Beta
×

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 Cuts and Runs From Iraq War Game

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the surge-of-protest-is-working dept.

The Military 321

Less than a month after the announcement of Six Days in Fallujah , a video game based upon a real-life battle between US Marines and Iraqi insurgents in 2004, Konami has decided that it is too controversial, and abandoned plans to publish the game. The developer, Atomic Games, has not commented on Konami's decision other than to say an announcement will be made soon. Konami told a Japanese newspaper, "After seeing the reaction to the video game in the United States and hearing opinions sent through phone calls and e-mail, we decided several days ago not to sell it." While the game did receive a great deal of criticism, others were optimistic, including several outspoken veterans of the Iraq war. One of the major complaints was that in researching the battle, Atomic Games reportedly interviewed several insurgents. This prompted speculation that the insurgents were compensated for their help, though Atomic later denied that was the case. Konami's decision also may have been influenced by the fact that they seemed to represent it as entertainment, whereas Atomic's president, Peter Tamte, was more hesitant to describe it as "fun." He said, "The words I would use to describe the game — first of all, it's compelling. And another word I use — insight."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Release it anyway (4, Interesting)

Entropy98 (1340659) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741185)

Why not just change the name and the story and release it?

Re:Release it anyway (4, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741289)

Why not just change the name and the story and release it?

Maybe because they were counting on the realism? And, dare I say it, the controversial attention was its biggest guarantee to sell?

I haven't read any of the articles linked above but I submitted it this morning [slashdot.org] and found a quote from a developer making it sound like information had been gathered for the game from all parties [gamepolitics.com] involved in the conflict.

Also, Dan Rosenthal, a blogger and veteran of the Iraq War, gave this insightful analysis of Konami's situation:

In order to make the game fun... it simply has to sacrifice some amount of realism for fun factor. When you do that with a war game based on a real war, with real people, you run the risk of dishonoring their memories and sacrifices, and I think that this game has a dangerous potential to do that.

Re:Release it anyway (5, Insightful)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 5 years ago | (#27742099)

In order to make the game fun... it simply has to sacrifice some amount of realism for fun factor.

I'm not sure wargamers would agree.

When you do that with a war game based on a real war, with real people, you run the risk of dishonoring their memories and sacrifices, and I think that this game has a dangerous potential to do that.

As opposed to imaginary wars like World War 2 and Vietnam?

Re:Release it anyway (1, Flamebait)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741299)

Yeah, I'd certainly play "A Week in Hajullaf"!

Re:Release it anyway (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27741783)

I'd play A Week in Auschwitz!

Re:Release it anyway (1)

mariocrux (979863) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741363)

How about "The fall of Kabul" ? Russians and the mujahideen resistance . . .

Re:Release it anyway (3, Interesting)

dasmoo (1052358) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741497)

Why not just change the characters to Nazi's and Americans, call it Afrika Korps, and people won't be offended.

Re:Release it anyway (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27742123)

Why not just change the characters to Nazi's and Americans, call it Afrika Korps, and people won't be offended.

Afrika Korps? Sounds like something that will ship with KDE.

Thanks a whole fucking bunch (4, Insightful)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741195)

We got *this* close to at last having a war game that was even vaguely anything like war. A chance we've avoided that, the crude reality of war should only be depicted in movies, TV shows and documentary, as God intended!

Re:Thanks a whole fucking bunch (5, Insightful)

Sylos (1073710) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741207)

It was too close to real life. How can the Army recruit kids if the kids realize they don't respawn at the end of the round?[SEE:America's Army]

kneejerk army bashing (4, Interesting)

doug141 (863552) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741369)

The army didn't pull it. Konami did.

Re:kneejerk army bashing (5, Funny)

stonedcat (80201) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741547)

You just keep thinking that if it makes you feel better.

Re:kneejerk army bashing (1)

santiagodraco (1254708) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741789)

And you keep telling yourself that if it makes YOU feel any better...

Re:Thanks a whole fucking bunch (4, Insightful)

GrpA (691294) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741393)

By telling them they will respawn in the next life... Or respawn in heaven or some variation of that.

At least, that's the reasoning and rationale behind a lot of people who fight on both sides.

GrpA

Re:Thanks a whole fucking bunch (3, Insightful)

Draek (916851) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741557)

Gee, and we should probably ban Grand Theft Auto as well, that thing is nothing more than a murder simulator!

