Telling the Truth to A Culture of Lies (Video)

There's A Soldier in All of UsMark LeVine, professor of history at UC Irvine, writes in Al Jazeera:

If there’s anyone who doesn’t think the world — and particularly the United States — desperately needs WikiLeaks, I offer you “Exhibit A” of why this is the case: the star-studded official trailer for the “Call of Duty: Black Ops” first person shooter video game. Regular readers of this column might recall my November 16 article, “Nowhere Left to Run,” where I discussed the cultural implications of “Black Ops” after spotting a poster for the game in a Berlin subway around the time of its release.

Since then I have seen the trailer, whose slogan is “There’s a soldier in all of us” and features both ordinary people — a secretary, fry cook, hotel concierge, and the like — along with celebrities like Los Angeles Lakers guard Kobe Bryant, and late night American talk show host Jimmy Kimmel.

After watching the trailer I was so exasperated I emailed a colleague at the Center for Middle Eastern Studies here at Lund and asked him, “Where is Ice Cube when you need him?” His reply stunned me: “LoL you don’t know where Ice Cube is? He’s doing the voice of Bowman in ‘Black Ops’…”

In case you’re not a hiphop fan, once upon a time Ice Cube was the terror of law abiding white citizens across America as a member of the highly political gangsta rap group NWA. In fact, their song “F*** Da Police” almost got them into as much trouble with the US government as is Julian Assange today.

But those days are long forgotten. Today Mr. Cube spends his time, when not playing secret service agents in movies, providing the voice for one of the lead characters in “Black Ops.”

But it’s not just hiphop that’s prostituted itself to violence and big corporations. The rock n’ roll establishment has equally shamed itself, as none other than the Rolling Stones allowed their song “Gimme Shelter,” one of the most important anti-war songs of the Vietnam era, to be used as the soundtrack for the trailer, which shows Kobe Bryant smiling widely as he and innumerable other “ordinary” people blast away an unseen enemy in a clearly Middle Eastern landscape (not surprisingly, digital sales of the song and other Stones hits spiked in the wake of the trailer’s release).

Read more here.

, , , , , , , , ,

65 Responses to Telling the Truth to A Culture of Lies (Video)

  1. justagirl December 28, 2010 at 7:49 pm #

    someone should duct tape good german’s hands and throw him in the closet.

  2. justagirl December 28, 2010 at 11:49 pm #

    someone should duct tape good german’s hands and throw him in the closet.

  3. hunter349 December 28, 2010 at 7:52 pm #

    Calm down. It’s a game. A fun one at that. The game takes place in Russia, Cuba, Hong Kong, Vietnam, The Arctic, USA, and Laos. The premise of the game is special operations during the cold war. In fact the Russians are the bad guys in this game. There are NO middle eastern missions in the game. When you see a war torn rubble do you automatically think Middle East?
    It’s a fictional story, it is no way any more controversial than any other war game. Deep Breaths.

    • Hadrian999 December 28, 2010 at 8:18 pm #

      I agree, It is a horrifically shallow and mindless game but it’s just a game designed to make money off the
      macho tough guys who are afraid to get off their couch, not some mind control program

  4. Anonymous December 28, 2010 at 11:52 pm #

    Calm down. It’s a game. A fun one at that. The game takes place in Russia, Cuba, Hong Kong, Vietnam, The Arctic, USA, and Laos. The premise of the game is special operations during the cold war. In fact the Russians are the bad guys in this game. There are NO middle eastern missions in the game. When you see a war torn rubble do you automatically think Middle East?
    It’s a fictional story, it is no way any more controversial than any other war game. Deep Breaths.

  5. Hadrian999 December 29, 2010 at 12:18 am #

    I agree, It is a horrifically shallow and mindless game but it’s just a game designed to make money off the
    macho tough guys who are afraid to get off their couch, not some mind control program

  6. Liam_McGonagle December 28, 2010 at 8:52 pm #

    Yes, I agree it SOUNDS horrible. But the practical implications are just about zero.

