×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Konami Announces a Game Based On a 2004 Battle In Fallujah

Soulskill posted about 5 years ago | from the tread-lightly dept.

The Military 644

The LA Times reports that Konami has announced Six Days in Fallujah, a video game due out next year that is based on an actual battle fought in Iraq in 2004. Quoting: "The idea for the game ... came from US Marines who returned from the battle with video, photos and diaries of their experiences. Instead of dialing up Steven Spielberg to make a movie version of their stories, they turned to Atomic Games, a company in Raleigh, NC, that makes combat simulation software for the military. ... 'The soldiers wanted to tell their stories through a game because that's what they grew up playing,' said John Choon, senior brand manager for the game at Konami... More than a dozen Marines are featured in documentary-style video interviews that are interspersed with the game's action. The Marines reappear in the game itself, doing pretty much what they did during the war. One tells the story of how he furiously wrote a letter to his wife and begged a chaplain to give it to her if he died. Another, Eddie Garcia, talks about how his right leg was shredded in a mortar attack, and how he suffered survivor's guilt after he was taken out of combat."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

644 comments

Scumbags (2, Insightful)

Pictish Prince (988570) | about 5 years ago | (#27487799)

Do you get extra points for incinerating women and children with white phosphorus?

Re:Scumbags (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27487869)

those are featured in the Israeli attack on Palestine (oh noes, they're the good ones! really!)

Shoot everything moving wearing a towel on head (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27487909)

That's teh only way to be sure.

Re:Scumbags (4, Informative)

Oxygen99 (634999) | about 5 years ago | (#27488071)

So this is flamebait why? The US Army did use white phosphorous in Fallujah and did so even according to the US Army themselves. White phosphorous is a terrible substance that [slashdot.org] "melts people's bodies down to the bone" [independent.co.uk] , and requires significant moral gymnastics/cowardice* to justify as a weapon of war. I think it's only reasonable that, as an American soldier, the option to deploy banned weapons against the enemy be an option, just as it should be possible to win the game by not ever going to war on half-truths and lies disseminated by a blatantly evil and corrupt administration. (* Delete as appropriate)

Re:Scumbags (-1, Redundant)

tibman (623933) | about 5 years ago | (#27488313)

You are mistaken. WP is not a banned weapon of war. Chemical weapons, however, are. WP is a thermal weapon, not a toxin or poison.

Re:Scumbags (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27488427)

Because it is a gun battle.

If someone is shooting at you, will you stop and think about what sort of weapon you are going to use?

You are an idiot.

Go home and cry to mommy.

This is sick (5, Insightful)

epiphani (254981) | about 5 years ago | (#27487841)

I've spoken to some people that were at Fallujah. I guess everyone sees it differently, but they saw it as a massacre. Over 1300 "insurgents" dead, less than 100 Americans.

They told me stories of teams of people that would go into apartment buildings and shoot every single thing in it. These people were all "insurgents". Entire families of insurgents.

I'm sure I'll get modded down for this, but screw it. What if someone made a game glorifying Rhwanda? Cambodia? I realize its not the same thing, but there are certain "battles" that shouldn't be immortalized as heroic actions.

Re:This is sick (5, Insightful)

yincrash (854885) | about 5 years ago | (#27487873)

Isn't that what happens in most war video games? The side you play on rarely dies, and the other side gets massacred. Sounds like an accurate example to make a video game of.

Re:This is sick (1, Insightful)

elrous0 (869638) | about 5 years ago | (#27487887)

It's usually the politicians who create "heroes," not the soldiers and marines. Most of them know better.

Re:This is sick (5, Insightful)

bistromath007 (1253428) | about 5 years ago | (#27487895)

Depiction is not glorification. The devs have been labeling this title "survival horror," which basically makes it the most accurate depiction of war I've ever heard of. These Marines want to tell their story, as many veterans have before them, and they want to do it in a way that they know will reach their own generation. Kudos to Konami for giving them a place to do that.

Re:This is sick (5, Funny)

meringuoid (568297) | about 5 years ago | (#27487971)

Over 1300 "insurgents" dead, less than 100 Americans.

I see what you mean. That kill ratio is pretty extreme.

You can't have the player getting killed one encounter in 13. They'll have to tone it down a whole lot, I reckon. Something nearer 100:1 would be nearer the typical FPS ratio.

Re:This is sick (0)

Shakrai (717556) | about 5 years ago | (#27487973)

I guess everyone sees it differently, but they saw it as a massacre. Over 1300 "insurgents" dead, less than 100 Americans.

So anything with a favorable ratio of casualties is a massacre?

Re:This is sick (3, Informative)

Daimanta (1140543) | about 5 years ago | (#27488195)

You might as well put tl;dr in there.

Read very closely:

"They told me stories of teams of people that would go into apartment buildings and shoot every single thing in it. These people were all "insurgents". Entire families of insurgents."

