Oh! The ways people cry...

[Flare4War]

It seems Fox is at it again.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38740099/ns/technology_and_science-games/

Am I the only one that thinks this is making a mountain out of a mole hill?

[Tensei]

From what I've seen, as far as Fox news being batshit insane goes, this is pretty mild.

I do love how time and time again they make vague mentions of "critics" without sources or concrete examples ( in this case one example). Maybe next time they should also write down that 95% of the population doesn't give a shit whether or not they can play as the Taliban.

[The Coop]

It's a legitimate concern, and I can understand why it would upset some people since we're still in the middle of fighting that conflict. As the article mentioned, we're not removed from it yet as it's not become a "past" war.

That said, it's a war video game with fictional characters and events put in real-world settings. It's fiction. Plus, many games let you play as one side or the other, so why should this one be any different? It's not going to recruit people to the Taliban cause, and it's not going to belittle, disrespect or make a mockery of the real soldiers who have given their lives. This isn't going to be some joke like the JFK assassination game, or the one where you could fly a jet into the Twin Towers, so I sincerely doubt the multiplayer will have "YOU SHOT A FILTHY AMERICAN DOG! ALHAMDULILLAH!" and show pictures of dancing Arabic villagers popping up every time you frag an opponent. I also doubt the names of the soldiers in the game will be taken directly from the casualty list of the current war. As a result, I don't see how it's being disrespectful at all.

This game's multiplayer will do what scores of others have done... have virtual good guys and bad guys, let you choose a side, and then have polygons firing polygons at polygons. It doesn't really matter if it's a past scenario or a current one, it still boils down to that. And if being able to play as a Nazi, the Soviets, the Viet Cong, and other U.S. adversaries in multiplayer games has come to pass, then why not the Taliban? I don't believe there's a 20 year "wait until the war's over" clause somewhere, so...

...

Strikes me as bit strange how some have no problem with a virtual us shooting a virtual them, but let it get flipped around, and then it's suddenly going too far.

[Brandon Strader]

I don't know what Fox had to do with that and I don't see what the big deal is. The video seemed pretty spot on.

[Flare4War]

If they were trying to use accounts of real soldiers and simulate real missions/objectives I might be able to understand why this bitch is throwing a temper tantrum, but they're not.

It isn't even like you play as the Taliban performing TERRORIST missions. If I understand correctly what they article was saying, it just allows you to play as a Taliban soldier in multi-player. It so doesn't matter.

[Arcana]

It's impossible to say whether "Medal of Honor" can find the right balance — for all I know, it could turn out to be an unmitigated disaster — but when it comes to dealing honestly with this kind of conflict, anything less than dual-sided playability strikes me as jingoistic whitewashing.

And I'm infinitely more uncomfortable with that than I am the thought of a virtual Taliban player casually firing at a virtual U.S. Army Ranger.

Seems that the editorial writer actually thinks that the issue overall is quite overblown.

In other words FOX NEWS IS ON OUR SIDE HERE

[Coyote-Trickster]

I sincerely doubt the multiplayer will have "YOU SHOT A FILTHY AMERICAN DOG! ALHAMDULILLAH!" and show pictures of dancing Arabic villagers popping up every time you frag an opponent.

i'm certain the pvp game chat will have plenty of that to go around.

[SoulinEther]

Am I the only one seeing this is MSNBC and the article itself was written by a PCWorld writer? Is the Fox bashing some sort of meme of which I am ignorant? :S

And the author expresses his opinion at the end, that this kind of game with its available playing modes needs to exist because "it's disrespectful not to see it through with both sides accessible as optional to play."

Stuff like this can exist. If you don't like it, don't buy it/play it. It's not like this supports American enemies financially or something...

edit: And I don't think this is making a big deal of a non-issue. I think it goes without saying that there will always be a group of people (most likely those directly affected by the represented conflict) who will react negatively to this kind of real-life/war representation, and seeing how topically this seems to be edgier, I'm not sure how it's not newsworthy.

[The Coop]

Am I the only one seeing this is MSNBC and the article itself was written by a PCWorld writer? Is the Fox bashing some sort of meme of which I am ignorant? :S

Re-read the article, especially the third paragraph...

The "controversy" probably would've ducked press coverage, but for Karen Meredith, the mother of a fallen soldier whose knowledge of EA's game extends to a Fox News headline ("Video Game Lets You Be the Taliban"). In a Fox News interview, Meredith decried EA's game, arguing that...

[prophetik music]

If they were trying to use accounts of real soldiers and simulate real missions/objectives I might be able to understand why this bitch is throwing a temper tantrum, but they're not.

It isn't even like you play as the Taliban performing TERRORIST missions. If I understand correctly what they article was saying, it just allows you to play as a Taliban soldier in multi-player. It so doesn't matter.

there's a lot of people where this type of thing hits home. it's similar to the mosque that's proposed for right next to the 9/11 site - some people view the ability to play as a Taliban fighter (even if it's just a player model) killing Americans as bad. it's the same reason that Germany nixed any WWII or game with Nazis as bad guys - there's too much history there, too many people who died to them.

[Brandon Strader]

If there's anything modern America teaches us, it's that we love those who hurt us the most. We're submissive little bitches. I for one, will be renting this game.

[SoulinEther]

Re-read the article, especially the third paragraph...

Ah, don't know how I missed that. Well... still.

Gonna read that article. I feel like I have some catching up to do (rather watch the video. still.)

Edit: alright... from how it sounded, I got the vibe that the person conducting the interview on fox was defending EA's rights too. The whole article seems to have just reported on what happened in that interview.

[Strike911]

And playing as a Nazi's in multiplayer is okay why now? She says time? There's a lot of old folks that lived through the 40's that would BEG to differ, ironically demonstrating in her own segment that what offends some people doesn't offend her. *face palm* I'm sure people that were victims of bank robberies would be pretty pissed, too.

I'm all for games that don't trivialize real war. That's wrong, period. But lady, come on... multiplayer war games are commonplace. What about the US military sponsored America's Army? The "official US Army Game" I might add where you play as a US soldier from your perspective and a terrorist from your enemies' perspective? At least that was how it was back in the day. Fact is, in multiplayer you're always playing a terrorist, the game just hides that fact from you. On a side note, I kind of love the symbolism of that aspect in America's Army: how no one views themselves as the bad guy in war. Ha. Anyway...

I'm sorry this woman lost her son in the war, I really am, but if I heard a few actual US soldiers complaining about this I'd be more willing to care a little more. If those soldiers were telling me the game is wrong I'd listen. I really would, but I'd be willing to wager there will be more US military men & women playing multiplayer Medal of Honor in Afghanistan (as the freakin' Taliban) than people complaining about the game in the United States, or elsewhere for that matter.

What's the right solution? A Co-Op Military title where everyone plays on the same team shoots at NPC Taliban troops? Back to Battlefield 2 and the MEC bots, I guess?