Soldiers discuss Six Days in Fallujah controversy

i enjoy your change of name

i know, right? from Sly to Ezio Auditore de Firenze. when i saw that assassin's creed 2 main character model, i was like 'that's my new name and avatar!' and i like it a lot.

But now your avatar is a beaver or something like that.

Don't get me wrong though.. I like beaver.

oh him? that's pedobear. he's my old avatar. i tried to tell him that it's over and Ezio is my new avatar but he refuses to leave me alone. Ezio, pedobear, and default mario switch. i got used to it.

Well, atleast you seem to be able to change your avatar, for whatever reason, no matter how many times I try, I seem to be stuck with Mario.

try switching to a different browser. on google chrome, i couldn't upload anything (except for pedobear...) and then when i switched to firefox, i was able to upload good ol' Ezio here.

Unfortunately, you still appear as Mario, here. I, too, have problems changing my avatar, so I'll try another browser as you suggest.

All I see is Mario. :P

And your talking about Ezio got me to look into the post on him here on Joystiq, and yeah, really cool. A+

i hope. if they do that though, they would have to have a LOT of checkpoints.

as long as they skip over the Recharging health/health pack thing, I'd be willing to defend its realism

If they made it too much like real war nobody would want to play it.

umm your game wont sale this will.....DUHHHHHHHHHH

I wouldn't give a fuck, because according to this little thing called THE FIRST AMENDMENT they have the right to. I might not like that the game exists, but I wouldn't try to have it banned.

.. what an amazing display of intelligence, CantFlame.

Well, you're right Moptimus. They have every right to make this game, but people have every right to voice their opinion.

It is my opinion and that of others, that this game displays a lack of respect for the fallen heroes and a lack of taste on subject matter. And from the press releases that they've made so far, a lack of any form of respect for our troops.
To me the phrase "It's just a game" is proof of that.

and what about COD games
Seriously its just a game, Yes people died but people die all the time, wars continue and its not going to stop,
Instead of bitching about this game, these groups should be bitching about the wars we are fighting banning a game isnt going to stop the war this game is based on

How do you feel about WWII games, Mystile?

Honestly, I have double feelings about those as well at times. I enjoy them, and I'd probably have more of a problem with them if they were based on actual squads and existing people. As far as I know, they are not.
Some of the cutscenes in COD:W@W are a bit disrespectfull, I admit.
This game, on the other hand, seems to try to get every event in this battle as accurate as possible.

A big difference, in my opinion, is that the events of WWII are far enough in history, that they might educate or atleast spark interest in people that don't know that much about WWII.

Another reason I'm not really excited about this game, is the fact there are still people over there, and there are still people dealing with the grief that this war has brought. People are still coping with the fact they loved a lost one.

It's just my opinion, though.

"I enjoy them, and I'd probably have more of a problem with them if they were based on actual squads and existing people."
Call of Duty 1 and 2 were based on real battles I believe. There is zero difference between playing a game that displays the tactics of a squad in WW2 and one in Iraq.

yup, its your opinion, and just like you like to complain about this game, I have the right to reply to your opinion

"Honestly, I have double feelings about those as well at times. I enjoy them, and I'd probably have more of a problem with them if they were based on actual squads and existing people. As far as I know, they are not."

So you would be ok if they made a game about the same battle, but with fictional squads? that's even worse, because you aren't paying any respect to the protagonists of the event. You are just replacing them, do you really think they would have been happy with that?

"Some of the cutscenes in COD:W@W are a bit disrespectfull, I admit.
This game, on the other hand, seems to try to get every event in this battle as accurate as possible."

And what's the problem with being accurate? I guess you have never seen documentaries?

What's the advantage of changing the facts and chain of events? other than bringing back memories to those related to the ones in battle, NONE. And before you say that bringing back memories is bad, I ll say bullshit sire, because as someone who knows people that have lost relatives, might it be in the military or police, in different kind of situations, most of the time they want to know how things happened, and often they feel proud of them. This wouldn't be any different.

"A big difference, in my opinion, is that the events of WWII are far enough in history, that they might educate or at least spark interest in people that don't know that much about WWII."

So its ok because it is far enough? may I ask, when does it become far enough?

So since this war isn't that long ago, it isn't educational nor interesting?

"Another reason I'm not really excited about this game, is the fact there are still people over there, and there are still people dealing with the grief that this war has brought. People are still coping with the fact they loved a lost one."

Uh, there are still people coping with the fact that they lost love ones during WW2....

If anything, the sooner the better, that way they can show that war is awful, and that unlike what the media showed on tv here on the US, the war was awful from the beginning, for both sides.

Regardless of any issues anybody has with this game, Moptimus is right that banning a game because of controversy or poor taste is just plain wrong. Freedom and banishment do not go together. You sacrifice one when you strive for the other.