This is what he means by massacre. The fact that you aren't able to read the 4 lines of his post doesn't make you insightful, it makes you a moron.

Re:This is sick (4, Funny)

Shakrai (717556) | about 5 years ago | (#27488257)

This is what he means by massacre

War is hell. Given that we sustained almost 100 KIA and nearly 600 WIA, it seems like a safe assumption that we were fighting people who were actually shooting back. Hence I'm skeptical about claims of a "massacre".

it makes you a moron

Also, fuck you ;)

Re:This is sick (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27488291)

Ignore Shakrai, he's nothing but a troll.

Re:This is sick (1)

Atlantis-Rising (857278) | about 5 years ago | (#27488219)

No, but I think there is a strong argument to be made that anything with an enormously unbalanced kill ratio is a massacre.

Re:This is sick (1)

Yacoby (1295064) | about 5 years ago | (#27487979)

I'm sure I'll get modded down for this, but screw it. What if someone made a game glorifying Rhwanda? Cambodia? I realize its not the same thing, but there are certain "battles" that shouldn't be immortalized as heroic actions.

You don't understand. We are the good guys, hence the people who we shoot at are the bad guys, so it is OK to kill them.

On a more serious note, I also hope they cover the shooting by the US of civilians who were protesting about the closure of a school, and the killings by US troops in the later protest about killings in the earlier protest.
Maybe about the use of White phosphorus in civilian areas?

Sure, both sides committed acts that could (and should) be considered war crimes, however, if you are going to make a documentary style game, you may as well try and ensure it isn't biased 100% towards the US. One can hope

Victory (1)

uneek (107167) | about 5 years ago | (#27487981)

1300 enemy vs 100 of our guys?

Sounds like a victory

Re:Victory (2, Insightful)

digitig (1056110) | about 5 years ago | (#27488259)

Only if you don't understand the difference between insurgents and "insurgents". For all you know from those figures it could be 5 enemy, 100 of your guys and 1295 innocent bystanders. Although I grant that in that case you would have made enemies of quite a few of those innocent bystanders as they saw you massacre their loved ones.

Re:This is sick (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27487987)

Winners always write history. It will remain that way, and the battles that are fought will always be won by "the good guys".

Re:This is sick (2, Insightful)

clickclickdrone (964164) | about 5 years ago | (#27488357)

>Winners always write history
Yep but I never thought I'd see the day when winners produced video games about it. How would the average US family feel if they'd lost a son in the Iraq/Afghan war and found out there was a video game made by say the Taliban where they got to shoot Marines, cut off heads etc?

Re:This is sick (1)

immakiku (777365) | about 5 years ago | (#27488029)

Certainly not immortalized as heroic actions, but they should be immortalized through documentary nonetheless. This is an opportunity to allow us to see the effects of war that we've never had before. If done right, this could serve as a valuable history lesson.

An unfair fight is the point of war (5, Insightful)

tjstork (137384) | about 5 years ago | (#27488045)

You seem to be under the delusion that wars are meant to be fair. That, somehow, an equal number of people should be killed on both sides and that's the good way to do a war.

That is stupidest thing imaginable.

The fact is, we spend 500B a year on the military so that when we do fight people, it is a massacre. We do not want our guys to die. We want their guys to die.

If you don't want massacres, then don't fight the USA. That the USA can massacre its opponents is a GOOD thing, as it brings more American soldiers home alive.

Now, if you don't want this, then don't send soldiers off to war, but that's a different debate. Once they are there, you want Americans to be able to kill enemies like a Power'd up dude in a video game.

Re:An unfair fight is the point of war (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27488183)

So in your sick, sorry world, once we are at war we can kill all the civilians we want, and that is a good thing. Fuck you. I would be glad to go into more detail about what a fucked up world view you hold, but if there is one thing I have learned, it is that the wilfully ignorant cling to their ignorance like a drowning man clings to a liferaft.

Re:An unfair fight is the point of war (4, Insightful)

tjstork (137384) | about 5 years ago | (#27488227)

So in your sick, sorry world, once we are at war we can kill all the civilians we want, and that is a good thing.

Dude, that's what war is. If you don't want war, then don't fight them. Don't sit there and pretend that war is a noble thing like a video game with so many rules. That only makes it more palatable to fight. I'd put this to you - if civilians understood that they would get killed in wars too, they might be a lot less likely to build, finance and cheer on the armies to fight them.

Re:An unfair fight is the point of war (5, Interesting)

meringuoid (568297) | about 5 years ago | (#27488283)

I'd put this to you - if civilians understood that they would get killed in wars too, they might be a lot less likely to build, finance and cheer on the armies to fight them.

This was more or less the reasoning behind the 2005 bombings on the London Underground.

Re:An unfair fight is the point of war (4, Informative)

FCAdcock (531678) | about 5 years ago | (#27488383)

As someone who was there, F you man. It's easy to sit here at home and call us murderers and bastards for what we did, but the fact remains that the people we put down were bad people.