    There may well be a “soldier in every American”, but he/she’ll never get out. He/she’d have to crawl out through something like 20 lbs of lard to get out, given that we’re something like the #1 Most Obese Nation in The Developed World.

    http://www.forbes.com/2007/02/07/worlds-fattest-countries-forbeslife-cx_ls_0208worldfat_2.html

    Sure, that’s from 2007. And top 8 are like thirdworld feudal states or puppet nations in the Pacific Ocean. But damn it, WE LEAD THE DEVELOPED WORLD IN BMI! In fact, BMI of 30=obesity, and for that year our average BMI was 74.1. More than twice the required amount of lard-assitude.

    • hunter349 December 29, 2010 at 8:34 am #

      It has it’s upside. I went fly fishing today and walked about half a mile to get to the stream. That is much too far a distance for most Americans to even consider walking. As a result it was a nice secluded day with all the cows still locked in their living rooms.

      • Guest December 29, 2010 at 2:25 pm #

        I wish I could go fly fishing. Can’t wait for spring!

  7. Liam_McGonagle December 29, 2010 at 12:52 am #

    Yes, I agree it SOUNDS horrible. But the practical implications are just about zero.

    There may well be a “soldier in every American”, but he/she’ll never get out. He/she’d have to crawl out through something like 20 lbs of lard to get out, given that we’re something like the #1 Most Obese Nation in The Developed World.

    http://www.forbes.com/2007/02/07/worlds-fattest-countries-forbeslife-cx_ls_0208worldfat_2.html

    Sure, that’s from 2007. And top 8 are like thirdworld feudal states or puppet nations in the Pacific Ocean. But damn it, WE LEAD THE DEVELOPED WORLD IN BMI! In fact, BMI of 30=obesity, and for that year our average BMI was 74.1. More than twice the required amount of lard-assitude.

  8. Josh December 28, 2010 at 9:39 pm #

    While I am kind of bothered that they used an anti-war song in the trailer, you are being completely and utterly ridiculous.

    It’s a game.

  9. Josh December 29, 2010 at 1:39 am #

    While I am kind of bothered that they used an anti-war song in the trailer, you are being completely and utterly ridiculous.

    It’s a game.

  10. Nano_Thermite_911 December 28, 2010 at 11:59 pm #

    This commercial is disgusting. Glamorizing war, desensitizing Americans further from the reality of their tax funded occupational missions abroad. Kobe Bryant should be fucking ashamed of himself. This shit aint no fucking video game for people who bear the brunt of the violence on both sides of the conflict.

    I don’t care how many points you score per game (the shit really doesn’t matter one fucking bit) but at least be mindful of what you are doing with your namesake. And if you really believe in this type of conflict why not sign up like Pat Tillman or Joe Louis? See how the government treats real soldiers.

    This shit is WACK.

  11. Nano_Thermite_911 December 29, 2010 at 3:59 am #

    This commercial is disgusting. Glamorizing war, desensitizing Americans further from the reality of their tax funded occupational missions abroad. Kobe Bryant should be fucking ashamed of himself. This shit aint no fucking video game for people who bear the brunt of the violence on both sides of the conflict.

    I don’t care how many points you score per game (the shit really doesn’t matter one fucking bit) but at least be mindful of what you are doing with your namesake. And if you really believe in this type of conflict why not sign up like Pat Tillman or Joe Louis? See how the government treats real soldiers.

    This shit is WACK.

  12. GoodDoktorBad December 29, 2010 at 12:05 am #

    My main problem with games like this (I play them) is that they tend to trivialize war in a unrealistic way. Killing is not the game games like this make it out to be. It will be a sad day for all the guys who want to join the military because of this game and others like it when they watch themselves or there buddy get blown up for real. Then, the fun is over…..

  13. Anonymous December 29, 2010 at 4:05 am #

    My main problem with games like this (I play them) is that they tend to trivialize war in a unrealistic way. Killing is not the game games like this make it out to be. It will be a sad day for all the guys who want to join the military because of this game and others like it when they watch themselves or there buddy get blown up for real. Then, the fun is over…..