Or perhaps, 99.99% of the world's population is perfectly able to distinguish between videogames and reality, and you're just doing a Jack Thompson strawman only to satisfy your petty war against the US army. Fuck you.

Re:Thanks a whole fucking bunch (-1, Flamebait)

dunkelfalke (91624) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741793)

How could be that modded "Insightful"?

When you cannot distinguish between work of fiction and a simulation of a real event happened a couple of years ago how can you honestly describe yourself as being able to distinguish between videogames and reality?

Also, you pretty much outed yourself as a nationalistic arsehole. Admit it, you are only disappointed that you cannot shoot some sand niggers singing "america fuck yeah"

Re:Thanks a whole fucking bunch (1)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741801)

He was saying that games too much like real life are decried while fantasies like America's Army are encouraged to increase recruitment. He's saying the "banning" is wrong. Who modded insightful?..

Re:Thanks a whole fucking bunch (1)

pizzach (1011925) | more than 5 years ago | (#27742119)

Or perhaps, 99.99% of the world's population is perfectly able to distinguish between videogames and reality, and you're just doing a Jack Thompson strawman only to satisfy your petty war against the US army. Fuck you.

This is not the way to get people outside of your circle to try and understand your point of view. And seriously, I doubt you have tried looking from their point of view to try to explain things better.

The key word is desensitized. Younger people and gamers tend to be more desensitized to violence through media than older people. You have to step outside of your circle to realize why "shooting a person in the head and seeing all the blood spurt out" is a general basis for discomfort for some people. Games are not the source of their grievance, but just an agitator. These are likely the people who don't want to see a Saw movie either. Horror movies would scare the shit out of them like a little kid because their desensitization is the same level as that of a child.

So naturally, the solution to this problem is to force these people to watch Newsgrounds cartoons and slasher flicks for an hour a day.

Re:Thanks a whole fucking bunch (1)

c6gunner (950153) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741653)

John Kerry? Is that you?

One small detail (0, Flamebait)

mangu (126918) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741737)

They used real life people in that game.

If no one in your family ever died, DO NOT ASSUME IT'S A SMALL THING TO LIVE WITH THE LOSS.

Asshole.

Re:Thanks a whole fucking bunch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27741351)

Unfortunately, I don't think people are ready to see video games as a serious medium.

The word 'video game' itself may have some part in that.

Re:Thanks a whole fucking bunch (5, Interesting)

caitsith01 (606117) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741399)

So it was going to be a game in which the player spent years growing and being nourished by self, family, friends, community and the state until the late teens before being shipped to another country and then unexpectedly killed without warning, after which the game becomes locked and unplayable?

I understand your point - but it is extremely hard to see how this game could have been a serious depiction of war. Would it include horrible brutality by some of the soliders on your own side? Would it throw up the extreme moral quandraries surrounding civilian casualties and the invasion of Iraq itself? Would it even include civilians? Animals? Disease?

Re:Thanks a whole fucking bunch (4, Insightful)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741665)

The fact that you can't see how a game could be a serious depiction of war only says something about your imagination.

Re:Thanks a whole fucking bunch (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741421)

Truth is, any on-going war is controversial. When is the last time you've seen a major Hollywood film based on it? Yes, there are a small selection of flicks documented here [wikipedia.org] . But don't hold your breath on any block buster movies about it to be released anytime soon.

Re:Thanks a whole fucking bunch (2, Interesting)

religious freak (1005821) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741471)

...the crude reality of war should only be depicted in movies, TV shows and documentary...

As it should be, IMO. The only TV show you see the current war in is appropriately somber and analytical (at least as somber and analytical as most of our journalists can get). If you want realism, watch al-jazeera. If you want to inform the general populace about a war, I don't care how realistic a game is, it'll still be a pale comparison against the real thing.

And despite the seriousness some /.ers equate with gaming, 99% of the population still thinks of gaming as a fancy toy. It's a pretty tough sell to those with kids overseas fighting the real thing.

And if you still want realism, join the Army.

Re:Thanks a whole fucking bunch (2, Interesting)

DrBuzzo (913503) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741971)

We got *this* close to at last having a war game that was even vaguely anything like war.

Uh... games are supposed to be fun. Pretend wars where you tend to kill lots of bad guys without being killed are fun. Shooting zombies and aliens is fun.

I'm not sure I'd really have any interest in getting home from work and sitting down to relive the most horrifying nightmares of human history.