Sure, There are bound to be a few innocent people killed in any war. This war has been great in that we have greatly reduced the number of innocent people killed as compared to historical numbers.

But when you take a town of 25,000 where the vast majority are violently anti-american and put lots of american soldiers in the center of town, you're going to have lots of people die. You choose who you would rather have die. Your neighbors and countrymen, or some terrorist raghead who is hell-bent on destroying america and is practicing building bombs in his kitchen.

Re:An unfair fight is the point of war (1)

hobbit (5915) | about 5 years ago | (#27488213)

If you don't want massacres, then don't fight the USA.

Be subjugated or be dead? Fuck you.

Re:An unfair fight is the point of war (0, Flamebait)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | about 5 years ago | (#27488293)

If you don't want massacres, then don't fight the USA. That the USA can massacre its opponents is a GOOD thing, as it brings more American soldiers home alive.

Which is why I pray to the imaginary God that we will see the civil war the wing-nutters predict, so I can do to you what you so casually believe we should do to others.

Re:An unfair fight is the point of war (1)

Reality Master 201 (578873) | about 5 years ago | (#27488299)

You seem to be under the illusion that the international treaties the US is a party to are only valid when we feel like obeying them. In fact, they have the force of law in the US, making deliberate violence against civilians in war not just immoral, but an actual crime.

If you don't want massacres... (5, Insightful)

Peter Simpson (112887) | about 5 years ago | (#27488349)

"If you don't want massacres, then don't fight the USA."

Ummm...they didn't "fight us", we invaded them, based on our president's dislike of their ruler and a bunch of trumped up "evidence".

Yes, they fought back, but think of what would happen if some foreign power invaded us. Certainly, there would be some who would choose to fight back.

Guerilla war is like that...the innocent die along with the insurgents, who shelter among them.
But, let's remember who started it, and not place *all* of the blame on the opponent.

Re:An unfair fight is the point of war (3, Interesting)

u38cg (607297) | about 5 years ago | (#27488437)

From a military point of view, yes. If they want to fight, rock their world. But the calculus changes when you are talking about operations in an environment where substantial numbers of civilians are present. You have serious and substantial obligations under military law and you cannot ignore them just because it is convenient. A great deal of what supposedly went on in Fallujah falls under that.

Western militaries are still tooled and trained to fight WWII. We need to wise up and move on and recognise that blindly teaching the doctrines that won the last war may not win the next one.

Re:An unfair fight is the point of war (1, Insightful)

epiphani (254981) | about 5 years ago | (#27488443)

If you don't want massacres, then don't fight the USA.

Excellent point. I'll do everything I can to avoid getting into a fight with the USA - open my facilities to UN inspectors, abide by no-fly-zones, generally do whatever I can. That should work, right?

Re:This is sick (4, Interesting)

vertinox (846076) | about 5 years ago | (#27488111)

I've spoken to some people that were at Fallujah. I guess everyone sees it differently, but they saw it as a massacre. Over 1300 "insurgents" dead, less than 100 Americans.

As opposed to every other wargame in history that glosses over war crimes and touchy topics?

I mean how many D-Day games were there that never even mentioned the fact that the Allies were under orders not to take prisoners for the first 24 hour of the invasion and that they were often killing 16 year old German reservists.

And to be fair Germans, Japanese, and Soviets did far worse things...

Yeah, sometimes war is really brutal and people do bad things and have to do bad things in order to survive (at least they think they do).

And then sometime in the future someone will make a game about it, but they are probably not going to include the really bad parts.

I mean in Silent Service series... Do you get to machine gun the Japanese sailors after sinking the merchant ship?

No.

But did it happen sometimes in the real war.

Yes.

You're looking at it from the wrong perspective (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27488191)

Try reading the introductory material to Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five, or The Children's Crusade: A Duty-Dance With Death. Just because the game uses a real battle doesn't necessarily mean it's glorifying anything.

Re:This is sick (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27488241)

I'd like a game where you gas jews and you get points for every creative jew death.

who did you talk to? exactly? citation needed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27488327)

yu are basically saying the marines murdered a bunch of civilians in fallujah.

where is the evidence?

Re:This is sick (1)

Brimmith (1090637) | about 5 years ago | (#27488369)

I've spoken to some people that were at Fallujah. I guess everyone sees it differently, but they saw it as a massacre. Over 1300 "insurgents" dead, less than 100 Americans.

That's may be accurate but the way the US military works requires that outcome. When a squad or platoon is engaged in a firefight, the ratio of American troops to enemy troops is suppose to be 3:1. This varies depending on how well the enemy is fortified and what not. Another reason why this really needs to happen is purely economical. It cost hundreds of thousands to train us and losing even one soldier is both awful but expensive whereas the enemy just indoctrinates their young to kill Americans. This kill to death ratio isn't uncommon because in Vietnam it was around 10:1 for regular line units and 200:1 for SF guys. The US military is not built to take extreme loses and the training and tactics show that.