Also, thinking that "Six Days in Fallujah" is disrespectful is both entirely subjective and based on no real experience with the game. You won't ever be able to form an opinion about this game that isn't subjective since whether or not you find it disrespectful can only be measured by personal values, but once the game is released then you ought to play it, or wait til you can see the game in action, so at the very least your opinion can be validated. Until then, your opinion about the game is not based on anything tangible and thus is prematurely formed.

I'm not saying you're wrong (afterall, subjective opinions are only wrong to people who disagree), but that your arguments against the game aren't valid until they're based on actual experience.

@Mystile
You're an idiot. Why are people even listening to what you have to say? WW2 shooters often have recreations of actual battles. If a marine with 3 tours under his belt says this could help raise awareness and sympathy for a soldiers plight, then that's good enough for me. Also, where do you get off saying;

"...this game displays a lack of respect for the fallen heroes and a lack of taste on subject matter."?

I am pretty sure you know nothing about this game, other than what you've been told. You haven't played it. You don't know shit about the amount of respect or taste in it. You don't have a leg to stand on. Quit trying to defend your idiotic initial post and move on to hating on something else you know nothing about.

I think I can relate. Nobody like to relive their bad experiences. But that's part of the reason we always skirt around the important issue, and precisely why the world will never improve.
What I will never understand is why it is always OK to have news reporting, movies, and documentaries of an event, but not video games? I know the public just don't see games as a meaningful media capable of expressing thoughts and emotions. It's just..strange, really, that for all the people arguing that video game is so interactive and can influence people's behavior very strongly, they would be so much against a game that might paint wars and violence as a bad thing.

Actually I WAS involved with Fallujah, in the USMC. And I did lose quite a few people I knew through both my tours to Iraq.
Why would I care that a game be made about it?
If the game talks about how shitty we are we all need to die and so on, then yeah, that sucks. But It's supposed to be a game about us (soldiers) doing what we do. It's because of the military the country has remained free, even if people dont agree with the wars. They suck but we did our job and the game will bring light to it.

Maybe I'll get a few less people telling me it was wrong that we did our jobs in Iraq, maybe a bit less press trying to screw over American soldiers for stupid crap.

I'll play it.

yep. that's rule one of the internet. bitch and moan until ya can't bitch and moan no more.

I've said this before to someone, but I'll say it again:

If you want to experience the real thing, sign up for the army. Put your money where your mouth is and be a real man.

Your comment disgusts me. There are people dying for your freedom, and you treat it like it's a fucking fun experience.

Go drink some gasoline and die!

Hey guy, listen, how the fuck do you know that I haven't served? You insensitive asshole. I've never been to the front lines; but I've made and sent over the weapons our boys use to this day. Weapons Engineer. And may some religion's god bless the soldiers in the front for what they do, I have nearly more respect for them than I do for my own mother.

I strive everyday to make killing machines for our boys to use and to eliminate our enemies. I fix them, so our soldiers can fire their rifle true, and shoot straighter than the enemy.

I find it funny that you call me the "insensitive asshole"....

I thank you for providing the troops with great weaponry. That said, you still come off as a douchebag in your first comment.

no offense, but both of you came off as douches. mystilearmor, saying 'go drink gasoline and die' isn't exactly being sensitive, now is it?

I never said I wasn't insensitve, but for him to point that out is calling the kettle black.

fair enough.

Yeah, my first comment was extremely douchy... I regret it.

All right. Now shake hands, you two.

Or hug!

Fuck that...

Lets cross swords and count to Schfifty Five.

maybe because we're still in iraq, which this is based on. i don't think people would care too much about a WWII game made 50 years after the war. and COD4 was fictional. so...

We still have people in the countries of WW2 too. Both under and above ground.

COD5: 50-60 years after WWII

this game: during the war

see the difference?

yes, one is the flavor of the month and the other is an old hat.

to put it another way

WWII: POPULAR
War in Iraq/Afghanistan: CONTROVERSIAL

i meant to say COD2 and COD5, not just COD5. COD5 is a full 60+

Time is irrelevant.

Sorry Sly, but if anything, a WW2 game, even today, would still be worse.

Like the poster above mentioned, time is irrelevant, if anything, the impact of WW2 was far greater, and so were the crimes.

Civilian losses:
WW2: Tens of Millions
Iraq/Afghanistan: Most sources estimate it at less than a million

Battleground
WW2: If Im not wrong, the only continent not involved was Africa
Iraq/Afghanistan: Do you really need me to answer?

It is rather hypocritical for someone to come and complain about a game portraying a war accurately, then come here and say that he enjoys other war games, and even worse, WW2 games.