Re:Thanks a whole fucking bunch (3, Interesting)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 5 years ago | (#27742121)

We got *this* close to at last having a war game that was even vaguely anything like war.

Uh... games are supposed to be fun. Pretend wars where you tend to kill lots of bad guys without being killed are fun. Shooting zombies and aliens is fun. I'm not sure I'd really have any interest in getting home from work and sitting down to relive the most horrifying nightmares of human history.

Who cares, not every one agrees, and want something different. What matters is this, and the fact that people like you want to prevent anyone from doing something that doesn't fit to what they want.

Cowards. (3, Insightful)

Kid Zero (4866) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741203)

They'll make any number of "Demonic hordes of Hell storm earth bloodly" games but won't publish something that really happened?

Strange.

Re:Cowards. (1)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741259)

Off topic : that's what I hate about "rebel" rockers who make a big deal out of talking about Satan, when the stuff that really disturbs is in what's real but that we don't want to hear about.

Re:Cowards. (1)

guyminuslife (1349809) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741383)

More off-topic: The most disturbing songs I've heard, IMHO, are all a capella.

But I haven't seen Barbados, so I must get out of this.

Re:Cowards. (0, Redundant)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741265)

I know a single mom of 2 who has to raise her kids by herself because her husband was killed in that specific battle. Demonic hordes of hell don't capitalize on the death of her husband or the kids fathers. It would seem that they should be owed a portion of profit made from their own blood (literally).

Perhaps there is a difference?

Re:Cowards. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27741287)

Yep... Margaret Mitchell should have been made to pay out royalties to the families of every poor sap who got killed in the Civil War just to give her something to write about in Gone With The Wind.

Re:Cowards. (0, Redundant)

Luke has no name (1423139) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741549)

Mod AC up.

Re:Cowards. (5, Insightful)

eln (21727) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741307)

Countless games capitalize on the deaths of millions of real people in World War II. There are also plenty of games that capitalize on the deaths of thousands in Vietnam. Hell, there are even games based on Desert Storm.

The only difference here is the war is still ongoing and also just happens to be a major politically divisive conflict. Give it 10 or 20 years after the end of the war, after we've had time to sanitize our memories and glorify the war in our own minds and they'll start making games based on it that people will accept.

Re:Cowards. (5, Insightful)

Zedrick (764028) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741587)

deaths of thousands in Vietnam

Uhm, death of millions (acccording to wikipedia).

It's not just the tiny amount of dead americans that counts.

Re:Cowards. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27742085)

And don't get me started on on undertakers...
They've been capitalizing on death since the dawn of civilisation!

Re:Cowards. (4, Interesting)

foo fighter (151863) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741631)

After seeing the realism of the first Call of Duty I refused to play any more WWII FPS. I've convinced many of my gamer friends to do the same. Obviously that's not enough to turn the tide of an entire industry. But I continue trying to reach out and change minds. Posts like yours give me hope that more people will start to think about what they are simulating when they play these types of games.

Re:Cowards. (5, Insightful)

plasticsquirrel (637166) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741697)

I'm still waiting for the game about Vietnam where the Vietcong are portrayed as covert freedom fighters, and the Americans are the evil imperialists who napalm villages and destroy your countryside with Agent Orange. That's a game I've wanted to play for years, but I'm sure that even after decades, America wouldn't have the stomach for it. I wonder if the same people who want this game to be published would also advocate a Vietnam game like this?

Re:Cowards. (5, Insightful)

Stickerboy (61554) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741311)

>I know a single mom of 2 who has to raise her kids by herself because her husband was killed in that specific battle. Demonic hordes of hell don't capitalize on the death of her husband or the kids fathers. It would seem that they should be owed a portion of profit made from their own blood (literally).

Perhaps there is a difference?

Should a journalist who writes a best-selling book about the Battle of Fallujah (or any recent military action, for that matter) be required to donate the profits from the up-front fees or sales to the families of the fallen soldiers?

Do the makers of the mind-numbingly large assortment of World War II games owe a large percentage of their profits to families of World War II casualties and organizations like the VFW?

For-profit news organizations are reaping huge advertising windfalls off of human tragedy, calamity and bloodshed.

Shit happens in the world. It's time to end the mindset of being automatically owed money because of it.

Re:Cowards. (0)

NoobixCube (1133473) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741603)

For-profit news organizations are reaping huge advertising windfalls off of human tragedy, calamity and bloodshed.

Mod parent up. I was going to say the same thing, no sense repeating it but DAMN I wish I had some mod points.