Re:This is sick (2, Insightful)

AppyPappy (64817) | about 5 years ago | (#27488429)

Epiphani

When you get back from fighting in Fallujah, come back and tell us what really happened, Until then, stick to playing games.

Entertaining horrors of war (5, Interesting)

Anonymusing (1450747) | about 5 years ago | (#27487861)

FTA: "For us, the challenge was how do you present the horrors of war in a game that is also entertaining, but also gives people insight into a historical situation in a way that only a video game can provide? Our goal is to give people that insight, of what it's like to be a Marine during that event, what it's like to be a civilian in the city and what it's like to be an insurgent." ... "Our opportunity for giving people insight goes up dramatically when we can present people with the dilemmas and the choices that faced these soldiers... It's a chance to really give them a better understanding and empathy."

Seems like this is more of a "real" first-person-shooter: it's not only based on history, it's actually built with living combatants in mind.

Some folks are going to call it tasteless to "present the horrors of war in a game that is also entertaining," but how is it any less tastless than playing a fictional character in such a game??

Re:Entertaining horrors of war (1)

SirGarlon (845873) | about 5 years ago | (#27487881)

This would make a lot of sense for training Marines, but why a mass market game? They say they want to tell their stories, but that's what memoirs are for. Looks to me like they are out to make a buck.

Re:Entertaining horrors of war (2, Insightful)

meringuoid (568297) | about 5 years ago | (#27487927)

Looks to me like they are out to make a buck.

Something wrong with that? Way I see it, they're upholding the finest traditions that made the free world what it is today.

Re:Entertaining horrors of war (1)

hobbit (5915) | about 5 years ago | (#27488047)

Way I see it, they're upholding the finest traditions that made the free world what it is today.

Are you being sardonic, or do you really think the free world is better off for being run by Halliburton?

Re:Entertaining horrors of war (5, Funny)

Theaetetus (590071) | about 5 years ago | (#27487943)

This would make a lot of sense for training Marines, but why a mass market game? They say they want to tell their stories, but that's what memoirs are for. Looks to me like they are out to make a buck.

... and since we were in Iraq keeping the world safe for Socialism, we must stamp down any attempt to make a buck. Highly insightful, Comrade!

Re:Entertaining horrors of war (4, Interesting)

saider (177166) | about 5 years ago | (#27487989)

Video games, blogs and podcasts will be the memoirs of the 21st century.

Re:Entertaining horrors of war (1)

bistromath007 (1253428) | about 5 years ago | (#27487995)

Find people among the Marines' age group and cultural background who will read memoirs.

Now find some that will play a video game. This is specifically why the vets working on this thing have said they're doing so.

Re:Entertaining horrors of war (0, Troll)

SalaSSin (1414849) | about 5 years ago | (#27488153)

Find a marine who can write it...

Nothing against those guys, a lot of them are educated, i'm sure, but that doesn't make them writers. Or they would need a ghost writer.. aka developer.

Meh, i shut up.

Re:Entertaining horrors of war (4, Insightful)

AaxelB (1034884) | about 5 years ago | (#27488059)

This would make a lot of sense for training Marines, but why a mass market game? They say they want to tell their stories, but that's what memoirs are for. Looks to me like they are out to make a buck.

They want to reach people like them: people who are growing up playing video games. Sure, a memoir would get the story out there, but few potential marines (a demographic which overlaps heavily with video-game-playing teenagers) are going to pick it up. The point isn't just to be heard, the point is to be heard by the people to whom it matters.

Re:Entertaining horrors of war (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27487919)

It's more tasteless to make money (for the producers) or have fun (for the players) out of real people dying than fictional characters dying.

Re:Entertaining horrors of war (1)

Anonymusing (1450747) | about 5 years ago | (#27488049)

By that logic, nobody should produce or watch any war-related movies -- and Call of Duty [wikipedia.org] is a crime against humanity.

Re:Entertaining horrors of war (1)

Anonymusing (1450747) | about 5 years ago | (#27488107)

Blast, I ruined that comment. Retake:

By that logic, nobody should produce or watch any historically-accurate war-related movies. Why is it OK to kill historically-suggested fictional characters in real virtual wars, but not OK to kill historically-accurate characters in real virtual wars? Call of Duty [wikipedia.org] must be a crime against humanity.

Tagged 'tasteless'... (2, Interesting)

meringuoid (568297) | about 5 years ago | (#27487885)

... don't we really mean something like 'too soon'? After all, Fallujah was a fairly trivial battle by historic standards. Surely it's in far worse taste to make fun videogames out of World War 2?

