geekhack

geekhack Community => Other Geeky Stuff => Topic started by: ricercar on Sat, 02 October 2010, 15:58:04

Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: ricercar on Sat, 02 October 2010, 15:58:04: Chicken ****s

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2010/10/ea-chickens-out-pulls-taliban-from-moh-multiplayer.ars

"we have also received feedback from friends and families of fallen soldiers who have expressed concern over the inclusion of the Taliban in the multiplayer portion of our game. ...we have decided to rename the opposing team in Medal of Honor multiplayer from Taliban to Opposing Force .... The game itself will not be changed in any way, the opposing force in the multiplayer section will simply no longer be called Taliban. Apparently, the only thing offensive was the name. This isn't changing the core content, simply the idea that seeing online play through the eyes of our enemy is so offensive that we must call them something else."

The power of words is ****ing amazing.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: Ekaros on Sat, 02 October 2010, 16:01:56: So when do I get game where I can play as freedom-figher instead of opressing force practising and forcing terrorism on poor countries?
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: ricercar on Sat, 02 October 2010, 16:05:37: "[the lack of real change] makes this move ... cowardly, not to mention stupid. Is this game based on an actual conflict, or isn't it? EA can pay lip service to realism, but only when it comes to guns and tactics; naming the enemy in the conflict that the game is exploiting is apparently way too offensive to be allowed."
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: Ekaros on Sat, 02 October 2010, 16:25:02: Now to consider how long it will take that we can play as "evil" side, like playing as german in WW2-based games...
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: Rajagra on Sat, 02 October 2010, 16:28:13: Quote from: ricercar;229054
we have decided to rename the opposing team in Medal of Honor multiplayer from Taliban to Opposing Force

Because it's OK to kill people provided you dehumanize them first, by stripping them of identity. This is a valuable lesson that we must teach our children.

(I'm going to state that I'm being sarcastic, because there are people out there too stupid to work it out.)
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: chimera15 on Sat, 02 October 2010, 16:43:30: This kind of bs has been happening more and more as games become more pop. The same thing happened with Fallout being nuke sensitive in Japan, when that was the best part of the game. They actually took out gameplay related to nukes that would hurt Japanese feelings. Like they can't think for themselves or something. It's just ridiculous politically correct censorship crap because some weak kids get their hands on the game and ruin the fun for everyone.

It's the same kind of crap that happened with the comic book and cartoon censorship in the 50's. Everyone thinks games are just for kids so they have to make it safe and tame, and it ruins the whole industry.

If you want to be unpc you have to write a book with words or something, or get a gallery, where you might actually be taken seriously and not have these ridiculous censorship put on your art.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: Ekaros on Sat, 02 October 2010, 16:46:36: Acctualy there is/was also issues with Nazis... Political correcteness...

But yeah, Japanese being hurt by atom-bombs is bit 9/11ish...

I do have issues being politically correct...
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: ch_123 on Sat, 02 October 2010, 16:54:53: Last I checked, the Germans and Japanese killed a lot more US soldiers than the Taliban is ever likely to...

Funny how short people's memories are.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: ch_123 on Sat, 02 October 2010, 16:59:28: Quote from: Ekaros;229057
So when do I get game where I can play as freedom-figher instead of opressing force practising and forcing terrorism on poor countries?

Some games like OFP/ArmA/ArmA2 allow you to play as freedom fighters, sometimes against indigenous threats as opposed to some evil super power invading for nefarious reasons.

Potential issues of propagandistic portrayals of US foreign policy aside, I find the whole "America vs Germany/Russia/Vietnam/North Korea/China/Middle East/etc" to be a somewhat stale formula for military games.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: kriminal on Sat, 02 October 2010, 17:12:46: well i kinda >_> knifed some of the civilians in the mw2 game <_<...
especially the dude that was dragging the injured dude to safety ... >_>
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: Rajagra on Sat, 02 October 2010, 17:43:08: Quote from: ch_123;229088
Last I checked, the Germans and Japanese killed a lot more US soldiers than the Taliban is ever likely to...

More Americans died in the US civil war than in WWII.