Re:Cowards. (1)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741317)

Right, they "capitalize", like anyone who writes books about it, makes movies, TV shows, documentary, reports about it on the news, and so on. The real reason here is it's because it's new for this media.

See, for some strange reason, we react very differently to the same content depending on the media. Everybody loves a Schwarzenegger or Stallone killing people, cops included, by the dozen in movies, but if you talk about the same thing in a song or do a video game about it you'll get protests against you. Go figure, but at some point we decided that music was for love songs and partying, that video games weren't meant to be serious, or that animated films were for children.

Re:Cowards. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27741329)

It would seem that they should be owed a portion of profit made from their own blood (literally).

I don't think they're LITERALLY going to be paying people in pints of blood, dude. Or paying _for_ blood either. Blood-for-oil is just an expression, you can't really trade plasma for crude...

Re:Cowards. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27741447)

Several of my good friends were there. I was overhead. There's a significant difference between a video game that's a part of history, and NY Times selling pictures of my body coming home. The first is called "history", and the second "profiteering". They're both callously designed to maximize profit. However, one presents history and the other manipulates it. Your ________ wing agenda tells you which is which.

NYT is right to show the cost of the war (1)

JimmytheGeek (180805) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741591)

It's the role of the press to bring us the story, especially if the powers that be want it hushed up. I think the Pentagon was chickenshit to hide the homecomings up to this point. Did you see that under the new process, 3/4 of families are fine with the photographs? Someone struck exactly the right note, giving families the right to make the call.

My agenda is truth. The truth is some of our people come back dead. It dishonors their memories to pretend otherwise, and to minimize their sacrifice. So I'm not willing to accept your formulation that its just a political bias that determines whether one should or will approve of their publishing the events.

Re:Cowards. (1, Insightful)

sirsnork (530512) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741529)

While I can sympathize. He was the one that joined the military. Either his wife married him with the knowledge that he may not come home one day, or they made the decision together that him joining was worth the risk.

This sounds harsh, but such is life, at the end of the day if you don't want to die in war, don't join the military. That's not a guarantee in all cases but it certainly is in this case.

Re:Cowards. (1)

Cathbard (954906) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741763)

Well that's the Carlyle Group and Halliburton fucked then.

Re:Cowards. (1)

adavies42 (746183) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741805)

statistically speaking, there are probably at least a couple people reading this article whose grandfathers died on omaha beach. how much are they owed by EA?

Re:Cowards? Howbout fiscally responsible (1)

grapeape (137008) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741413)

Who would be their target audience...the anti-war crowd would be out because they would claim it was glorifying the role of a soldier, the pro-war crowd is out because its too soon and the war is still going on. That leaves the indifferent who couldnt even be counted on to buy "Blood In The Sand" despite good reviews. The chances of recouping development costs were slim to none while the chances of creating enough ill will to damage Konami's reputation long after the game was relased were high. Canceling the game and probably firing the idiot who thought it was a good idea to start with is really the only option they have.

Re:Cowards? Howbout fiscally responsible (1)

dangitman (862676) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741519)

the pro-war crowd is out because its too soon and the war is still going on

I don't get it. Why would the pro-war crowd be bothered by depictions of the war while it is ongoing? They think the war is a good thing, so what's their problem with it being depicted?

Re:Cowards? Howbout fiscally responsible (1)

Kamineko (851857) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741565)

They're probably anticipating the point when you've reached the final boss and the game suddenly cut off with 'To Be Continued...'.

Remember Halo 2 + 3?

Re:Cowards? Howbout fiscally responsible (0, Troll)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741569)

They think the war is a good thing, but don't have the balls to sign up themselves

Fixed.

Re:Cowards? Howbout fiscally responsible (1)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741867)

If its done well it could easily not glorify the war at all. A cold harsh look at the realities of what happened, would defiantly get me to buy a copy and i think both wars were entirely retarded. I also think a lot of gamers are fairly could put their political opinions aside and just enjoy the game.

Re:Cowards. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27741577)

Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

I think that's a shame (4, Interesting)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741253)

I think it's certainly an event worth trying to convey. Whether they'd have pulled it off with appropriate levels of gravitas is unknown at this stage and ultimately open to interpretation in any case but it's a shame if people who choose to be offended by the idea alone have caused it to be shut down.

How about a realistic game where planes hit towers (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27741415)

I mean, it was an actual event too and think about it, you get to pilot your own plane and if you succeed in killing the most infidels you get all the hairy faced virgins you want?