Anyway, I just hope there's an option to play as the Iraqi resistance. I remember once playing one of the Call of Duty games - it began with a pretty well made Pearl Harbour, and I was terribly disappointed to learn that you had to be the Americans.

Oh man... (-1, Troll)

Idiomatick (976696) | about 5 years ago | (#27487899)

If Fallujah is ok we should have a gas chamber game. You go around in a big truck and kill thousands of jews, I see no moral reprehensibility. (Is it still a Godwin if its relevant?)

Honestly though this is sick. It was a wholesale slaughter of people. Burning corpses hanging in chunks from buildings. People having their flesh burned to the bone while they are alive. I'm normally ok with this sort of thing but this is up there on the offensive scale. Not going to leave out the fact that the US violated weapons treaties are we?

Re:Oh man... (3, Insightful)

Shakrai (717556) | about 5 years ago | (#27487961)

If Fallujah is ok we should have a gas chamber game. You go around in a big truck and kill thousands of jews

Oh give me a fucking break.

I'm normally ok with this sort of thing but this is up there on the offensive scale

The only thing that's offensive is some jackass invoking the memory of genocide to describe a battle where less than 2,000 people died.

Re:Oh man... (1)

hobbit (5915) | about 5 years ago | (#27488063)

So genocide is about numbers, not actions? Take your own fucking break.

Re:Oh man... (4, Insightful)

Shakrai (717556) | about 5 years ago | (#27488323)

So genocide is about numbers, not actions?

Genocide is defined as the systematic extermination of an entire national, racial, political, or ethnic group. Do you really think that's what our forces were doing in Fallujah? If you do you are a moron. If you don't then you ought to be calling out morons like the GP who make dumbass comparisons with the Holocaust to stir up emotion.

Re:Oh man... (0, Flamebait)

Ralph Spoilsport (673134) | about 5 years ago | (#27488393)

The only thing that's offensive is some jackass invoking the memory of genocide to describe a battle where less than 2,000 people died.

Think about that when YOU'RE on the business end of an AK47. As the bullets blow your world away, know that in the country where your murderer came from you will be immortalised in a computer game, where for a split second some ignorant brute bursts into your house and shoots you as you cower in your bed.

Two words for you:

Fuck. Off.

RS

Well that's war for you... (4, Insightful)

tjstork (137384) | about 5 years ago | (#27487977)

Honestly though this is sick. It was a wholesale slaughter of people. Burning corpses hanging in chunks from buildings. People having their flesh burned to the bone while they are alive. I'm normally ok with this sort of thing but this is up there on the offensive scale. Not going to leave out the fact that the US violated weapons treaties are we?

What the fuck do you think war is dude? A bunch of people running around like in Unreal Tournament or HALO with fake manly voices going "Roger Roger" and shooting all the time?

Phosphorus bombs are not a violation of any weapons treaty. And besides, we had no treaty with the insurgency, so screw them.

Re:Well that's war for you... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27488039)

That's great then! We should nuke North Korea then.
I mean we have no treaty with them, right?

captcha : optimism
>.>

Re:Well that's war for you... (1)

tjstork (137384) | about 5 years ago | (#27488125)

That's great then! We should nuke North Korea then. I mean we have no treaty with them, right?

Read up on the Korean War. Last time the USA overran North Korea the Chinese roared to their defense with an army of roughly 300,000 men, and the Russians chipped in some of their fighter aircraft. Recall that in the face of this, Doug Macarthur wanted to start nuking the Chinese and there were some people that though that the thing to do. But Truman decided that he had had two world wars in his lifetime and he did not want a third.

Re:Well that's war for you... (1)

CmdrGravy (645153) | about 5 years ago | (#27488081)

I'm actually not sure what sort of war it is when one side decides to simply pro-actively attack the other but it's surely not one I'd like to glorify in any way.

Re:Well that's war for you... (1)

tjstork (137384) | about 5 years ago | (#27488199)

I'm actually not sure what sort of war it is when one side decides to simply pro-actively attack the other but it's surely not one I'd like to glorify in any way.

I don't think you need to glorify any sort of war. Indeed, perhaps the sickest vocabulary thing that has happened to humanity is that the word "glory" that comes from war was taken to be a good thing, when its really meant to describe a door that only some people pass through. Not necessarily that its a good door.

Re:Well that's war for you... (1)

hobbit (5915) | about 5 years ago | (#27488087)

Um, it's not war, because you never declared war, precisely so that you could do things like break weapons treaties.

Re:Well that's war for you... (1)

tjstork (137384) | about 5 years ago | (#27488171)

Um, it's not war, because you never declared war, precisely so that you could do things like break weapons treaties

Not declaring war is like splitting hairs. The President sought the permission of Congress to go and invade somebody else, and he got it. In my mind, that's a declaration of war sufficient for the other side to understand that trouble was coming.

