Alvis

Saw the truth behind the copied door
Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,300
By this logic, war games shouldn't exist at all. And no, this isn't a "slippery slope" kind of thing. It's just that there's literally no difference between any other weapon and this one, it all revolves around killing other humans with horrible weapons of death, if that is offensive to you, then there are many mone genres to play.

How about calling out CoD for actually bad things, such as gambling systems?
 

Tavernade

Tavernade
Moderator
Sep 18, 2018
8,932
There's an even bigger "woo hoo", you get a fucking nuclear bomb at 30 kills. Why is the line drawn at white phosphorous?

Nuclear weapons have entered a sort of weird cultural space where they get used a lot in genre fare. I don't think people care as much because we see them used in non-Hiroshima/Nagasaki contexts in fiction. That's not true of WP, which as I said earlier I've only ever seen used in Spec Ops as an example of a horrific inhuman act.
 

fick

Alt-Account
Banned
Nov 24, 2018
2,261
Thank God we've got a marine telling us a chemical that burns things does bad stuff to humans.
 

snausages

Member
Feb 12, 2018
10,542
There's an even bigger "woo hoo", you get a fucking nuclear bomb at 30 kills. Why is the line drawn at white phosphorous?
Nukes havent been used since WWII, so I think that's the reason here.

The writer sounds concerned at how a game like this could shape attitudes of young men who might join the army one day is my best guess. Nukes will hopefully never be used ever again, there's no appetite for it. But WP will

Gamea have been used as recruitment propaganda before after all. Maybe not CoD, I dont know. But Americas Army and Full Specteum Warrior have been IIRC
 

PadWarrior

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,475
I would think to not have your daughter wandering around watching you play violent video games.

But if that floats your boat and your moral principles, then I'm not one to judge, am I?
Let me add some details to that. My wife was in the room and our daughter would wake up from her nap and wander into the living room. Didn't mean to trigger you with my post especially since I'm not judging anyone and was talking about my personal situation. Have an awesome day :)
 
Oct 27, 2017
39,148
Does that really negate that it can be realistic? Realistic violence sure has a lot of shock value
It can but the point is that just using shock value and violence doesn't mean it is "realistic".

As I said earlier, using American Sniper movie as an inspiration to depict "realistic warfare" isn't what you would do if you want to be authentic to the horrors of wars.
 

Hawkster

Alt account
Banned
Mar 23, 2019
2,626
Let me add some details to that. My wife was in the room and our daughter would wake up from her nap and wander into the living room. Didn't mean to trigger you with my post especially since I'm not judging anyone and was talking about my personal situation. Have an awesome day :)

Its cool. I was just wondering why a 10 year old would wander around watching you play violent video games, but I appreciate the clarification nonetheless
 

Deleted member 56266

Account closed at user request
Banned
Apr 25, 2019
7,291
Nuclear weapons have entered a sort of weird cultural space where they get used a lot in genre fare. I don't think people care as much because we see them used in non-Hiroshima/Nagasaki contexts in fiction. That's not true of WP, which as I said earlier I've only ever seen used in Spec Ops as an example of a horrific inhuman act.
Nukes havent been used since WWII, so I think that's the reason here.

The writer sounds concerned at how a game like this could shape attitudes of young men who might join the army one day is my best guess. Nukes will hopefully never be used ever again, there's no appetite for it. But WP will

Alright, what are your guys defenses for using AC-130s, drones, and chopper gunners then? Are those acceptable?

Drawing the line at white phosphorus is a foolish take.
 

RdN

Member
Oct 31, 2017
1,783
Come on.. We had freaking NUKES as a killstreak reward almost 10 years ago.

People seem to want to find issues with everything nowadays.
 
OP
OP
Phendrift

Phendrift

Member
Oct 25, 2017
32,531
It is, it's nearly as terrible as people are making out, it covers the battlefield in smoke and disorients people, it's not graphically burning their skin or anything, it's exactly like napalm, but this veteran saying it helps validate people's reasoning.

This isn't to say I don't respect the opinion of vets, they've seen things that would likely break a lot of people, but this depiction isn't graphic IMO
I mean, that's what the author is saying is the problem. It DOESN'T show the horrific consequences. It's an actual modern issue that the game isn't handling with care and is understating the real-life atrocities it causes.
 

Avitus

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,973
Shooting folks in the face over and over again is bad also.

The nuke is okay, and so is the depiction of everything else that has caused hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths, but I draw the line at WP! is such a uniquely American privilege. To normalize absolutely everything but take issue with one particular weapon of war because it's gruesome.
 

Deleted member 5491

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
5,249
By this logic, war games shouldn't exist at all. And no, this isn't a "slippery slope" kind of thing. It's just that there's literally no difference between any other weapon and this one, it all revolves around killing other humans with horrible weapons of death, if that is offensive to you, then there are many mone genres to play.

How about calling out CoD for actually bad things, such as gambling systems?
Dude, read the whole article
 

Tavernade

Tavernade
Moderator
Sep 18, 2018
8,932
Alright, what are your guys defenses for using AC-130s, drones, and chopper gunners then? Are those acceptable?

Drawing the line at white phosphorus is a foolish take.

I don't know what an AC-130 is, but drones are in sci fi stories all the time, and I don't see armed helicopters as a huge deal.