Ban games where you can play U.S. soldiers!! Think of the children!
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: Voixdelion on Sat, 02 October 2010, 18:54:21: Quote from: Rajagra;229072
Because it's OK to kill people provided you dehumanize them first, by stripping them of identity. This is a valuable lesson that we must teach our children.

(I'm going to state that I'm being sarcastic, because there are people out there too stupid to work it out.)

This kind of thing struck me with the realization that at any time one can find between 8 and 11 million people online (and that is only via the playstation network- nevermind xbox/wii in addition) for the purposes of playing COD4;MW2 and the joy of blowing each other to bits while I was unable to find ONE SINGLE MATCH in order to play a friendly round of Karaoke Revolution; American Idol Encore. Even in the popular guitar hero games (which are my latest addiction) I am often able to find a match here and there at best, but I bet I could still find tons in Soul Caliber 4 despite the "new release" factor having worn off eons ago.

I was moved to share some musings on the whole "video game violence" thing when browsing p2pnet.net and my comment earned itself a whole headline of its own (here: http://www.p2pnet.net/story/36702)(interspersed with some reactions from the blog owner Jon Newton-- who, btw, is actively fighting for our right to link with impunity and deserves whatever support can be given in this upcoming court battle which may very well affect us all: Summary here (http://www.p2pnet.net/story/44394)or search terms "Crookes vs Newton" (http://www.google.com/search?q=Crookes+vs+Newton+&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a) for more.)
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: kriminal on Sat, 02 October 2010, 19:22:34: Quote from: ripster;229103
You are scaring the tourists thinking of visiting Trinidad. Now I haven't been to Tobago - it sounded funny.

>_>
well i did feel remorse after.. yeah...
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: Lanx on Sun, 03 October 2010, 02:10:08: wait...
who is opposing this? the american families? why? wouldn't they want junior to go, "see dat der towel head der, he took ur brotha, ger er done!"

besides how are the supposed to be fighting the taliban? aren't they just a bunch of ppl w/ IED's? just call them terrorists look at counterstrike, no one has issues there, heck i choose terrorist cuz they all look the same! (no really they do!)

btw Japan emo at nuclear bombs?
hello, they have a world wide fanbase and they have dedicated millions of dollars and 6years of pop culture to make famous gojira or as we all know GodZilla (NOT 1998 pos cgi one). I mean they the opitome of a walking nuclear disaster, that comes back and attacks Japan like 99% of the time and once in a while will attack America, why not... always attack America!
imagine if GodZilla, made from an iguana and nuclear bomb decided to have a little bit of intelligence and go, hmm "killing gaijins would be more fun!"

This is the same culture w/ hentai/rape/tenticle/mega porn, I mean that stuff will make any middle American have bleeding eyes. Ok i know America has nasty stuff too, but ppl read this stuff on public trains, go ask the ppl here who've visited or see a documentary of Japan and trains, and you'll see everyone holding a manga (if it's hentai or not is a different story).

I mean really, Japan=too emo.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: chimera15 on Sun, 03 October 2010, 05:00:23: Overcoming frustration and accomplishing something, even in a game is what makes games like those so addictive and interesting. It's not that they mimic killing, it's that they mimic the sense of accomplishment of having achieved something definite which most people never do in real life. Those girl games don't really do that, that's why they're not that popular.

It's a new form of art, a better form of art, that most people look at fps only see as violence. And indeed if you're a sick individual intent on viewing it that way, it's likely you have other problems that will eventually manifest in negative ways game or not. In those cases at least with the game you have a way to get your jollies. There have been cases where sick kids have killed their parents for taking their games away. Those kids and people are sick mentally, and are on a hair trigger, and are going to be set off game or not. Blaming it on a game is just dumb.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: chimera15 on Sun, 03 October 2010, 05:07:27: Quote from: Lanx;229224
wait...
who is opposing this? the american families? why? wouldn't they want junior to go, "see dat der towel head der, he took ur brotha, ger er done!"

besides how are the supposed to be fighting the taliban? aren't they just a bunch of ppl w/ IED's? just call them terrorists look at counterstrike, no one has issues there, heck i choose terrorist cuz they all look the same! (no really they do!)

btw Japan emo at nuclear bombs?
hello, they have a world wide fanbase and they have dedicated millions of dollars and 6years of pop culture to make famous gojira or as we all know GodZilla (NOT 1998 pos cgi one). I mean they the opitome of a walking nuclear disaster, that comes back and attacks Japan like 99% of the time and once in a while will attack America, why not... always attack America!
imagine if GodZilla, made from an iguana and nuclear bomb decided to have a little bit of intelligence and go, hmm "killing gaijins would be more fun!"