Re:Oh man... (2, Interesting)

meringuoid (568297) | about 5 years ago | (#27488133)

If Fallujah is ok we should have a gas chamber game. You go around in a big truck and kill thousands of jews, I see no moral reprehensibility. (Is it still a Godwin if its relevant?)

Your forces have conquered Jerusalem!

* Install a new governor
* Raze the city

Been there, done that, got the T-shirt. I'm normally at my genocidal best when it comes to playing Alpha Centauri: sunspot activity gives you twenty turns in which the international community won't pay any attention to your atrocities, and missile needlejets equipped with nerve gas pods are such a wonderful weapon in your first major wars...

Re:Oh man... agreed. (0, Troll)

Ralph Spoilsport (673134) | about 5 years ago | (#27488277)

How about a "Wounded Knee" game? Why just play at "cowboys and Indians" or watch Dallas vs. DC on NFL? Go for the GUSTO!!! Kill innocent women and children - call them insurgents/terrorists/savages whatever.

I feel a song coming on...

John was all present and Jim was all there
And Georgie was up for promotion
Not that the Army gave a bugger who they were
When confronting some heathen commotion!

The troops live under
the cannon's thunder
From Sind to Cooch Behar.
Moving from place to place
Till they come face to face
With a different breed of fellow
Whose skin is black or yellow
then quick as a wink
they chop them into beefsteak tartar!

Johnny found his whiskey too warm
And Jimmy found the weather too balmy
But Georgie took them both by the arm and said,
"Don't ever disappoint the Army!"

The troops live under
the cannon's thunder
From Sind to Cooch Behar.
Moving from place to place
Till they come face to face
With a different breed of fellow
Whose skin is black or yellow
then quick as a wink
they chop them into beefsteak tartar!

John is a write-off and Jimmy is dead
And Georgie was shot for looting
And young men's blood goes on being red
While the Army just goes on ahead... recruiting!

The troops live under
the cannon's thunder
From Sind to Cooch Behar.
Moving from place to place
Till they come face to face
With a different breed of fellow
Whose skin is black or yellow
then quick as a wink
they chop them into beefsteak tartar!

I think we need a My Lai game! That's it! Storm into the little hooches with your M16 blazing! Mother and children "Please mister Army Man NO!"

BLAM!

DIE YOU TERRORIST!

BLAMMO!

DIE YOU INSURGENT!

How about this: You get to Fly the "Enola Gay"! Woot!

There's a song for that one, too, but I've got Stanard Ridgeway in my brain right now.

Or here's another one: Be a Nazi bombardier and gunner on an He-111 or a Dornier bomber as you incinerate Coventry or sections of London! COOOL!

Bombardier zu Pilot - die Bomben sind gefallen! Essen Brennen Tod, Sie britischen Ratten! HEIL!

The saddest part is there are people in this world whose hearts and minds are so blinded by power and greed and cynicism and stupidity that this game will find a happy home in some collections.

Hey America - you wanna know why everyone hates you? Games like this, and the attitude behind it.

RS

Re:Oh man... (3, Insightful)

Sir_Lewk (967686) | about 5 years ago | (#27488281)

If Fallujah is ok we should have a gas chamber game. You go around in a big truck and kill thousands of jews...

Please do not downplay the sevarity of the holocaust to such extremes. Millions of jews were killed and you are doing history and society a great disservice in attempting to compare it to something as relatively tame as Fallujah.

The subaltern (0, Troll)

vajorie (1307049) | about 5 years ago | (#27487913)

The Marines reappear in the game itself, doing pretty much what they did during the war. One tells the story of how he furiously wrote a letter to his wife and begged a chaplain to give it to her if he died. Another, Eddie Garcia, talks about how his right leg was shredded in a mortar attack, and how he suffered survivor's guilt after he was taken out of combat.

Are we going to from the people they "fought" against (both the militia and the civilians that they massacred as well as their families and friends); will they be allowed to tell their own versions of the story; what will be sacrificed in order to present us with a coherent story that makes sense; is the game sponsored by the US, Iraq, or other states or their armies?

In other words, who and what will be transformed into subalterns [wikipedia.org] and who will be playing what role in this transformation?

I Am So Brave (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27487929)

Here I sit, in my mom's basement
Never had a real job, never will
I read /., jerk-of to anime-pr0n
And post in the DU/DK echo chambers
All day long

I am too smart to be a soldier
A marine, an airman, a sailor
I am too hip to fall for that
But I fight for peace
And social justice and
"Progressive" politics

I write "Amerikkka", "Bu$hitler"
"Darth Cheney" and I get modded-up
In the echo chambers
And I attack anyone who wanders
From the Huff-Po dogma
And call them "Rethuglican Jews"

I know my door will never be kicked down
I know I will never lose my job (I don't have one)
I know I will never listen to my mother
Being raped in the cell next to mine

I am so brave
Here in my mom's basement
Somebody give me a medal

Hm (1)

Uthic (931553) | about 5 years ago | (#27487947)

While the prospect of playing something like Operation Flashpoint in an urban setting is appealing (which it won't be, probably end up like COD4, heh) I'm not that excited over this. I guess it's a case of too close to the actual event more than anything, and sort of trivializes what went on there and was experienced by the Marines, the insurgents and any civilians left. Also the story, if there is any, will probably be censored and adjusted (not to mention it's one-sided).