Sure, YOU might think that its tasteless but to others that dont, this could be one hell of a game.

Cmon, you mean you dont think people out there wouldnt love a game where they could try and blow up the Pentagon or the White House?

Its fun AND its realistic but its still just a game. How could anyone be offended by this idea?

Oh wait, if it happens to you, then its offensive. If it happens to others, you bitch about it on /.

controversial to interview participants? (4, Interesting)

jfruhlinger (470035) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741301)

I'm not any kind of gamer, but if you accept that video games are a legitmate form of artistic expression enjoyed by a growing number of people (and you're an idiot if you don't), the idea that interviewing insurgents is somehow sinister is ludicrous. Would it be evil for a filmmaker making a movie about Fallujah to interview people on both sides of the fight?

Plus, I hate to break it to people, but a lot of the guys the Americans were fighting in 2004 and 2005 in the Sunni Triangle were later recruited into the Awakening Movement, which then turned against foreign fighters and our now allies (albeit uneasy ones) with the US military. Enemy of my enemy, shifting alliances, etc.

Re:controversial to interview participants? (5, Informative)

gandhi_2 (1108023) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741515)

when i was in ramadi (05-06), AQI shot themselves in the foot by trying to muscle out the local boys. started a war-within-a-war between themselves and groups like 1920 Revolution Brigades and MML...at times there was more "red on red" violence than anything else. we (people above my pay grade...WAY above) saw the opportunity to play nice (read: pay nice)...and it worked out pretty well... probably not forever, but those suni's can be a pragmatic bunch. sons of anbar, awakening counsils, desert patrol...all started thanks to AQI being voilent and stupid.

case in point: at one point, while we were recruiting locals for the Iraqi police and army...all the local insurgents declared no attacks on the recruitment: they wanted to get people in...to influence, grab power, spy, whatever. well AQI said fuck that...and sent a suicide-vest-wearing dude who proceeded to kill several iraqis and a guy in my battalion [stripes.com] . AQI never learned that there was no I in retard...

little story behind that story for ya.

Re:controversial to interview participants? (2, Insightful)

Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741555)

Well, this idiot strongly disagrees with the notion that war simulation games represent any form of art more significant than a Dwayne Johnson Film. Make a game that rivals this [abc.net.au] , then get back to me.

Re:controversial to interview participants? (1)

Cabriel (803429) | more than 5 years ago | (#27742007)

Well, this idiot strongly disagrees with the notion that war simulation games represent any form of art more significant than a Dwayne Johnson Film. Make a game that rivals this [abc.net.au] , then get back to me.

You should play Earthbound for the SNES. It's artistic expression is all kinds of cracked out.

Doesn't add up, does it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27741315)

There's no way they weren't expecting, and counting on, controversy with this title. Someone with serious clout has to have sent them a message.

Good precedent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27741319)

Now that there's a precedent, perhaps we can get other game companies to not release titles too.

Bad movie title sin-offs come to mind. I'm looking at you Star Trek.

So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27741339)

"After seeing the reaction to the video game in the United States and hearing opinions sent through phone calls and e-mail, we decided several days ago not to sell it,"

I'm curious about those phone calls and e-mails. How many of the phone calls came from satellite phones? And exactly how many of the e-mails were in broken English expressing opinions like "Inshallah we will cut your head you filthy kaffir son of a pig monkey!!!!1!11"

The medium (1, Insightful)

nathan.fulton (1160807) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741353)

The question has to be asked: does medium matter? ie, why can the History channel portray these things but not game developers.

In most cases, the answer is no. Books vs. TV is really not that huge of a difference if you've got an author good at descriptive writing. However, in a video game, you are an active participant. You are doing things. And worse, when you finish doing that stuff, you just get up and go eat dinner/go to school/whatever.

I am of the opinion that games like this actually function to divorce us from taking any real action to prevent the events they portray. One of those things where you are trained again and again to look at an atrocity, recognize it is evil, and then go on with your life.

I am NOT saying that war is always evil (although I think most would agree it is -- even if it is a necessary evil), but rather that this specific medium used in this specific (real world) context trains us to divorce the substance of what is being viewed with the process of reaction.

Re:The medium (2, Interesting)

bVork (772426) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741741)

I disagree strongly with this. Try playing Rendition [tads.org] . You'll probably find it difficult to not feel disgust at your own actions in the game.