This is the same culture w/ hentai/rape/tenticle/mega porn, I mean that stuff will make any middle American have bleeding eyes. Ok i know America has nasty stuff too, but ppl read this stuff on public trains, go ask the ppl here who've visited or see a documentary of Japan and trains, and you'll see everyone holding a manga (if it's hentai or not is a different story).

I mean really, Japan=too emo.

That's exactly my point. It wasn't Japan being emo over it though. It was Americans being oversensitive and too pc, and not understand Japan, and deciding that they would be pc and remove it from the game. Nobody in Japan actually asked or complained. Bethesda just did it. It's even worse than this case with the Taliban, where at least you could see they had complaints from vets relatives. Not to mention this is a very realistic game based on the Middle East wars, fallout was complete fantasy. It was completely obscene self censorship.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: Voixdelion on Sun, 03 October 2010, 06:10:13: Warning: it's 4am - I may not be as clear in expression as in my thought process here, but I will do my best...

Quote from: chimera15;229233
Overcoming frustration and accomplishing something, even in a game is what makes games like those so addictive and interesting. It's not that they mimic killing, it's that they mimic the sense of accomplishment of having achieved something definite which most people never do in real life. Those girl games don't really do that, that's why they're not that popular.

It's a new form of art, a better form of art, that most people look at fps only see as violence. And indeed if you're a sick individual intent on viewing it that way, it's likely you have other problems that will eventually manifest in negative ways game or not. In those cases at least with the game you have a way to get your jollies. There have been cases where sick kids have killed their parents for taking their games away. Those kids and people are sick mentally, and are on a hair trigger, and are going to be set off game or not. Blaming it on a game is just dumb.

Actually if you read the linked blurb, I never blamed the game for anything other than perhaps reflecting the problem with real life. Why does failure to accomplish the challenge in a different game not result in the same kind of swearing and vituperation that a bad day of war games causes? My point is whether the popularity of the games that highlight the killing and violence isn't indicative of the ultimate self-destructive nature of man and perhaps may even feed that nature to no good end. Surely there is another scenario outside of war and killing which can provide the stimulus of "overcoming frustration and accomplishing something" without the accomplishment having to simulate the destruction of something or someone else? (I find those girly games to do just that; No simulated or animated death necessary.)

Why is it that the war games are so hugely popular? Surely with all the combined knowledge that led to such beautiful and realistic graphical presentation there is some way to develop gameplay that meets those goals which doesn't involve killing? Was mortal kombat successful just because you could rip someones arms off and beat them to death with them? I enjoyed Tekken and Soul Caliber and Virtua Fighter more myself - (Tekken was my favorite for the button commands being intuitively linked to the actions of the fighters hands and feet, which meant that I didn't need to memorize button combos to fight effectively against even a seasoned player if my instincts were good.)

But that is neither here nor there...
To address EA's capitulation to stupidity, I think the final words in the article are spot on:

"We must be shielded from the idea of our enemy being human, and being able to play them in multiplayer crosses that line. I'm sure the soldiers and the family of soldiers who were offended before will be heartened by the fact the people killing virtual American troops look and act like the men who killed their real friends and family... but are called something else. Renaming something you don't like makes it go away, right?"

Its reminiscent of Voldemort and the "He-who-must-not-be-named" thing from Harry Potter.

