SHP Forums

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Military bases across the U.S. have banned the sale of a new video game that lets a player pretend to be a Taliban fighter and "shoot" U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

"Medal of Honor" by Electronic Arts, a major game developer based in Redwood City, Calif., hits stores Oct. 12. Gamers are scoffing at the decision, saying that advanced technology has made it commonplace in the gaming world to let players switch sides and play the bad guy.

After public protests, including by British Defense Secretary Liam Fox, U.S. military officials decided not to stock the game in any of the nearly 300 base exchange shops.

The game also won't be sold at any of the 49 GameStop stores located on various military bases. Troops will be allowed to own copies, but they would have to buy them off-base.

"We regret any inconvenience this may cause authorized shoppers, but are optimistic that they will understand the sensitivity to the life-and-death scenarios this product presents as entertainment," said Maj. Gen. Bruce Casella, who commands the Army & Air Force Exchange Service, which oversees more than 180 base exchange shops.

Casella made the decision last week, with the Navy quickly following suit. Kathleen Martin, a spokeswoman for the Navy Exchange Service Command, said the game won't be sold at any of the Navy's 104 exchange shops "out of respect for the men and women serving and their families."

Past versions of the 11-year old "Medal of Honor" game have been set in World War II, allowing players to act as either members of the Allied force or the Nazi regime.

The latest version is set in modern Afghanistan, where some 140,000 U.S. and NATO troops are fighting the Taliban. The story is told through a small group of characters known as "Tier 1" operators, elite fighters who take their orders directly from the president and defense secretary.

"Operating directly under the National Command Authority, a relatively unknown entity of hand-picked warriors are called on when the mission must not fail," according to an online description of the video game by Electronic Arts.

The website does not advertise the fact that the multiplayer version allows a player to role-play as a member of the Taliban.

One online promotion features video interviews with Special Operations personnel who the company says served as consultants to improve the authenticity of the game. The faces of the men interviewed were blurred and their names not given.

"By me being a part of it, I at least have some say on how the community is represented," one man says.

Britain's Fox said last month that he was "disgusted and angry" by what was a "tasteless product." Fox called on retailers to show their support for the troops by not selling it.

"At the hands of the Taliban, children have lost fathers and wives have lost husbands," Fox said. "It's shocking that someone would think it acceptable to recreate the acts of the Taliban against British soldiers."

Electronic Arts did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Spokeswoman Amanda Taggart was quoted last month by the Sunday Times as saying video gamers routinely play both good guys and bad guys.

"Most of us have been doing this since we were 7: Someone plays cop, someone must be robber," the newspaper quoted her as saying.

If you play the Nazis in previous MoH games, I don't see how playing terrorists is any worse. You could even play terrorists in SWAT 2 and let's not forget Counter-Strike, so it's certainly been done before this.

America's Army came up with a great method for dealing with this: everyone ALWAYS see their own side as American soldiers and ALWAYS see the enemy as terrorists. So no matter who's playing on which team, they're always "the good guys" while fighting "the bad guys."

Is it in bad taste and just all around tacky? Hell yes.

Bannable? I don't think so.

I love this part:

This article wrote:Britain's Fox said last month that he was "disgusted and angry" by what was a "tasteless product." Fox called on retailers to show their support for the troops by not selling it.

"At the hands of the Taliban, children have lost fathers and wives have lost husbands," Fox said. "It's shocking that someone would think it acceptable to recreate the acts of the Taliban against British soldiers."

Anyone with any kind of imagination would realise that the opposite is also true.

Sigh... war is terrible, and its first casualty is always the truth (particularly inconvenient truths)...

Solution: Stop making realistic war games. Problem solved.

They're only banning the game in military bases - which makes all kinds of sense from a safety and morale perspective. When you want to win a war, you don't let your troops play a game that allows them to sympathize with the enemy. Also, since this game is based on current events, being able to play as a Taliban makes light of what some of these people have faced first-hand and could incite some physical violence on-base. But since they don't actually ban the presence of the game, it seems more like the military is simply trying to cover their legal butts by refusing to stock it.

Datadog wrote:They're only banning the game in military bases - which makes all kinds of sense from a safety and morale perspective. When you want to win a war, you don't let your troops play a game that allows them to sympathize with the enemy. Also, since this game is based on current events, being able to play as a Taliban makes light of what some of these people have faced first-hand and could incite some physical violence on-base. But since they don't actually ban the presence of the game, it seems more like the military is simply trying to cover their legal butts by refusing to stock it.