The problem isn't the medium of videogames, it is the presentation of the subject matter within the game. But how are we to know whether the presentation in Six Days In Fallujah approached the subject matter effectively (or not), when outcry from people like you prevent such works from being created?

I hope Atomic finds another publisher (1)

Khashishi (775369) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741361)

or they publish it themselves. Seems like they already put a lot of work into it.

In other news.. (3, Interesting)

bronney (638318) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741367)

An executive from Atomic Games, the maker of the unreleased game Six Days in Fallujah was seen handing over the complete source code on a 1.44MB floppy disk to an executive from 3D Realms. Gamers around the world rejoice that this controversial title might yet see the day of light in the latest release from 3D Realms.

Exactly what title that be, we're not authorize to report here.

Re:In other news.. (1)

adavies42 (746183) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741811)

"interesting"? really? oy....

Exploiting the Fallen for a buck. (2, Insightful)

captnbmoore (911895) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741381)

Some of the comments so far have been total dissapointment that they are not going live. Being a Veteran and understanding how the culture is I could understanding that if they were to set aside a certain amount of the profit to help the families then maybe. There is a big difference in Warcraft, WOW, DOOM III and any of the other gore and blood offerings than using the unfortunate and sad situation these young kids had to endure and the families have to live with this the rest of their lives. This is one that should never have been thought of.

Re:Exploiting the Fallen for a buck. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27741467)

How about setting aside some money for all of the Iraqi's butchered as well.

Re:Exploiting the Fallen for a buck. (0)

db32 (862117) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741511)

I agree...I am not some ideologist over what is happening over there, but the whole "three sides" of the story crap with insurgents is a bit unreal. I am well aware that the vast majority of the Arabic world is not a bunch of bloodthirsty immoral killers, however, in the context of the people fighting it is perfectly acceptable to lie to infidels (and shoot them, and cut off their heads, and so on). I mean seriously...this is like interviewing the Nazi soldiers while the war was still going on. Yeah...there certainly are more than one side, and All Quiet on the Western Front is a good example of that...but they are also the team that was running death camps... I hope to God that these insurgents weren't "compensated" for their involvement. Ugh... War profiteering and exploiting the lives of soldiers is bad enough, these guys exploiting the deaths of soldiers is even worse.

I even like the historically based war movies/games etc...but for fucks sake they could at least wait until the bodies are cold... If they actually released a game that "told the story of the insurgent in his quest to kill marines"... Well...I guess I would suggest having them roam around that area unarmed just so they can see what kind of story they would find...

Re:Exploiting the Fallen for a buck. (5, Insightful)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741589)

If China invaded tomorrow, would you fight the invaders? If so, are you going to all stand in a row and fire like good soldiers? Or are you going to use IADs, set ambushes, etc? If you want to have any real effect you're going to do number two. Just like we did in the revolutionary war. Just like they do today. They're fighting what they see as a war of independence in the most effective way.

Re:Exploiting the Fallen for a buck. (1)

jcnnghm (538570) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741919)

in the most effective way.

There is also a most effective way of fighting insurgencies, perfected over several thousand years of warfare.

Re:Exploiting the Fallen for a buck. (1)

Bottlemaster (449635) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741991)

If so, are you going to all stand in a row and fire like good soldiers? Or are you going to use IADs, set ambushes, etc?

Why stop there when you can blow yourself up in a crowded marketplace full of local civilians or plant car bombs to massacre and maim schoolchildren?

I do agree with your point, but lots of these folks have given up being strategic and started being assholes.

Re:Exploiting the Fallen for a buck. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27742053)

They aren't fighting for the liberation of their country, they are fighting a religious war against Christians.

allah akbar indeed.

Re:Exploiting the Fallen for a buck. (1)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 5 years ago | (#27742139)

in the context of the people fighting it is perfectly acceptable to lie to infidels (and shoot them, and cut off their heads, and so on).

Just about every type of evil imaginable has been perfectly acceptable to large numbers of people fighting in every war, ever.

Re:Exploiting the Fallen for a buck. (1)

dangitman (862676) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741553)

than using the unfortunate and sad situation these young kids had to endure and the families have to live with this the rest of their lives. This is one that should never have been thought of.

Why? Should this event be erased from our memories, erased from public consciousness, just because some people got killed?

