It is currently Tue Jun 18, 2013 10:51 pm
Major Banter wrote:Cos that's 70 years ago.
Phott wrote:You sound like the game is supposed to be realistic but they failed.. I'm gonna go and laugh at *insert any non-realistic game here* right now because it's unrealistic and suck bawls.
Aicever wrote:From gameplay-view there's nothing that justifies the existence of this scene in the game. It's clear the developers included it just for the controversy and shock value. Getting people talk about the game means more sales for them. They don't really care what people think about it. For them it's just a cheap marketing trick, nothing more. Sadly it works..
Major Banter wrote:...More to the point, in those games you're fighting for a damn good cause against a willing enemy; not just gunning down people graphically to make a point. S'all.
Dionysos wrote:My point is that there's really no particular "moral" difference between displaying ww2 and todays conflict; if anything, WW2 was A LOT worse.
Highlight to read:My bro let me play it today. Your an undercover CIA agent with the Russians in the mission...you DON'T have to shoot anyone yourself, civilians that is. You do fight some Russian SWATS later on. But you can chose not to fire your gun at the innocents. Though it doesnt make any difference to the story/outcome. Also at the end, The terrorists end up shooting you, as they know your a spy. Your character basically just got dragged into this fucked up scenario. It's an intense and touchy subject I know, but the media and alot of people (who haven't even played it) seem to be forgetting the game's contents. It warns you it has disturbing stuff, everyone is just taking this one scenario out of context from the whole game.
Mr-Jigsaw wrote:But shooting unarmed civilians has never been the object of the mission(for successful mainstream games).
Given that "criminal" is not mutually-exclusive with "civilian", I find it interesting that you seem to desire "hard and fast rules" and then turn around and go the comparative-morality route where unprovoked murder is OK depending on the allegations against the person being murdered.your real objectives are mostly criminals who are armed and most likely deserve it.
The Hollow Night wrote:Anybody also remember Postal 2? THAT was far far worse, (pouring gasoline over innocent people, lighting them, then pissing on them to put the fire out) just one example...
Users browsing this forum: No registered users