This is a very good point.

There are a lot of families who've lost relatives in Afghanistan and Iraq over the last decade or so. Because this war is recent (and still going on), it's in poor taste.

I suppose the difference between being able to play as the Taliban versus the Nazis is that we're at least a generation or two removed from WW2. While we know of the atrocities the Nazis committed and how horrific WW2 was, we didn't live through it nor did we have parents who fought in it. We don't know anyone personally who lost their lives in WW2. We've heard stories and maybe lost a relative we MIGHT have known later after we were born, but otherwise, we never experienced the loss of a father/mother/brother/sister due to war.

As far as a game is concerned, even though it's in poor taste, I don't see what's so bad about being able to play the opposite side. Then again, I've never fought in combat nor do I know anyone (aside from my grandfather in WW2) who has.

Datadog is also right in that soldiers cannot see their enemy as real people. Maybe that sounds harsh, but the fact is if you're going to kill the enemy, they have to remain simply "the enemy" instead of individuals who have lives, hopes, dreams, and family. You can rest assured the opposing side does that as well.

The military trains its troops to kill, period. This killing can be in defense or offense, but the fact remains they're a weapon and weapons have only one purpose: to kill the enemy.

While the Nazis were far worse than the Taliban, even given how barbaric with their own set of unforgivable atrocities, the main difference is that the Taliban are current. There are people that are still suffering from them. The wounds are too fresh. I abhor censorship, but they should have had better sense. Just because something is legal to do does not make it a good idea. Just as the idiot preacher the wants to burn the Koran has the legal right to do so, a right that I would not take away, does not make it a good idea without serious consequences.

Given the climate in this country it may turn out to be a bad decision on Electronic Arts' part, as a boycott might grow. If it does, they will have no one to blame but themselves. Especially since a very good solution exists. As noted by DeadPoolX, they could have made all players see themselves as the good guys and the opponents as the bad guys.

In the end, I don't see the ban as that big of a deal. They can buy it elsewhere. It just makes getting it a little more inconvenient.

DeadPoolX wrote:

Datadog wrote:They're only banning the game in military bases - which makes all kinds of sense from a safety and morale perspective. When you want to win a war, you don't let your troops play a game that allows them to sympathize with the enemy. Also, since this game is based on current events, being able to play as a Taliban makes light of what some of these people have faced first-hand and could incite some physical violence on-base. But since they don't actually ban the presence of the game, it seems more like the military is simply trying to cover their legal butts by refusing to stock it.

This is a very good point.

There are a lot of families who've lost relatives in Afghanistan and Iraq over the last decade or so. Because this war is recent (and still going on), it's in poor taste.

I suppose the difference between being able to play as the Taliban versus the Nazis is that we're at least a generation or two removed from WW2. While we know of the atrocities the Nazis committed and how horrific WW2 was, we didn't live through it nor did we have parents who fought in it. We don't know anyone personally who lost their lives in WW2. We've heard stories and maybe lost a relative we MIGHT have known later after we were born, but otherwise, we never experienced the loss of a father/mother/brother/sister due to war...

I understand and sympathise very strongly with the points made both by Datadog and DPX. These are very good and very valid points.

On one point, however, I must disagree: while I don't personally know anyone who lost their life in WW2, both my grandparents went through that horror from the Soviet side. Though she is 93, my grandmother still remembers the war. My grandfather, though he died many years ago, fought in the battle of Stalingrad - the most horrific siege in the history of sieges - and lived to tell the tale. Some members of my family were either taken to Nazi work camps or Soviet gulags. Indeed, my father's mother was sent to a Soviet gulag to do 10 years' hard labor because she dared to re-tell a joke she heard about Stalin. Someone overheard her and told the KGB, who came the next day and took her away. My dad never saw his mom again. Neither I, nor my sisters, ever had a grandmother on my dad's side.

So yeah. Whilst I never personally lost anyone to war, many people very close to me have - and I personally consider role-playing a Nazi soldier (or, for that matter, a Soviet one) to be in rather poor taste.

Now, obviously, your families' experiences in the war had been different, so YMMV. But I hope you understand my point-of-view. There, I said it - I feel better.

Hey, did anyone else notice that the title of this thread says "Metal of Honor"?

Anyway...

I probably shouldn't say "Nazi soldier" since not all Germans belonged to that party. By and large, when playing on the German side, you're part of the Wehrmacht. Usually this means the player character is part of the Heer and less often, the Luftwaffe or Kriegsmarine.

