The lights are on
EA has been criticized recently for making the Taliban one of the teams in the multiplayer component of its upcoming installment of the Medal of Honor franchise. Playing as members of the terrorist group that has attacked the United States and various other countries around the world rubs some players the wrong way, and it seems like everyone has an opinion about the decision. But what do our actual fighting men and women think about it?
A recent interview by GamrFeed answers that very question. Joseph Jackmovich spoke with a total of nine men and women serving in various branches of the military, including the Army, Navy, and National Guard. Topics discussed during the interview include their feelings on whether playing as the Taliban is disrespectful to soldiers, how military shooters affect the public's perception of war, and how they feel about the way video games represent war.
The soldiers' responses vary greatly: Some feel video games can help educate the public about what soldiers experience during war, while others feel they can "cheapen the impact of war," and be disrespectful to the casualties of both sides of the conflict. If you've ever had mixed feelings about military shooters yourself, or if you're just interested in what our veterans have to say, I highly suggest you check the interview out for yourself.
Email the author Jeff Marchiafava, or follow on Google+, Twitter, and Game Informer.
This is somewhat overused I know, but it's a game. I have the utmost respect for our military and the sacrifices they make, but this game isn't being made to attack the military. It's to show a semi-realistic representation of what goes on across the sea. I don't believe EA meant for this to be offensive and I personally don't think it's a huge deal.
This is just like the controversy when Infinity Ward put the "Airport Terrorist" level in Modern Warfare 2. It's just a perspective and a way to expand on the something such as a war.
oh no usmc ?
Playing as the Taliban dosent really bother me, but it's the fact that in the game they use IED's when playing as the Taliban, also detonated by cell phones, and for me that's taking it a little too far
The reason why it might be a big deal to everyone is because they might of lost a friend or family member and its hard to take that in till this day. Now me, I don't think its a big deal like what @TK Baha said because yea, its a semi-realistaic. Its suppose to show how it is over seas. I don't think they did it on purpose. Beside, how about Call of Duties games. You play as a terrorist there. And World at War lets you play as Nazi's. So everyone else be the judge. I just say its a game.
Well the soldiers aren't near as critical as the politics. Jack Thompson will probably sue this just like he did with the Grand Theft Auto games. Hillary clinton will cry out "Stealing the innocence of America's youth" and we go from there
No EA should absolutely not put the Taliban in the game as playable characters. It is absolutely wrong in every aspect, in other words they may as well just pledge their allegiance to the Taliban and start shooting our soldiers. (end rant)
It may be more now news which is why it's such a big news story. But how different is it then in BC 2 where you play as a Russian killing U.S. soldiers. In the end it's just a video game in my opinion.
I don't mind, and I have respect the military. I mean, EA just wanted to give gamers the Medal of Honor experience: fighting the real enemy and telling the soldier's experience. Also, we've seen controversy before, what's so different now?
ugh, i watched this story on youtube and now it looks like fox news is now sniffing up someones ass because they got nothing better to do but hire dumbass reporters and interview complete morons for supposedly interesting stories.
its a game they arent glorifying the taliban in any way. The campaigns story is about the US military and thats all that matters
THAT doesn't bother me. However, what bothers me is that the news media killed the chance of the Fallujah Marines simulator game but this is ok. Why not make a realistic war simulator about a conflict that is as fresh in our memories as our last holiday.
At least THAT (simulator) game would present some of the slow, slow, sprint, slow of actual war and teach some people how thin the line is between life and death out there.
also that health doesn't recharge in real life and that aiming so well so quick is more difficult than one might think.
Look on the bright side...if you're not playing as the Taliban...at least you get to shoot the Taliban.
My personal view on this interview is it's kind of a cheap trick. First of all, we don't know a thing about the background of those that were interviewed. They might not have ever even deployed to a hostile area. So them speaking for the "military" is kind of misleading.
I'm active duty Navy. I did a tour in Iraq...yet I don't feel I am at all qualified to answer whether this is disrespectful to the military or not. Why don't we ask the guys (and girls) who were shot at, shot up or shot down. I'd have a hard time saying it isn't disrespectful if I were standing next to someone who sustained severe injuries at the hand of the Taliban who thought it was.
I don't think playing as the Taliban is as bad as shooting american soldiers like in Modern Warfare 2
Hmm, funny how not a single person thought the this years Best Picture Winner was disrespectful to soldiers or "lessened" the impact of war. OOOOHHHH, that's right, I forgot this was a video game, and therefore not to be taken seriously. Silly me, for a second I thought we lived in a world where more people play and buy video games than go to the movie theatres....
Bottom line its a game nuff said. Seriously.