Who's the target audience? (2, Insightful)

Lord Byron II (671689) | about 5 years ago | (#27487949)

The left won't play because they don't support the war.

The right won't play because they don't want to glamorize American soldiers getting shot at.

Everyone else won't play because it's tasteless.

Re:Who's the target audience? (5, Funny)

need4mospd (1146215) | about 5 years ago | (#27488075)

Libertarians. They're free to shoot whoever the hell they feel like.

Re:Who's the target audience? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27488197)

Libertarians. They're free to shoot whoever the hell they feel like.

Hey now! A libertarian's right to frag stops where my player model begins!

Re:Who's the target audience? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27488371)

If it's good I'll play it.

I'm against the war but this isn't real so who gives a shit?
I'm against shooting at people in general, but this isn't real so who gives a shit?

Finally, not all of us consider using a medium as a way to tell a story tasteless or see some kind of requisite time before such an attempt can be made. It's not like we need to wait 22.3 years before telling a tale of history.

What a great thing. (4, Insightful)

tjstork (137384) | about 5 years ago | (#27487951)

I think its good that Americans who fought Fallujah get to tell their story. We've had plenty of insurgent friendly lefties tell theirs for long enough, indeed, some are posting here. The fact of the matter is that Fallujah was the one place where insurgents tried to make a pitched battle rather than hit and run as normal. Urban fighting ensued, and the insurgents ultimately lost.

Re:What a great thing. (5, Insightful)

Leafheart (1120885) | about 5 years ago | (#27488169)

I like how "defending your country from a foreign invading army" suddenly becomes "insurgents that needs some killing".

War sometimes is a necessity, invasion, hardly.

Re:What a great thing. (1)

Shakrai (717556) | about 5 years ago | (#27488215)

I like how "defending your country from a foreign invading army" suddenly becomes "insurgents that needs some killing".

Given that most of the insurgents who were fighting us were Sunni's aligned with the former murderous regime, I'd say that it's quite fair to label them as people who need killing. You do realize that the people you are claiming were defending their country are the same people that killed more Iraqis than Americans, right?

Re:What a great thing. (4, Insightful)

Leafheart (1120885) | about 5 years ago | (#27488339)

Probably yes, and still don't matter. You were the invading force. Searching for WMD that didn't exist. Or you really believe you were invading Iraq to give them freedom? And if that is the truth, why hasn't America invaded Sudan, North Korea, Israel, and any other very violent regiments?

Re:What a great thing. (0, Troll)

FMZ (1178473) | about 5 years ago | (#27488273)

Urban fighting ensued, and the insurgents ultimately lost.

As did hundreds, if not a thousand, innocent bystanders.

Fallujah wasn't a "pitched battle". It was a massacre. Sure, there were insurgents there, and they were out to cause harm. But throwing phosphorous grenades all around, burning civilians alive, obliterating the occupants of whole buildings... out of line.

I don't think I've seen a game based on Vietnam, but this is damn close, and it's disgusting. Wholesale murder with complete disregard.

Our soldiers go out there to protect innocent lives. Unfortunately, they don't seem to give a shit about other nations' innocents, only American innocents. If there were American citizens dotted throughout the buildings in Fallujah, you can be damn sure they'd be a lot more careful. "Oh, but they don't know who is an insurgent and who isn't, so they have to be careful and shoot everybody that could be, including children." Again, sounds just the same as Vietnam, and it's no less disgusting today.

Murder is murder. It doesn't matter if you are scared that someone could be an insurgent. If they are innocent, and you killed them, it's still cold-blooded murder. And that's what this game is based on. Sure, they'll probably make every enemy NPC into an insurgent, just so they don't have to deal with the cold, hard fact that a good number of the people killed were civilians.

I've seen the raw footage. I've seen the bodies burned. I've seen children's corpses mangled, the buildings crumbling. All because 19 terrorists flew a couple of planes into a building full of innocents. In Fallujah, the body count was about two thirds of the final body count of 9/11. Can we go home now? Can we stop the killing? Can we let it be and not seek to further glorify the actions of the American military, which is going to haunt the soldiers for the rest of their lives?

With a heavy heart,
FMZ

Re:What a great thing. (4, Insightful)

Shakrai (717556) | about 5 years ago | (#27488385)

Our soldiers go out there to protect innocent lives.

Actually, no, our soldiers go out there to execute the policy of the United States of America.

Unfortunately, they don't seem to give a shit about other nations' innocents, only American innocents.