What is most likely the most offensive thing about this game (at least to the families who are said to have complained, though I think the complaint is misplaced) is also what I see as potentially problematic for human advancement in general --the consequences of the animated violent death is perhaps too forgiving to learn a potentially valuable lesson from because despite all the blood and guts and 3d graphic oohs and aahs and textures rendered... when you die you still get to respawn to fight some more. In real war, you don't get to try again. There isn't a balance of graphic depiction of blood and guts with actual game consequence of blood and guts. The glory is still there even in defeat which makes the sense of accomplishment ultimately false.

I've not seen what happens beyond the graphical representation when someone employs the nuclear device in COD:mw2, but if it were to be realistic even in a simulation I think that essentially the scoring effect should be setting of all scores of all participants in the game to zero and render the next three attempts to play entirely futile. It should make the deployment of a weapon of mass destruction possilble, but not rewarding.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: chimera15 on Sun, 03 October 2010, 07:34:53: If you use a nuke you get banned from the game for a period of time? roflol
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: J888www on Sun, 03 October 2010, 08:59:14: I see it all as governmental collaboration to diminish World population , secret policies for the survival of the human race. To create a general mind-set of killing so people would go to war/murder/fight/exterminate for the benefit of all so there'll be less burden on our resources. Governmental policies to create a population full of alpha-numerically illiterate people who are inept to function in society because they are much more easily controlled. Governments do not want intellectuals who questions this and that at every turn, in the Central Kingdom, they even shoot them in public demonstrations.....................
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: quadibloc on Sun, 03 October 2010, 10:20:58: Quote from: J888www;229252
Governments do not want intellectuals who questions this and that at every turn,
Well, you can say that because you're located in 英國 (The United Kingdom) and not 中國 (China, the Middle Kingdom).
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: EverythingIBM on Sun, 03 October 2010, 12:21:08: Well the good old games certainly didn't have censoring:
(http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:imjT7-CMAO-45M:http://i651.photobucket.com/albums/uu236/PH-GameTech/wolfenstein-3d-hitler.jpg&t=1)
(http://www.techshout.com/images/hitler-wolfenstein-3d.jpg)

This is probably the first, and last, game that will have hitler in a mechanical suit.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: chimera15 on Sun, 03 October 2010, 12:48:22: Quote from: EverythingIBM;229286
Well the good old games certainly didn't have censoring:
Show Image
(http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:imjT7-CMAO-45M:http://i651.photobucket.com/albums/uu236/PH-GameTech/wolfenstein-3d-hitler.jpg&t=1)

Show Image
(http://www.techshout.com/images/hitler-wolfenstein-3d.jpg)

This is probably the first, and last, game that will have hitler in a mechanical suit.

Yeah, later ones just have zombie nazi's. Or....

(http://www.motifake.com/image/demotivational-poster/0809/bloodrayne-bloodrayne-ww2-wwii-war-nazi-germany-rnr-demotivational-poster-1221148701.jpg)

That would be a great game. Taliban vs Nazi Zombies, vs Vampires. roflol

(http://www.celsius1414.com/uploads/nazi-zombies.jpg)
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: Rajagra on Sun, 03 October 2010, 16:05:24: Anybody who plays this kind of game understands that assuming the role of a faction DOES NOT involve being sympathetic to their cause.

I doubt very much that any relatives of fallen soldiers were offended by this game or even aware of it. At least not until after some "sympathetic" moral guardian (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11056581) felt "disgusted" and approached them with the loaded question of how they felt about kids playing the role of Taliban killing Westerners.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: microsoft windows on Sun, 03 October 2010, 16:08:04: I just play Solitaire. No moral reasons against that.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: Rajagra on Sun, 03 October 2010, 16:15:30: Quote from: microsoft windows;229352
I just play Solitaire. No moral reasons against that.

I don't know. Maybe it's like chess, a metaphor for war, in which you need to use strategy to defeat the enemy. How can anyone possibly enjoy playing the black pieces and attacking the virtuous white side? I'm outraged that anyone could be that sick!!! Ban chess. Think of the children!
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: Ekaros on Sun, 03 October 2010, 17:20:26: Quote from: Rajagra;229353
I don't know. Maybe it's like chess, a metaphor for war, in which you need to use strategy to defeat the enemy. How can anyone possibly enjoy playing the black pieces and attacking the virtuous white side? I'm outraged that anyone could be that sick!!! Ban chess. Think of the children!

