http://www.destructoid.com/play-as-al-qaeda-i-can-t-support-the-new-medal-of-honor-179654.phtml
What the fuck were you smoking when you thought this article up? I could follow your train of thought until you mentioned that this only applies to multi-player in which your chosen faction doesn't impact shit beyond your initial load-out and avatar's appearance. 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.
You're making something out of nothing in this case. This is exactly the same shit Jack Thompson and the 'football moms' pull, 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 sets gamers and the games industry back when the people involved can't even differentiate between a game and reality.
I would assume your love of Medal of Honor was present during the other games in the series where you could play as the fucking
NAZIS. Did you throw you're controller down in disgust then? No, you fucking played because, "fuck it, it don't affect me" but now, with your loose ties to Afghanistan you think you can jump on your high horse and say playing as the bad guys is beneath you? Fuck you.
I mean, shit, you're even throwing around Taliban and Al-Qaeda as if they're interchangeable. Shit, man. If you're gonna' pretend like you have any sort of moral stance on this kind of thing, rather than just using it as an excuse to bring attention to yourself, at least research your shit.
It's a fucking game, mate. It's not asking you to support Al-Qaeda through playing as them. The developers came at it like this,
"Hey, we've got the US Army in Afghanistan but we need someone for them to shoot."
"Well golly, I just don't know who we could use as a disposable enemy force to throw at the player."
There's only one answer, Hamza. It ain't Nazis, it ain't Vietcong and it sure as hell ain't goats.
Pyramid Head's blog
Follow
RSS
Contact
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.
Welcome to Destructoid!
"...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".
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.
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.
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?
RESEARCH YOUR SHIT!
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.
Instead, I will post the following image:
Walking away won't give your argument any extra credibility.
Everyone here graciously wasted their time responding to you, so you owe them the same courtesy.
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 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.
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.