  14. Launcelotgobbo December 29, 2010 at 2:39 am #

    Whatever stupid things Americans do, its going to turn around and bite them in the ass. History has shown that all that asshole-r-us-and-proud-of-it bullshit ended somewhere in 2006 and everything is falling down like a pack of cards around the Ameridiots. America will stay fucked as long as they let corrupt jews rule washington and 20 years from now all the republican rednecks will either be drunk jobless SOBs wandering around decayed mid-western cities or getting their throats slit somewhere in the middle-east or some godforsaken jungle in asia. Keep up the good work

  15. Launcelotgobbo December 29, 2010 at 6:39 am #

    Whatever stupid things Americans do, its going to turn around and bite them in the ass. History has shown that all that asshole-r-us-and-proud-of-it bullshit ended somewhere in 2006 and everything is falling down like a pack of cards around the Ameridiots. America will stay fucked as long as they let corrupt jews rule washington and 20 years from now all the republican rednecks will either be drunk jobless SOBs wandering around decayed mid-western cities or getting their throats slit somewhere in the middle-east or some godforsaken jungle in asia. Keep up the good work

  16. ripley December 29, 2010 at 3:15 am #

    Hasn’t the world just become a little too politically correct? Come on, we all know it’s a video game. I’d play it whether I was shooting South Africans (that’s me), English, Americans or Afghani’s. Surely the average thinking person is aware it’s just a mindless means of escapism and that war or even murder is not a trivial thing? Come on now people, if I read a Stephen King novel I don’t suddenly become a clown that lurks in drains and lures little children! If I have fun playing a video game where I shoot the s**t out of people I don’t suddenly sign up for military service thinking that I’ll never die. Just employ some common sense would ya?! Sheesh!

    • none December 29, 2010 at 1:21 pm #

      @ripley….I agree completely and personally find the commercial quite funny. What scares me however is that there are unfortunately people out there that have some sort of psychological issues that keep them from drawing a fine line between reality and the video games they play.

      Personally I play video games to compete and being a stereotypical adult male, I like guns, what can i say. I should point out that I don’t own any guns in real life and unless my life or the lives of those that I love were endangered, I could never kill someone. Ohh and I like exotic sports cars too, even though owning one in real life would be completely pointless and a huge waste of money, so instead I play Forza once in awhile.

    • Andrew December 29, 2010 at 1:55 pm #

      Those examples are reductio ad absurdum straw men. The argument is not that the game makes you a killer, it’s that games and advertisements like these make war more acceptable to society in general.

      • Hadrian999 December 29, 2010 at 2:21 pm #

        I don’t know if i can agree with you here, war and violence have been the foundation of our society since it’s begining, i don’t think they have ever been unacceptable or taboo in america

        • Andrew December 29, 2010 at 3:02 pm #

          Would “propagandistic media–these games and advertisements being only modern examples–have helped keep war acceptable to society throughout history” be more accurate?

          • Hadrian999 December 29, 2010 at 4:15 pm #

            it’s a hard question, it’s along the same lines of the chicken or egg thing, are we violent because of our culture or is our culture a reflection of our nature. I would be happier if these games showed a more accurate reflection of the nature and morality of war, less about good and evil more about the grey area it really is. this game ignores all the morally questionable actions of the us govt during the cold war in favor of a simplistic good vs. bad story, it could have been much more interesting.

          • Liam_McGonagle December 29, 2010 at 5:43 pm #

            Well, it does all bring to my mind the question: “Why don’t we ever see big rollouts for games w/ titles like: “Medic: Life Saver” or some shit like that?”

            Theoretically, at least, wouldn’t it be possible to situate more morally appealing games in equally adreneline-pumping scenarios?

            Or is there just a quicker, cheaper or somehow more “satisfying” biological payoff to squashing someone’s skull instead of rescuing someone?

          • Hadrian999 December 29, 2010 at 5:57 pm #

            i didn’t make the games about more moral actions, i meant show war as less a good vs. evil morality play and show what kind of consequiences and situations happen in war.

          • Liam_McGonagle December 29, 2010 at 6:20 pm #

            Sorry if I made it sound as if I was portraying a moral agenda in your comment.

            I tried (apparently not successfully) to take credit for my own interpretation of what I saw as the “culture vs. biological nature” issue touched upon, even if only briefly, in your earlier comment. I guess I was wondering if there is some a-moral biological imperative being catered to in these games, and the extent to which they might be culturally re-moulded.

            But fuck that cloud talk for now. To get to your point about games displaying consequences/actual situations of war, that strikes me as a tough one.

