| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (139)

Posted: Apr 7th 2009 11:31PM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I don't see how making a game about an event necessarily "glorifies" said event. The Call of Duty series certainly doesn't glorify war; it showcases the horrifying aspects of it far more preeminently than the positive ones.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 12:04AM maveric101 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
i totally agree, it depends on how they present it. making it a typical shooter and giving the player the feeling of justice for killing enemies like in an alien shooter (i.e. halo) would be completely insensitive. but if they try, they could present it with they reverence it deserves and maybe make it more like an interactive documentary. we will have to wait and see.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 12:56AM kbeehaze said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
lol who didn't see this coming?
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 2:09AM WiredKnight said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I agree. I don't understand why nobody can see games based on real-life conflicts as tributes or memorials to those who fought in them.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 6:43AM Xocolatl said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
The media "glorifying" something is just a code word for "we fucked up bad, and I don't ever want anyone to bring that up ever again."

When someone slips on a banana peel, people laugh. Is it that funny to laugh at a person hurting himself? It's choose to go to war or ever wave a "support our troops" flag that is truly glorifying a war.
Video games? They either bring to light a horrible truth, or trivialize the subject. Trivializing so many deaths is certainly not a very nice gesture--but people have been doing it forever.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 9:55AM AintNoHalfStepn said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Positive aspects of war? What exactly might those be?
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 11:36AM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
the positive aspects of war is when the other side gives up and they bring cake and drinks and we all have a party!

oh wait the war would have to be over for that to happen...
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 11:49AM FallenArms3 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Indeed, I was just about to say-- who said they are glorifying it? People seem to believe that videogames are only really games, as in fun and rewarding and meaningless. I think they are as powerful of a media as film or novels, and they can say the same things. And what better way to show a person how terrible war is than to throw them into it with a gun and say, "survive"? There are too many assumptions being made here.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 12:28PM SaMav said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Six Days in Fallujah is in development at Atomic Games in collaboration with "more than three dozen" Iraq War veteran US Marines"

Obviously those three dozen Iraq War veterans must feel some pride or I don't see why they would agree to work with the developers.

I work on an Army base and I see dozens of Vets of this war (sometimes no older than 20 years old) that have been severely wounded in combat. A lot of the time they are confined to wheelchairs.

I constantly see them making their way down past where i work, to the Gamestop.
They can no longer work in the army. And to pass the time, these video games are all they have. (Besides the ones that have a loving family to accompany them)

Not only will this be exciting for them, but even the deceased I would imagine, would be honored as well.

Nobody wants to die in combat, only to be forgotten a few years later.
Reply

Posted: Apr 7th 2009 11:32PM Sly C said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
part of me thinks this was too soon to release a game based on this. another part of me thinks that the controversy is a bit irrational. how is this 'glorifying' the battle? no media has been released for the game yet. so far, the devs have let us know that they just want it to be a neutral view.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 12:03AM MarkezJM said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I think they deserve all the controversy they're getting if it turns out that U, U, D, D, L, R, L, R, B, A, B, A, select, start, actually does something in the game. :P
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 1:16PM mac15444 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I agree with your comment about the game being released too soon. Since the war is still going on, it is still too fresh a memory to recall. I think they should hold off on it for a couple of years or they will become a big media target. Its going to be something like GTA IV being attacked by every concerned parent and that Jack Thompson guy.
Reply

Posted: Apr 7th 2009 11:34PM direfulburden said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
.....i still think that "close range" is ten-times more controversial.... and so far i have only played the demo; since my computer froze since it couldn't handle all the violence and controversy on-screen.
Reply

Posted: Apr 7th 2009 11:34PM arrness PSN chsowls Steam dcdani said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Definitely controversial

COD4 took a good route in making a game modernized, i'm interested to see how this will turn out though.
Reply

Posted: Apr 7th 2009 11:36PM MarkezJM said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I still stand by my original thoughts that it's simply too soon for this. I don't necessarily think that they shouldn't, or don't have the right to make this game, I just think the timing is poor.

On top of that, what occurs to me in this article is that there's the potential to whitewash or really misinterpret what actually happened. I think they'd be doing a disservice to the public, if they were to release a game like this so fresh on the heels of the actual occurrence that there is the chance it could lead to some serious miseducation.

And yes, people, yes, I would feel the same way about a movie coming out on the same battle at a time like this.

2 cents.
Reply

Posted: Apr 7th 2009 11:48PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think you may be right about it being too soon. But really, I think any controversy is a little bit much. If you are offended that their making a game about war A, then you should be upset about war games in general. There is no logical reason for this game to be any more offensive than any WWII game. WWII had a much higher death toll than the current war. And, quite frankly, whitewashing is likely to happen in any game (or movie or book, for that matter) about any war.