That's generally how military forces work.

As much as we would like to believe it (2, Interesting)

olddotter (638430) | about 5 years ago | (#27487963)

We haven't really evolved much since the days of the Roman Colosseum. At least we are not flying "insurgents" here to be killed live before large audiences. Its a small step forward. Still RE is a lot of fun, and the enemy there is always some unfortunate zombie creature.

Let's see what it looks like (4, Insightful)

Tgeigs (1497313) | about 5 years ago | (#27488033)

As a former member of the military, and someone who spent time in the Gulf, I can tell you that NOTHING is as cut and dry as civilians try to make it. When you're a twenty year old stuck half way around the world in a dessert city and people are literally trying to kill you everyday with road side bombs, sniper attacks, and suicide bombs as they HIDE AMONGST the innocent public, it is very easy to cross the line and hurt/kill the wrong people. It's also just as easy to get a limited viewpoint of what happened and say things like, "The military is bad", or "Fallejuh was a massacre", or "What happened there is sick". No, it wasn't bad, a massacre, or sick...It was war. Label the politicians with those monikers, not the war itself. Along those lines, I think that if this game accurately depicts both the good and bad sides of war, the internal struggle of the soldiers as they tell their stories and follow orders they might not like, the reactions of ALL the towns people, favorable and unfavorable...Well, dammit, I think that would be a great game and one that US Citizens might actually be better off having played it.

Re:Let's see what it looks like (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27488289)

Not to disagree with you but it's quite clear that the situation there is indeed pretty harsh and soldiers should never have to come back and have the kind of stigma that they suffered through with Vietnam and the likes. STILL it doesn't mean that us citizen should condone stuff done in our names.
If anything, it's true that it could be the most tasteless piece of entertainment ever, but it could also be a good commentary on how it all went.
And seriously appart from when the US soldiers rape the locals nobody hates them as much as the media make it out to be.

Re:Let's see what it looks like (2, Informative)

Em Emalb (452530) | about 5 years ago | (#27488341)

Very well said. It's one thing to sit on the sidelines and spout your views, it's another to go there and be "in the shit" and try to deal with it.

Some of the people responding here are acting like these Marines went in, killed everything in sight and then sat back drinking a beer laughing about it.

WTF? They're human just like you and I. (I should know, I was in the Corps) This crap affected them the same as it would anyone else. This is an attempt at telling their story, and people want to treat it like it's either an attention grab or a money grab.

To them I say shame on you.

Re:Let's see what it looks like (1)

Uthic (931553) | about 5 years ago | (#27488433)

"WTF? They're human just like you and I. (I should know, I was in the Corps) This crap affected them the same as it would anyone else. This is an attempt at telling their story, and people want to treat it like it's either an attention grab or a money grab." And you don't think this is an attention grabber which will help lead to increase profits for the game ? There's a reason they went for the "real" aspect, and it's not out of good feelings for the Marines.

No matter the angle (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27488115)

I find this idea to be distasteful.

Speilberg (1)

Demonantis (1340557) | about 5 years ago | (#27488121)

Why couldn't Speilberg have directed the game. I think it would have have been much more awesome since he understands how an audience would react to what they are showing.

slashdot and hypocrisy (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27488127)

hundreds of games exist whee you murder people for fun and profit. you even kill prostitutes o take their money in GTA.

now, finally, actual soldiers want to make their own game, and slashdotters think it is 'sick'.

what is truly sick is the utter disconnection of slashdotters with reality. the site is replete with stories on 'cool new weapons', the video game reviews and mentions are legion, star wars is almost a religion.... the political and history and philosophy discussions are strictly on a high school level.... this article is a perfect example of that.

people who sit around pretending to be soldiers for hours a month, are 'discomforted' by the real stories of actual soldiers. they find it 'sick' and 'disturbing' that actual soldiers want to tell a story.....

but if anyone protests against video game violence, they are instantly shouted down as 'prudes' or 'against freedom of speech' by the slashdot legions.

it is no wonder the the USA makes bad decisions, its own people are apparently repulsed by reality, and prefer to live in a fantasy world.

Well so much for gamers being able to say... (1)

JoshDmetro (1478197) | about 5 years ago | (#27488131)

'But its not real.' Lets go kill people under the guise of finding expired sarin gas and then we will make a game of it. Maybe we will have a Columbine game or some such. At least then pathetic dorks can shoot classmates right from the comfort of their mom's basement.

Yet another Medal of Honor re-spin and rip-off (4, Funny)

0xdeadbeef (28836) | about 5 years ago | (#27488229)

The only thing that would make this game interesting would be for both factions to be playable.

Better yet, make the entire Iraq war an MMORPG.

OK (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 years ago | (#27488287)

All this "it is just fiction" line of defense is so good and well if they show me a KonamiÂs "letÂs blow up skyscrapers with a hijacked plane" thematic game.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...