You know, there is a small chance that this could be a portrayal that is shocking and illustrates the futility of war. In that case, wouldn't it be in the best interests of the families of the fallen that it be seen, as a warning to society not to continue down that path? Whitewashing over these incidents only increases the chance that they will happen again and again. Because when the politicians are calling for the next war, people might not have images of that horror, and think that war is a more noble and desirable thing than it actually is.

Re:Exploiting the Fallen for a buck. (1)

captnbmoore (911895) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741671)

I would expect that no one want's it erased from memory or history. But Taking something that was horrific on both sides and making it something that for most whom would play it FUN is not the way to go about it. Make a documentary, Movie, Book anything but a game. It's called respect for those that through no fault of their own lost their lives and a GAME is no way of showing respect.

Re:Exploiting the Fallen for a buck. (1)

Rudolf (43885) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741721)

I would expect that no one want's it erased from memory or history. But Taking something that was horrific on both sides and making it something that for most whom would play it FUN is not the way to go about it. Make a documentary, Movie, Book anything but a game. It's called respect for those that through no fault of their own lost their lives and a GAME is no way of showing respect.

There are lots of games based on WWII. Do you feel the same way about those?

Re:Exploiting the Fallen for a buck. (1)

captnbmoore (911895) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741929)

Time. Most of those who fought in WWII are Gone now. That was a different era and a different type of war. This war is still on going. How about we make a game out of 911; Lets see who can hit the tower and knock it down make sure that people are thrown out or jump from the towers. Sounds fun doesn't it. Think people would not raise all kinds of hell if that happened. And that was 8 years ago. It's called patience. A little discretion goes a long way.

Re:Exploiting the Fallen for a buck. (0)

c6gunner (950153) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741715)

In that case, wouldn't it be in the best interests of the families of the fallen that it be seen, as a warning to society not to continue down that path?

You think it would be in the best interest of dead soldiers families for their country to turn into a bunch of surrender monkeys? ...

You really don't get it, do you? The world isn't composed solely of people who think the way you do. In fact, people with your views make up a teeny-tiny minority on a global scale. If you have any integrity, you'll at least try to see things from the point-of-view of others, even if you disagree with them.

Replacement (5, Funny)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741397)

In a follow-up press release, Konami states they plan instead to produce a game where you pilot Air Force One in the skies above NYC, performing daring acrobatic feats like "buzz the highly populated pier" and "read all the hats of the tourists at the top of the Chrysler building".

Re:Replacement (1)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741487)

Sounds like the Grand Theft Auto series to me.

Re:Replacement (1)

Kamineko (851857) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741585)

It's Ace Combat meets Metal Wolf Chaos!

If Iraq bombed and invaded America (5, Insightful)

MrMista_B (891430) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741431)

If Iraq bombed and invaded America, then Americans who fought back would be terrorists and insurgents.

Re:If Iraq bombed and invaded America (3, Insightful)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741477)

Only if the government/armed forces surrendered. Because then that's no army, that's... an insurgence!

Re:If Iraq bombed and invaded America (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27742001)

In Iraq's case they didn't surrender.

Re:If Iraq bombed and invaded America (1)

basementman (1475159) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741677)

and how is this related to the topic at hand?

Re:If Iraq bombed and invaded America (1)

c6gunner (950153) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741731)

and .... ?

If Martians invaded Earth, they'd have big three-legged walking machines with death beams!

Maybe we'll see it later... (1)

damn_registrars (1103043) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741451)

As a game that we can unlock with the Konami code inside Contra 6?

Damn (1)

Airborne-ng (1391105) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741465)

I worked with many friends in the Army(yea not just USMC) 1/25th SBCT 25th ID that participated in this battle two months before I arrived to Mosul, Iraq and I would love the opportunity to have even a chance to see it through a game developers eyes (however unrealistic it may be IMO). Chock another up to our conservative society just not being ready for something like this. Least we got Obama.

Re:Damn (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27741579)

Least we got Obama.

Obviously you have no use for your paycheck. Please consider donating it to me.

Games as art (1)

philljcool (1085873) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741513)

As the tools of content creation become more accessible, I worry that we'll miss out on a lot of great art because it is about modern wars, drugs, crime or sex. If we sanitized the rest of art like this then we'd lose a lot of great movies, books, documentaries and paintings.