War sucks. But it's something that happens and is going to continue happening long past the death of anyone reading this. It just so happens to make compelling game fodder. Let Konami off the hook. Sure, they may have bad taste, since it IS so recent, but when does too soon turn into ok? It has to happen sometime, and I think people need to let things go. If you have a family member who died in Phantom Fury, I'm sure Konami means no offense, and will take none if you don't buy the game. But to get all pissy about it right away is a waste of everybody's time.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 1:16AM Courtney said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I agree, it is the whitewashing of history that bugs the hell out of me with this (and I feel the same way with many types of media that deal with real events).

I've seen it mentioned in multiple articles now about the inclusion of Marines as advisers to making the game realistic and true to what happened, using their notes from the battle. In the WSJ article, it was mentioned in passing that they had also talked to some Iraqis "involved in the conflict." That's pretty vague. Are these civilians who survived, government bureaucrats who were hundreds of miles from the fighting, actual insurgents, who? How they are sourcing this matters a great deal as to how accurately it will portray the battle.

I just don't see how you can create a truly accurate, documentary style experience without having deeply sourced your creation with accounts from multiple sides who witnessed the battle and its aftermath. I true documentarian (ala Ken Burns) might log thousands of hours of interviews with hundreds of sources. I somehow doubt that level of analysis and research is going into this. I hope I'm wrong, as I would actually welcome a game with that level of detail and accuracy, but I'm highly cynical as to the likelihood of that happening.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 1:54AM Johnnynumber5 is powered by cell said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Markez

I respect your opinion and though we have already been down this road I still think that the game is fine and I don't have a problem with it being made. We should all give the developer some credit and see how the game turns out before we make sensationalist emotionally vested comments about glorifying the tragic event. My biggest fear would be caving into public opinion and setting a bad precedent for dictating content in any type of media.

I completely respect your opinion and position on the matter as you stated your opinion with grace, civility and eloquence. I just happen to respectfully disagree and tend to think that the sooner this type of stuff is put out there the sooner the healing will begin.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 2:26AM MarkezJM said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah, pal, agreed on a few points. I'm fine with the game being made as well, just again it's a timing thing for me. Think we need a bit of more closure on the occupation before healing can begin, but a lot of this argument just boils down to the semantics of issues that not everyone will ever agree on. Without a doubt I don't want to see public opinion carry the kind of weight where it borderline becomes censorship, either.

Great question by RogueFace up there is when does too soon turn into ok? I mean, seriously, really, hell if I know, does anyone? At some point it does, I don't have a good answer for when. I do kinda dig some of the comments I'm seeing that would be more interested in a documentary type style presentation, I almost think that could work for a game and I don't know if any developer has seriously tried that work for a serious subject matter.

Few off topic notes for ya, Johnny. Final WBC game was faaantastic, really wish the US took that more seriously. Lastly, my company had a nice event and we had a suite for the Padres opener against the Dodgers, sucks we lost, but we were overhanging leftfield and I got to hear some bozo heckle Manny for awhile. What's your squads record here with 2 days away in the seez?
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 5:14AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@courtney

This is not a Documentary game (As they stated in their reason to make the game) game where you need hundreds of hours of interviews from people in that area to make it a entertaining shooter.... You only need the marine report in a game that has you playing a marine. They might use it to recreate the feel of the marine or the storyprogress of where these group of marines will go. Not alot of interviews that are not foucused on the marines you are playing.

The only thing they need to recognize is the scope of the conflict. And I think that is what they are trying to reach.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 7:01AM Jakeybaby said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I don't even think it is too soon. There is no point hiding the fact that we were the bad guys in this one. The powers that be entered the war without full support.

I agree with Rougeface. If you get upset at one war game, book, or movie, then you get must be upset at them all.

I mean come on, I doubt the Germans are very happy about Wolfenstien. Not only taking a war which Germany took a very controversial role in, but perceives them as cult super soldiers being SUPER evil. I somehow doubt the game will be like this, and for this amount of controversy for it having only being announced is ridiculous.

I'm giving full support to this one. Its a topic I want to educate myself further on (should it be a documentary like the devs say), and as a gamer I'm more than happy to have my preferred form of entertainment get this involved with real life matters.

No-one can deny a political statement in a country with free speech. So who are we to deny a game such as this? Interactive story telling (games) as a whole could benefit from using real life events in a documentary style or even in a perspective style, and so far I see nothing wrong with this title. Time will tell, and I will be watching this one closely (as I believe will many others be, waiting for it to slip up) and like joystiq, I'm very excited.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 11:51AM Courtney said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Lav, try taking a look at the source material before jumping to conclusions. There are conflicting statements about this game coming from the publisher and the developer. The pub is pusing the entertainment aspect, but the devs are talking about it's accuracy. From the original Wall Street Journal article:

"But Atomic Games wants its new release to be more than a game. The company sees it as a new kind of documentary.