Also isn't it kinda racist that white always begins? I mean are they somewhat superior or something?
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: Voixdelion on Sun, 03 October 2010, 19:21:00: Quote from: Rajagra;229353
I don't know. Maybe it's like chess, a metaphor for war, in which you need to use strategy to defeat the enemy. How can anyone possibly enjoy playing the black pieces and attacking the virtuous white side? I'm outraged that anyone could be that sick!!! Ban chess. Think of the children!

Heh heh... Perfect. I'd kinda like to see some rabble rouser take this route just to see what happens in this incredibly retarded society. 'Specially in the right properly sensitized (or censitized) environment...
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: Voixdelion on Sun, 03 October 2010, 19:29:42: Quote from: J888www;229252
I see it all as governmental collaboration to diminish World population , secret policies for the survival of the human race. To create a general mind-set of killing so people would go to war/murder/fight/exterminate for the benefit of all so there'll be less burden on our resources. Governmental policies to create a population full of alpha-numerically illiterate people who are inept to function in society because they are much more easily controlled. Governments do not want intellectuals who questions this and that at every turn, in the Central Kingdom, they even shoot them in public demonstrations.....................

The first time this theory was proposed to me by a highly intelligent if somewhat cynical programmer type, it was quite horrifying that the truth might be so plain as that:t hat the failure to educate was by design, not misspending or even innocent bureaucracy. I am tending to agree, unfortunately, as that actually seems a far more logical conclusion to draw given the data I see.

Quote from: ricercar;229054

The power of words is ****ing amazing.

This. In soo many ways.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: Oqsy on Sun, 03 October 2010, 20:16:39: My suggestion is to call EA and demand a refund.

Each time someone puts you off or acts like they don't know what you're talking about, ask to speak to their superior (not condescendingly, just matter of factly).

Each step of the way tell the person on the other end of the phone that you purchased a game with the *explicit* knowledge that you could play as or against "The Taliban". Tell them that the way they changed the content make the game no longer interesting to you, because you didn't buy the game to play war with/against a generic threat.

Encourage everyone you know that has the game to call EA with the same complaints, and the same method of reasoning.

Also be sure to mention that you will no longer buy ANY EA titles, be it sports, racing, war, or whatever until your money is refunded OR the content (the word "Taliban") is replaced.

If you are unwilling to demand EA grow a pair with your dollars, then nothing is going to change here, and nothing of interest to this story whatsoever.

A corporation changing and/or sanitizing content in it's product to please more of the masses is no news. Them reversing this decision because people call them on it *would* be news.

For all the complaining that's going on about the way the world is currently, there sure are a small number of people actually standing their ground. If you're really worried that the world is changing for the worse, SPEAK OUT! PUT YOUR GODDAMNED FOOT DOWN!
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: Rajagra on Sun, 03 October 2010, 22:05:10: I haven't bought an EA game since I was put off buying Crysis Warhead by the "copyright protection" that only allowed you to reinstall it a handful of times. What with that, Securom issues and spyware that EA seems fond of, avoiding EA seems like a good idea.

If only they backed down to their customers as easily as they do to politicians.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: chimera15 on Mon, 04 October 2010, 08:12:54: They're hyping this crap on fox news. Makes me sick. The family of the fallen soldiers are like, "We're living this, it's not a game." Well no crap lady. Neither was D-day, ww2, Vietnam, Korea, or any conflict, but there were dozens of games, movies, and all kinds of media made about them, and vets actually helped make the games. Does that mean that it can't be a movie, tv series, or books either? It's not any of those either. Why are you picking on games?

There was no problem playing as the german, or Japanese sides in these games. Didn't even COD let you play as a Japanese soldier at one point before??? There was no objection by ww2 vets then.