The only times I've played the German side have been in Panzer General, European Air War, and Aces of the Deep (I don't think Red Baron counts since that's WW1). I should emphasize that I play the Allied side far more often, but sometimes I like a change of pace.

DeadPoolX wrote:Hey, did anyone else notice that the title of this thread says "Metal of Honor"?

Well it was me posting it - is it a surprise I put METAL instead of MEDAL?

Metal forever. (As in music!)

Will fixy now.

DeadPoolX wrote:Hey, did anyone else notice that the title of this thread says "Metal of Honor"?

Yep. I wasn't sure if to say anything, though - I know Tawmis loves his metal!

DeadPoolX wrote:I probably shouldn't say "Nazi soldier" since not all Germans belonged to that party. By and large, when playing on the German side, you're part of the Wehrmacht. Usually this means the player character is part of the Heer and less often, the Luftwaffe or Kriegsmarine.

Hmm. OK, I know what you mean - it wasn't exactly right, what I said - not all Germans subscribed to the National Socialists. There were many Germans who risked their lives and/or well-being by helping Jews, gypsies, and other so-called untermenschen, and many more Germans who protested the insane Nazi ideology and the way the war was going. I am grateful for all their efforts. Sadly, many of them were - to use the chilling Nazi phrase - "liquidated". It is so sad that a country that gave the world such thinkers as Neitsche etc., such artists as Wagner, and such beautiful accomplishments as the castles at Neuschwanstein and Linderhof, should also have been ruled by such brutes as Bismarck and Hitler. But I guess that's true for any country, at some least in some stage in its history.

Anyway, I have tried shooters in the past (e.g. Doom, Wolfenstein, etc.) just to see what all the fuss was about. I never particularly liked FPSs - the constant moving around and watching out just made me feel nauseous and gave me a headache. It's funny how I never got that feeling when I played Oblivion, though... *shrug* Don't know why.

Rath Darkblade wrote: It is so sad that a country that gave the world such thinkers as Neitsche etc., such artists as Wagner, and such beautiful accomplishments as the castles at Neuschwanstein and Linderhof, should also have been ruled by such brutes as Bismarck and Hitler. But I guess that's true for any country, at some least in some stage in its history.

I wouldn't compare Bismarck to Hitler. The first one, while certainly harsh and tough in his political positions, was undoubtedly a political genius, while the other, well, how to put it? He wasn't even a good general, and the rest of his character is as much a story of madness as it is of ignorance and self-hatred.

Something to remember about DOOM and Wolfenstein 3D (and other early FPS titles) is that FPS development in the early 90s was at the same stage the Adventure genre was at during the early 80s. It'd be ludicrous to say KQ1 had a good story, which is the very crux of Adventures. It was simplistic, but fun since it brought something new to gaming. The same is true of those early FPS games.

I think the reason you didn't get sick when playing Oblivion is that the movement is slower. You don't dash here and there or have to deal with a war zone around you. From what I've gathered, Oblivion is a lot like Morrowind and Fallout 3 in that combat certainly exists, but the game can be played at a slower, more cautious pace.

Oh and just so you know, if I play DOOM or Wolfenstein 3D on my current PC, I feel nauseous as well. It's the movement -- it's TOO smooth. I'm used to characters moving as if they were real people and DOOM and Wolfenstein 3D act as if you're on a hovercraft or something.

Rath Darkblade wrote:Hmm. OK, I know what you mean - it wasn't exactly right, what I said - not all Germans subscribed to the National Socialists. There were many Germans who risked their lives and/or well-being by helping Jews, gypsies, and other so-called untermenschen, and many more Germans who protested the insane Nazi ideology and the way the war was going. I am grateful for all their efforts. Sadly, many of them were - to use the chilling Nazi phrase - "liquidated". It is so sad that a country that gave the world such thinkers as Neitsche etc., such artists as Wagner, and such beautiful accomplishments as the castles at Neuschwanstein and Linderhof, should also have been ruled by such brutes as Bismarck and Hitler. But I guess that's true for any country, at some least in some stage in its history.

This is important to note that the first people to die at the hands of the Nazis were Germans. Equating All Germans with Nazis would be the same as equating all of Islam with Al Qaeda or the Taliban. Certainly Germany is not the font of all fascism. Fascism has read its ugly head all over the world. It can arise anywhere ultra nationalism grows. It relies on an us versus them mentality.