"For us, games are not just toys. If you look at how music, television and films have made sense of the complex issues of their times, it makes sense to do that with videogames," Mr. Tamte says."

They are setting themselves up for some high expectations in regards to the accuracy of what the create.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 9:58PM Johnnynumber5 is powered by cell said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Don't know why that got voted down ... whatever

Onto baseball ... I'm FL through and through and though I have always been a Marlins fans last year gave me hope because the rays were so good. To be honest I like both teams but if I had to pick one it would be the Marlins. Hanley Ramirez & David Price FTW Not sure if you play fantasy baseball or whatever but look out for our young 3rd baseman (eligible 2nd baseman as well) Emilio Bonifacio as he is the real deal.
Reply

Posted: Apr 9th 2009 9:16PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Courtney

Those quotes may only have regard to the accuracy of the US marine account be it full or just the 3 dozen US troops they contacted. Yet have not stated they need or have Iraqi accounts or others to have the full spectrum of the game as a full blown Docu. type.

I was insinuating that this games accuracy will apply to the US Troop progression. And not other groups.
Reply

Posted: Apr 7th 2009 11:43PM Ignatius said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Lemme guess, the next flight simulator creator will get sued over "glorifying" the ability to fly planes into buildings, whether by accident or on purpose.

Look, if it offends you, look away, no one is making you look.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 1:22AM Courtney said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Just like no one is making you look at people criticizing the development of this game. Just look away, just look away, nothing for you to see here.
Reply

Posted: Apr 7th 2009 11:43PM doc j said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think this game - if done well - has the potential to push the envelope for what people think of when we think of "video games". I mean, if the sole purpose of the game is for happy carefree fragfest, then I think the game is likely to be a bit insulting. If the game is trying to make a compelling narrative, a drama of sorts. As long as it really isn't about exploitation, then I think at least they have the right to attempt to make the game. A video game is one form of media, after all.

There are already dozens of books about Fallujah. Was it too soon?
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=Fallujah&x=28&y=15

Also, I have a friend who's brother died in Fallujah. So while I am not completely untouched by the incident, there are certainly those for whom it hits closer to home. Even still, it doesn't really affect what I think about the video game though.

Aside from that, of COURSE there is going to be controversy. I just hope that Konami isn't hoping to exploit that for sales.
Reply

Posted: Apr 7th 2009 11:59PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm a little skeptical, considering Konami's going for "a compelling entertainment experience." Of course, that seems to contradict Atomic's desire to make a "documentary"-style experience, so who knows?

I think a good way of judging what direction it's going in is the content of the first promotional videos and press demos. If they talk about the cover system, they're probably not focusing on the dramatic aspect.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 4:54AM MrHashbrown said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@ doc j:

I think Joystiq nailed it with this excerpt from the article:

"Regardless of Konami and Atomic Games' intent, it appears that Six Days in Fallujah could inadvertently become one of the most important video games this generation because of its subject matter. In a medium that is not typically hailed for handling current affairs, Six Days will have a lot of historical weight on its shoulders and eyes on its portrayal of the ongoing Iraq War."

Books, music, and movies are "allowed" to make movies about recent events in US history (which includes the Iraq War) and there isn't too much of an outcry about it (the only movie in recent history that I think caused such a controversy was probably United 93). But if you've ever seen United 93, you know they take the history VERY seriously and do not attempt to exploit the premise for money. It's an honest, hard to look at documentary that sticks to the truth and promises not to entertain, but to honor.

If Atomic Games and Konami take this seriously and make this more about honoring those who were killed by educating others what it was like to be in that battle and all of the horrors the soldiers have seen, then the game will not only be a triumph but, as Xav said, the most important video game to date.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 8:56AM xGeneral DEATHxDEETH82 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
If you haven't tried them yet, I highly recommended the Brothers in Arms titles. They present a great narrative viewpoint that doesn't glorify the events of WWII, but really bring home how harsh and terrible they are. Anyways, just thought I would throw that in there. It's kind of hard to say when it's "too soon", but I feel as though if this game is handled with the same narrative prowess as BiA, it would make for a great story relating the horrors of war.
Reply

Posted: Apr 7th 2009 11:46PM Marius said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I cant wait for the sequel Six Days in New Orleans
Reply

Posted: Apr 7th 2009 11:51PM Crusty Magic said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You unlock Noah as a playable character at the end of the campaign.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 1:57AM Johnnynumber5 is powered by cell said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Marijus

I have a working title for your game ...

Six Days In New Orleans: Kanye vs Dubya
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 9:00AM xGeneral DEATHxDEETH82 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Kanye: George Bush doesn't care about black people.