Maybe gamers should start a war against stupid people like that. Then we could pretend to be so self righteous and create a stupid person side we can play as to see and feel what being an idiot is like.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: Oqsy on Mon, 04 October 2010, 19:22:59: chimera: Maybe you could stop referring to soldiers and/or their families as "stupid" long enough to realize there are other points of view besides your own. While it may be hard to see the logic in EA's rationale on this, ****bagging the soldiers or families that have lost loved ones in this *fresh* conflict will not win you any cool points.

Stop and really think about the tone and perspective of your post. Rinse, and repeat.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: keyboardlover on Mon, 04 October 2010, 20:22:38: Quote from: Oqsy
chimera: Maybe you could stop referring to soldiers and/or their families as "stupid" long enough to realize there are other points of view besides your own. While it may be hard to see the logic in EA's rationale on this, ****bagging the soldiers or families that have lost loved ones in this *fresh* conflict will not win you any cool points.

I agree. Totally inappropriate and not cool. Is your loss anywhere near as gut-wrenching as theirs? You just sound like a complete tool.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: 8_INCH_FLOPPY on Mon, 04 October 2010, 23:01:59: Quote from: ricercar;229054

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2010/10/ea-chickens-out-pulls-taliban-from-moh-multiplayer.ars

"simply the idea that seeing online play through the eyes of our enemy is so offensive that we must call them something else."

Wow, I though that you were just paraphrasing. They actually said that. It's not like I had a bunch of respect for them to begin with, but now I am really shocked that they could say that. Whether you believe in the War in Afghanistan or not, pretending that the enemy is someone else for fear of evoking sympathy is pretty cowardly.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: chimera15 on Mon, 04 October 2010, 23:42:05: Quote from: Oqsy;229736
chimera: Maybe you could stop referring to soldiers and/or their families as "stupid" long enough to realize there are other points of view besides your own. While it may be hard to see the logic in EA's rationale on this, ****bagging the soldiers or families that have lost loved ones in this *fresh* conflict will not win you any cool points.

Stop and really think about the tone and perspective of your post. Rinse, and repeat.

None of the soldiers are saying this. It's the families of the fallen soldiers that in their grief just want everyone to feel their pain, and looking for a way to do it.

The fact is that the soldiers use games like this to train themselves, and probably do have games where they play as the Taliban, because they want to see the logic and mindset that goes on on their side, so they can then get an advantage on them in the real world.

The problem is that the families are using their grief as an excuse to censor art. They're not looking at it from any reasonable view that games have been made of every other war or conflict where thousands more of American soldiers have fallen, with the "opposing force" being represented, and played as what they are. I'm sorry, but that is the epitome of stupid.

In the war on terrorism even civilians that have never set food in Afganistan are members of the conflict, because the Taliban and terrorists see us as such. The families of the fallen have no more right to deny us playing as the Taliban, than I do sitting in my parents basement, because any day a terrorist could decide to take a crop duster and fill it full of anthrax and blanket the east coast with it to kill us all. If I want to create, and or play a game as the Taliban to get into that mindset to understand it, understand how to stop it, or survive it, some woman who lost her son shouldn't have the right to stop me.

The real problem is that her stating "my life is not a game" is an insult to games and gamers. A much worse one than me calling her stupid. It's a fundamental degradation of games, as is EA's decision to change the game, and neither of them understanding what 3d fps games, or really what they should be called, "simulations".

The fact is the terrorists that destroyed the towers used games to learn to fly. We should be able to use games to understand them, and how to destroy them just as well. Degrading Call of Duty and saying it's just a game, as she and EA have done, is not only just sad and stupid, but possibly rises even to the level of evil when you consider that it could get more people killed when they could have used this game to save lives by representing it for what it is, and making it as real to life as possible.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: Lanx on Tue, 05 October 2010, 04:35:40: actually i disagree, this is just EA playing into the minds of idiots, yes i said it, if you have a family member affected by this war cuz they fought over there, then yes that is sad, really sad, but that in no way should affect how I or any other first person shooter gamer should be "allowed" to play a game.
This cannot be labeled art, when EA buckles like a screaming baby, they go, "lol these ppl just want the name changed, just do it, we'll still sell millions!!!"
pretty much the ars article is dead on.