The issue with WP, for me, is that having it in a game is unnecessarily cruel. There are reasons for drones and helicopters to be in a video game: they're a fun toys to play with and we see them all the time in other mediums in various contexts. There's zero reason to have a chemical weapon most people don't know about and just use it nonchalantly and inaccurately.

Come on.. We had freaking NUKES as a killstreak reward almost 10 years ago.

People seem to want to find issues with everything nowadays.

Nukes may as well be sci fi weapons, and they often are used as such. That doesn't make it ok but it's in less bad taste. Unless something goes horrifically wrong they're not a weapon anyone will ever see be used again.
 

Deleted member 8593

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
27,176
The fetishization of the military complex in shooters is only outdone by their actual funding of gun manufacturers so...
 

Spenny

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,566
San Diego-ish
The nuke is okay, and so is the depiction of everything else that has caused hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths, but I draw the line at WP! is such a uniquely American privilege. To normalize absolutely everything but take issue with one particular weapon of war because it's gruesome.
I think this is just how they justify going to other people's homelands and murdering them in their head. Somehow kids dying slowly is worse than shooting/blowing up/stabbing them. It's all awful.
 

Hexa

Saw the truth behind the copied door
Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,775
I mean, that's what the author is saying is the problem. It DOESN'T show the horrific consequences. It's an actual modern issue that the game isn't handling with care and is understating the real-life atrocities it causes.

Guns in general are a pretty big issue in the US, bigger than WP will ever be, and the depictions of them in gaming are even less realistic. But that's the thing. It's a game. The whole marketing thing they do calling the games realistic, authentic, and whatnot is dumb and kind of gross, but the games themselves portraying such things and portraying them in such a way they better fit the game is fine.
 

TimeFire

Avenger
Nov 26, 2017
9,625
Brazil
This thread is proof that videogame criticism has a lot of growing up to do when an enthusiast forum can't understand context and nuance.

In any way, the best propaganda piece the US army ever had continues to march on
 

Deleted member 56266

Account closed at user request
Banned
Apr 25, 2019
7,291
I don't know what an AC-130 is, but drones are in sci fi stories all the time, and I don't see armed helicopters as a huge deal.

The issue with WP, for me, is that having it in a game is unnecessarily cruel. There are reasons for drones and helicopters to be in a video game: they're a fun toys to play with and we see them all the time in other mediums in various contexts. There's zero reason to have a chemical weapon most people don't know about and just use it nonchalantly and inaccurately.



Nukes may as well be sci fi weapons, and they often are used as such. That doesn't make it ok but it's in less bad taste. Unless something goes horrifically wrong they're not a weapon anyone will ever see be used again.

Look up what an AC-130 is, it kind of undermines your whole "it's in sci if so it's ok" argument.
 

KORNdog

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
8,001
If there is a third World War, it's not the impact of the atomic bombs that will wipe out all life on earth, it's the radiation.

True. But the nukes in MW aren't detonating hundreds of miles away from the maps location while you live out your shortened lifespan in a radiation zone. It's a direct attack. The nuke is instant. WP, even when direct, is still a slow and painful death.
 

Charcoal

Banned
Nov 2, 2017
7,715
Hey IGN, I'm in the Air Force. You can interview me about the dangers of cyber attacks if you want.
 

AYZON

Member
Oct 29, 2017
922
Germany
Are modern nukes even still "nukes" that contaminate an area? I thought we are using hydrogen bombs nowadays. Might be wrong though

edit: Guess they still radiate, thought they wouldnt. So, nvm.
 
Last edited:

The Last Laugh

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Dec 31, 2018
1,440
COD official canceled by the nets. Stay tuned for the exciting announcement of Ghost Recon: Pillow Pals. 100% Resetera approved!
 

Alvis

Saw the truth behind the copied door
Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,300
You didn't read it or your comprehension is awful. The structural baseline of his argument was in no way presenting why war games shouldn't exist.
The fact that I came to a different conclusion than you doesn't make my comprehension awful. I know what he said. I maintain that there's no difference in whatever weapon is used in a war game. I don't care. I think all of them are horrible weapons of death that have no place in real world society, yet I think all of them are fine in a videogame about war. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Apparently texts can now be redacted in a way that only lets readers reach a single conclusion. Is it possible to learn this power?
 

Hawkster

Alt account
Banned
Mar 23, 2019
2,626
This thread is proof that videogame criticism has a lot of growing up to do when an enthusiast forum can't understand context and nuance.

In any way, the best propaganda piece the US army ever had continues to march on

I suppose if violent video games are US Army Propaganda mouthpiece, we might as well ban them, right?
 

CopperPuppy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,636
I think this is a flaw with just about everything in all war games. Though I haven't played a CoD game in ages, and so if white phosphorus is a new weapon recently introduced into the game world, then I could understand being critical of Infinity Ward for introducing something new. White Phosphorus is kind of a ... niche ... war weapon, like it's something that people who don't know much about war wouldn't really know anything about. So, to introduce it is already showing that you have a level of experience with war making that most people don't, and then, to portray it in a sort of ... I Dunno ... half-assed or light hearted way makes it worse than, say, the nuke weapon in Modern Warfare 2 -- which have already been in light pop culture for decades and prone to being treated more comically (whether it's something like Doctor Strangelove or the Fallout series).
It's bad that this sort of nuanced take sticks out in a thread like this.
I suppose if violent video games are US Army Propaganda mouthpiece, we might as well ban them, right?
Criticism =/= calls to ban