Mike Meyers: .........
Reply

Posted: Apr 7th 2009 11:48PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Nothing major will happen about it.

1- Like I said previously, Kuma War does this sort of thing MUCH sooner, and they've been doing it for a very long time.
2- Controversy in this industry doesn't really have much of an effect. Do all the yelling you want, you're just advertising for it. A game would have to go very, very far to get pulled off shelves, and that's the only real way you're going to damage it-- Wal-Mart still carries GTA, last I checked, so a war game is almost certainly not going anywhere.

The only way this-- assuming it's a fine game in all other respects-- will fail is if there's a large enough set of hardcore gamers that feel uncomfortable playing it; and I really don't see that happening. Again, GTA is far more tasteless, and it sells like hotcakes.

Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 2:01AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The sad fact is, Konami is only getting so much flak as it's a major "household" name. Kuma Reality Games on the other hand isn't and is very niche. You're right though, Kuma does it WAY sooner.
Reply

Posted: Apr 7th 2009 11:53PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Simple. Switch the insurgents with ghouls and change the name to "Six days in Castlevania". Problem solved.
Reply

Posted: Apr 7th 2009 11:55PM Appleanche said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think the real key difference between the books and this game is one is for educational purposes the other is shaping up to be entirely for entertainment. I think it's too soon. There is a reason we haven't seen any (at least mainstream) movies based on it, it's too soon, wounds haven't healed.
Reply

Posted: Apr 7th 2009 11:59PM maveric101 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
well the vietnam war was broadcast on television. you don't think that was too soon? while maybe not quite as graphic, i'm sure wounded soldiers who were sent home didn't care to watch that. if that was ok, then this should be. it depends on how they treat the game. if they treat the subject with reverence instead of making it a typical shoot 'em up then imo i don't see a huge problem.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 2:02AM Magetto1 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I don't think they broadcasted the Vietnam War on TV for entertainment purposes...

And what? Not 'quite as graphic'? o_0
Reply

Posted: Apr 7th 2009 11:56PM maveric101 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
i hope they do make it more like an interactive documentary. a glorified shoot-em-up with this subject matter would be extremely inconsiderate.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 12:10AM golobulus said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
what the hell do you mean vietnam wasn't quite as graphic? i suggest you watch a documentary or 2. and take a real class on the subject.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 12:20AM maveric101 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
first of all, you replied to the wrong comment. second, i said i don't think what they broadcasted on TV would be quite as graphic/in your face as a violent video game (they didn't have premium channels then...). of course the documentaries would be much more gruesome. and yes i have seen a couple.

work on your reading comprehension.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 12:04AM Negativecool said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Konami, said it wasn't the publisher's intention to take a stance on war"

Seriously? They think the controversy surrounds them pressing a political agenda? They're frickin clueless.

It's too early (for people like me, and old enough to remember where they were on 9/11 and have been following the Iraq war since the onset) to be entertained by an engagement I had friends fight in.

Games are made for entertainment. This makes me uncomfortable, but it's their right to make the game...so whatever.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 12:21AM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Yeah! And cars are made for transportation.

Using cars for sport? RACING? Sickening! That isn't at all like the purpose I assigned to it myself!
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 12:42AM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Games are just like any other medium, they can be used to communicate emotions on many more levels than simple entertainment. I remember where I was on 9/11 as well, but what does that have to do with the Iraq war? I also have friends down there. I think making games/movies/etc about stuff recent is great. It's not like WW2, that war that happened in history and therefore we have no emotional connection to, it's something that happened and is happening. If done right, this game could carry a great message.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 2:16AM Negativecool said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Feba-

You're an idiot.

Carry on.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 10:51AM osirus824 said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Yeah, I totally agree, negativecool. The only way the existence of this game can be justified is if it somehow manages to create a complex moral terrain, like Bioshock did. In other words, the game has to be artistic and insightful without being exploitative and cynical.

I'm not getting my hopes up.
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 12:55PM acme64 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
we have games for every other war. Why do people think Fallujah would be excluded? Replace cod4: modern combat with cod4: IRAQ and tell me how that'd be any worse?
Reply

Posted: Apr 8th 2009 9:55PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Video games are an art medium, and art ultimately can not be censored. It is up to only the beholder of the work of art. You cant tell a artist "Your doing your art wrong" or "you cant do that now" and expect any sort of reaction that would change their art. Hell, the vietnam war was nicknamed "the media's war" even if people wanted it to not be televised nothing would stop it from being so. so if you think you've really made a differance, even if they end up not putting the game on store shelves, then guess what? Another big company is just going to pick up what konami drops. Your on the losing side of an endless battle you can never win.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Shank 2 review: Refined brutality

Posted on Feb 10th 2012 11:45AM

Rhythm Heaven Fever review: Crazy into you

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 12:00PM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW