personal connection to.
As for Nazis, take a game like Battlefield: Heroes. It used a lighthearted, cartoon graphical style for a game set in a WWII environment. However, by simply making the two factions generic (National Army vs. Royal Army) rather than being Nazis vs. Americans, it was less likely that players would feel uncomfortable with playing as cartoon Nazis. That's the same thing that was done in the Modern Warfare games.
In any case, did you notice that the article was Hamza's personal reaction to the game? Did he say "This game shouldn't have been made." or "This was a bad idea by the developers."? No he didn't. He simply explained why he felt uncomfortable playing the game, but his opinion was not supposed to be a generalized one for all gamers. It's the same thing as if someone who is arachnophobic said they couldn't play through Limbo, or someone whose friend or family member was killed by gang violence might be uncomfortable with parts of GTA. They're called "personal reasons".
Wow okay, I'll bite. He said those things bcause it hit home for him. Nowhere in his article did it say that you shouldn't buy it either. Unless you've never ever been personally offended by anything ever, I think I can safely say shut the fuck up and grow some sensativity. seriously, stfu. But you shouldn't play games. you seem angry. Angry people don't fit in on the internet.
dude, that's a harsh indictment.
Hamza's entitled to his opinion. I don't exactly agree with him but I have my own problems with these kind of "real world" games. Being I feel that there is an underlying promotion of general militarization and nationalism to some degree. Many people disagree with me but I respect their side of it.
I'd take being a blue scout against a red pyro over any "realistic" enemy.
Hamza's entitled to his opinion. I don't exactly agree with him but I have my own problems with these kind of "real world" games. Being I feel that there is an underlying promotion of general militarization and nationalism to some degree. Many people disagree with me but I respect their side of it.
I'd take being a blue scout against a red pyro over any "realistic" enemy.
Whoo-Hoo! This dude brought the fail train from the comments section over to the c-blogs. Way to break the "don't suck" rule there bro.
Seriously, why wasn't this just a comment on the article? Did you really think your opinion was so important that it should be articulated in a different area in hopes more people could see it? If so, I disagree.
Seriously, why wasn't this just a comment on the article? Did you really think your opinion was so important that it should be articulated in a different area in hopes more people could see it? If so, I disagree.
You know, I had this big comment worked out in my head where I would point out how you’re wrong or just a dick in just about every point you make, but you’re not worth it. Guncannon’s arachnophobia/Limbo analogy perfectly sums up Hamza’s post (in fact I can imagine Chad posting that and the comments exploding with how adorable he is).
Also, a person you don’t know and will never meet says he won’t play a game because it makes him uncomfortable, does it anger you that much or do you just really like Al-Qaeda?
Also, a person you don’t know and will never meet says he won’t play a game because it makes him uncomfortable, does it anger you that much or do you just really like Al-Qaeda?
Welcome to the C-Blogs. Where we don't stand for that horseshit and cockery you get away with on the frontpage without a stern and well thought description of how fucking moronic you are and a few humorous JPGs to keep things light.
I've never been into the Medal of Honor series, and this one won't be different.
Pyramid Head, everybody is entitled to have their own opinions. If you disagree, then instead of directly attacking them or their opinions, write a blog about your counter argument.
I hated everything that Nintendo announced on E3, as well as everything related to Kinect. Did I attack those who liked them? No. I just explained why I despised those things, without locking on to anybody in particular in my verbal attacks.
Don't lose your cool, and don't insult anyone.
If you're going to antagonize anyone, go ahead. If you're going to antagonize me, I'll even share one of my opinions:
I think Kirby's Epic Yarn is one of the worst things that came out of E3 this year. (In terms that simpler minds can better grasp: Kirby's Epic Yarn is crap and sucks!)*
I hope you be more civilized and write a tasteful blog explaining why I'm wrong.
* Remember: Don't hate the player, hate the game.
Pyramid Head, everybody is entitled to have their own opinions. If you disagree, then instead of directly attacking them or their opinions, write a blog about your counter argument.
I hated everything that Nintendo announced on E3, as well as everything related to Kinect. Did I attack those who liked them? No. I just explained why I despised those things, without locking on to anybody in particular in my verbal attacks.
Don't lose your cool, and don't insult anyone.
If you're going to antagonize anyone, go ahead. If you're going to antagonize me, I'll even share one of my opinions:
I think Kirby's Epic Yarn is one of the worst things that came out of E3 this year. (In terms that simpler minds can better grasp: Kirby's Epic Yarn is crap and sucks!)*
I hope you be more civilized and write a tasteful blog explaining why I'm wrong.