Yeah and Resident Evil 5 is RACIST (5, Insightful)

CreamyG31337 (1084693) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741517)

Because it's set in Africa, and there's black zombies! I saw one attack a white woman, so clearly the zombie was a racist! Honestly, I played through the whole game, and I didn't see anything that seemed racist to me. But I thought it's worth mentioning because it's another recent case of video games that bother some tiny minority of overly sensitive people. They make a big fuss and somehow it gets picked up by the press, which apparently scares away retailers, publishers, parents, and whatever else. I guess my point is that I don't really believe this game could be that bad or offensive. Maybe not quite what Konami is comfortable publishing, but I'll still check it out when it gets published. Or at least wait for a review of the actual game, not just listen to statements from people that are offended by war or that battle or whatever.

Blood of Bin Laden open source fun (0)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741543)

Thankfully something like this "game-amentary" has been done for open source.
With open source you never have to worry about "not to sell it".
Info on the game and making of http://www.bloodofbinladen.com/ [bloodofbinladen.com]
The data can be found at
http://fileball.bungie.org/index.php?option=com_remository&Itemid=53&func=fileinfo&id=3186 [bungie.org]
The Aleph One open source application for Linux, Mac and Windows
http://source.bungie.org/get/ [bungie.org]
Click on the OS of your choice.
Copy AlephOne.app or AlephOne.exe into the data folder.

Re:Blood of Bin Laden open source fun (1)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741841)

Right because a game, suggested and supported by the some of the troops who actually served in iraq, and wanted to get across the harsh realities of war, is totally the same as a crappy killbinladen, team-america-ftw game!

article title (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27741551)

I just wanted to say, excellent job on the title of the post. I chuckled.

Bang! Bang! Shoot 'em up !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27741571)

Bang, bang, shoot em' up, destiny
Bang, bang, shoot em' up to the moon
Bang, bang, shoot em' up one, two, three
(One, two, three, four!)

I wanted to be a spaceman
That's what I wanted to be
But now that I am a spaceman
Nobody cares about me

Hey mother earth
Won't 'cha bring me back down
Safely to the sea
But 'round and around and around and around
Is all she ever say to me

I wanted to make a good run
I wanted to go to the moon
I knew that it had to be fun
I told 'em to send me real soon
I wanted to be a spaceman
I wanted to be it so bad
But now that I am a spaceman
I'd rather be back on the pad

Hey mother earth
Won't 'cha bring me back down
Safely to the sea
But 'round and around and around and around
Is just a lot of lunacy
(Yeah!)
'Round and around and around and around and around
(So bring me back down)
'Round and around and around and around and around
Safe on the ground

Hey mother earth
Won't 'cha bring me back down
Safely to the sea
But 'round and around and around and around
Is all she ever say to me, yeah

You know I wanted to be a spaceman
That's what I wanted to be
But now that I am a spaceman
Nobody cares about me

Say, hey! You mother earth
You better bring me back down
I've taken just as much as I can
But around and around and around and around
Is the problem of a spaceman

Konami's insight (1)

Device666 (901563) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741619)

It's not just only that - as other slashdotters pointed out - many games do monetize war and games are an artistic form of expression and it only speaks for them to have researched both sides of the war. It's also a statement surprising to come from a game company. I'll guess we'll never see any wargame again from Konami, unless Konami is naive about wars (and games) in general.

Ridiculous (5, Insightful)

dvs01 (1192659) | more than 5 years ago | (#27741669)

Yes, I think that this game would be VERY fun. Why hide the damn fact? Yes, I think it would be VERY fun to act as a terrorist and kill U.S. forces, while afterward, it would be VERY fun to play on the U.S. side and kill the terrorists. Why fun? Why should I say its fun to play a video game character that kills Americans? Why the hell not? The strategy and tactics involved in both sides would be interesting, no matter what it's actually meant to depict. In fact, simulating a defeat of the Marines would be quite fun to do, since they obviously won and outgunned their enemies.

Aside from that, killing anything and everything is fun in video games, and that's just how it is. I'll shoot a baby with a rocket launcher, and then get off the PC and go about my peaceful day in real life. It's a fucking game. Hence the name.

Anyone heard of Counterstrike? That game is notorious for being VERY fun, despite the fact that one of the teams has to play the terrorists. Whoever is sensitive to this needs to not play, and stop trying to ruin the time of those who want to play.

This is more ridiculous than the people who protested against Resident Evil 5, a game set in Africa, where (surprise!) a majority of the zombies are black.

This decision makes no business sense (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27741881)

They gave in to the opinions of people who would have never bought the game anyway and killed it off. Why would they not let the opinions of the fans of the game dictate their next move instead of those of people who will never buy it, no matter what?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?