These ppl have no right to complain, if they don't even play the game, they just like to complain because it's "out there". This is no different than those church going idiots who hate gay people, and i mean the vehemonently hating kind. Gay ppl aren't all up in these ppls faces, they aren't doing gay things to them daily, they're just minding their own business being gay, it's just that these church going idiots can't stand a single day knowing that there are ppl out there just being gay.

That's the same thing really, ppl who unfortunately are affected by this war cannot stand to face it that there's a game out there that would have had American's Vs. Taliban's, they just like to ruin it for everybody.

Now if they love MOH and are affected by a tragedy and start playing MOH and start have nervous breakdowns because they crouch jumping shooting America soldiers while they are playing the "Taliban" team (which is 99.999999% unlikely) then yea, stop playing MOH.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: Oqsy on Tue, 05 October 2010, 13:52:02: Well, the under 18 gamer crowd has said their piece. Anyone with descended testes and facial hair want to take a crack at it?
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: Oqsy on Tue, 05 October 2010, 14:05:38: Liam and me, we're gonna **** you up.

Seriously though, I disagree with EA's decision. However, I feel that I'm the only one that thinks all these ****ing **** gamer kids *****ing about their RIGHTS to play COD their way need to be dropped in the middle of opium country with a bowie knife and a roll of kite string. Until you earn enough money to run your own video game corporation, or buy controlling share of EA, their decisions about their products are their choice, plain and simple. Rights have JACK **** to do with this. You don't have the right to dictate to a comprany how they create, produce, or market their products. The only say you have is to buy or not buy the product, or to voice your opinions on the matter.

Playing a game as "the taliban" is NOT a right. It's not guaranteed anywhere in any document anywhere in the history of the world. If a company offers a game with that feature, well holy **** you're in luck. If they don't, too bad. If they offer it, and then use whatever shady logic to justify taking it away, once again, boo ****ing hoo. Design your own game, or gtfo.

As I said in my OP on this, let your money do the talking, call them and complain that they changed an aspect of the game play that you specifically desired when you purchased the game, etc.

But this garbage about rights and making it some kind of crusade is just immature and lame. Piling on to the families of fallen soldiers is beyond lame, and deserves some serious soul-searching.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: Rajagra on Tue, 05 October 2010, 20:03:51: Maybe EA made to change to protect players from being accused of training for terrorism and being shipped off to Guantanamo Bay.

Or maybe they just worked out that the extra publicity would only do them good?
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: audioave10 on Wed, 06 October 2010, 00:33:56: I thought Nazi-Zombies were a good choice to be politically correct.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: keyboardlover on Wed, 06 October 2010, 06:34:52: I think it's worth pointing out that all the World War and Asian War games were released MANY YEARS after those conflicts were over. The war on terror is a very fresh conflict and probably will be for some time. So if you're going to be a crybaby gamer about it, sorry, you'll just have to wait. Unfortunately other, better folks are out there fighting for your right to even play a ****ing video game.
Title: Chicken **** EA
Post by: zefrer on Wed, 06 October 2010, 07:11:38: Quote from: 8_INCH_FLOPPY;229818
Wow, I though that you were just paraphrasing. They actually said that. It's not like I had a bunch of respect for them to begin with, but now I am really shocked that they could say that. Whether you believe in the War in Afghanistan or not, pretending that the enemy is someone else for fear of evoking sympathy is pretty cowardly.

Obviously the point of that sentence missed the top of your head by approximately 2km (you didn't get it).

"The game itself will not be changed in any way, the opposing force in the multiplayer section will simply no longer be called Taliban. Apparently, the only thing offensive was the name. This isn't changing the core content, simply the idea that seeing online play through the eyes of our enemy is so offensive that we must call them something else.

Which is what makes this move so cowardly, not to mention stupid. Is this game based on an actual conflict, or isn't it? EA can pay lip service to realism, but only when it comes to guns and tactics; naming the enemy in the conflict that the game is exploiting is apparently way too offensive to be allowed."

I hope that is now clear. Maybe try and read and understand what it is you are critisising before doing it. Kinda like the people being offended by the use of a name in a videogame.