* Remember: Don't hate the player, hate the game.
Please see my second to last comment in the main post, you're not worth the few clicks and copy/paste.
Instead, I will post the following image:
Instead, I will post the following image:
I've found the holes in all your arguments (the one's that aren't image macros), especially yours Guncannon, but if you can't see them yourselves I won't waste my time. It's become apparent that this isn't any kind of community I want to be a part of.
All the better, since none of us stand for anyone directing insults and degradation to anyone else in this community.
Walking away won't give your argument any extra credibility.
Walking away won't give your argument any extra credibility.
Such an admirable grasp of stream-of-consciousness technique. I love how it reads like a drunken rant delivered over Xbox live.
@ Pyramid Head: What are you, like seven years old? WAH I COULD BEAT ALL YOUR ARGUMENTS EXCEPT I DON'T FEEL LIKE IT WAH
Everyone here graciously wasted their time responding to you, so you owe them the same courtesy.
Everyone here graciously wasted their time responding to you, so you owe them the same courtesy.
@Sama
You say that but Jim Sterling rises in popularity.
As for everyone else, I'm disappointed that none of you can find any merit in this here blog. Sure, it's a mess - it's gruesome and blunt and unsubstantiated and probably smells. But he raises the point of the connect between the multiplayer and campaign contexts: if the other team in online deathmatches was a bunch of space marines or zombies, it would tear from the feel of the game. Should we especially avoid our games from having concern over modern politics and events, to resolve this disconnect without troubling sensitivities? In addition is raised the point of hypocrisy in unabashedly gunning down these digital figures but shrilling at the thought of those digital figures. Who wants to discuss the root of that? There's discussion to be had.
You say that but Jim Sterling rises in popularity.
As for everyone else, I'm disappointed that none of you can find any merit in this here blog. Sure, it's a mess - it's gruesome and blunt and unsubstantiated and probably smells. But he raises the point of the connect between the multiplayer and campaign contexts: if the other team in online deathmatches was a bunch of space marines or zombies, it would tear from the feel of the game. Should we especially avoid our games from having concern over modern politics and events, to resolve this disconnect without troubling sensitivities? In addition is raised the point of hypocrisy in unabashedly gunning down these digital figures but shrilling at the thought of those digital figures. Who wants to discuss the root of that? There's discussion to be had.
@Byronic Man
You can preach intelligence but if you sound like a moron you're not gonna be taken seriously.
If he had a point worth hearing out maybe he should've made it instead of pointlessly putting in dickery and fluff. For that reason his point is moot. Any argument made is as much about the delivery as it is the content.
That said I didn't see any point worth addressing but that's me. There is not point to most of these blogs. They're all forming arguments around a nonissue.
You can preach intelligence but if you sound like a moron you're not gonna be taken seriously.
If he had a point worth hearing out maybe he should've made it instead of pointlessly putting in dickery and fluff. For that reason his point is moot. Any argument made is as much about the delivery as it is the content.
That said I didn't see any point worth addressing but that's me. There is not point to most of these blogs. They're all forming arguments around a nonissue.
Again, I point you towards the Jimquisition and EDS' blog. They're popular enough; discussion managed to sprout in spite of their antagonistic tone. While they are at the same time more intelligent in content than this blog, that doesn't redeem the dickery they go about expressing it.
@Xzyliac
I'm sure my college English professors would say otherwise. Essays are the epitome of fluff. I could state my point in maybe a paragraph, but noooo, it needs to be 10+ pages, because of archaic rules.
I think the point is worth hearing: It's pretty much a multiplayer skin for the other team. I don't see why everyone's so angry except because Hamza is a guy you get news from most days on this lovely site, and therefore have come to respect him over someone who has just shown up.
I have no problem with Hamza's opinion either, but I don't think Pyramid Head's colourful language is anything to take offense at. Until he says "fuck you" of course, in which case Hamza could be offended, but I am not.
I'm sure my college English professors would say otherwise. Essays are the epitome of fluff. I could state my point in maybe a paragraph, but noooo, it needs to be 10+ pages, because of archaic rules.
I think the point is worth hearing: It's pretty much a multiplayer skin for the other team. I don't see why everyone's so angry except because Hamza is a guy you get news from most days on this lovely site, and therefore have come to respect him over someone who has just shown up.
I have no problem with Hamza's opinion either, but I don't think Pyramid Head's colourful language is anything to take offense at. Until he says "fuck you" of course, in which case Hamza could be offended, but I am not.