            It’s probably one thing to understand intellectually, but I imagine it’s quite another to experience first hand the way that the most basic assumptions civilians take for granted are violated, sometimes casually, sometimes gleefully, in actual combat.

            I get pissed off when a waiter fucks up my order at a restaurant. But I’m not quite sure how I’d take it when I stop by the roadside to help/inspect an apparently “stalled” vehicle and find out it was all a set up to splatter my guts all over the place, etc., etc. That is a violation of trust of a whole other magnitude.

            Not sure how a game could begin to address that issue without trivializing it.

          • Hadrian999 December 29, 2010 at 6:43 pm #

            it can go both ways in war sometimes the stalled vihicle is a bomb ambush that gets you, sometimes it’s just a stalled vihicle and a family gets wiped out because a soldier expected it to be a bomb or that car speeding up to a convoy really is just a stupid driver and he gets killed because of it, in games the choices are always too clean, a soldier on deployment has to live with uncertanty 24/7 and with the consequences of the actions he took even if there were no alternative, games like this do a disservice to soldiers by portraying life in combat as a clean morally clear environment.

    • Dimitri Dee December 30, 2010 at 11:41 pm #

      But what happens when you give that Stephen king book to an 8 year old, or a 10 year old. And to answer below? who cares if america has violence as some sort of foundation? Maybe its time to change that. Look where it got us so far. Do you think that its okay for someone to go and play massive violent video games to unwind? I mean its like anything else, moderation. But we see it EVERY WHERES in our society.

      This is why I worry sometimes. Our society is crashing all around us and we keep making excuses as to why we should just keep things the way they are. People its not working. Take ur heads out of your asses before its too late.

      Its not an issue of video game violence. Its an issue of violence in our culture.

  17. ripley December 29, 2010 at 7:15 am #

    Hasn’t the world just become a little too politically correct? Come on, we all know it’s a video game. I’d play it whether I was shooting South Africans (that’s me), English, Americans or Afghani’s. Surely the average thinking person is aware it’s just a mindless means of escapism and that war or even murder is not a trivial thing? Come on now people, if I read a Stephen King novel I don’t suddenly become a clown that lurks in drains and lures little children! If I have fun playing a video game where I shoot the s**t out of people I don’t suddenly sign up for military service thinking that I’ll never die. Just employ some common sense would ya?! Sheesh!

  18. Anonymous December 29, 2010 at 12:34 pm #

    It has it’s upside. I went fly fishing today and walked about half a mile to get to the stream. That is much too far a distance for most Americans to even consider walking. As a result it was a nice secluded day with all the cows still locked in their living rooms.

  19. Ironaddict06 December 29, 2010 at 12:03 pm #

    YO peeps its alla about da dalla.

  20. Ironaddict06 December 29, 2010 at 4:03 pm #

    YO peeps its alla about da dalla.

  21. Rufus December 29, 2010 at 12:22 pm #

    Wow, way to over analyze a game that had to be made. It had to be made becasue of the money that was made off the last game. Now, considering this one made over a billion dollars already (google it), there will have to be another sequel made. Go ahead and start writing your next angry letter becuase the next trailer will probably show a digitized Ghandi shooting North Koreans and the theme song will be “Give Peace a Chance”.

    Why cant we all just play Halo Reach and then we can hate the Covenant together in politcally correct heaven.

    • Andrew December 29, 2010 at 1:11 pm #

      “Over analyze” usually means “come to a conclusion that makes me uncomfortable.”

      • Rufus December 29, 2010 at 2:22 pm #

        Thank you for that useless reply. I was stating that it was about money. I am no more comfortable with the media brainwashing we all receive daily than anyone else is, but if there is money to be made and no one stands up to this type of thing, it will continue.

        • Andrew December 29, 2010 at 4:59 pm #

          My reply spurred you to explain your point, and I agree with it, so it wasn’t totally useless.

          • Rufus December 30, 2010 at 12:32 pm #

            touche’

  22. Rufus December 29, 2010 at 4:22 pm #

    Wow, way to over analyze a game that had to be made. It had to be made becasue of the money that was made off the last game. Now, considering this one made over a billion dollars already (google it), there will have to be another sequel made. Go ahead and start writing your next angry letter becuase the next trailer will probably show a digitized Ghandi shooting North Koreans and the theme song will be “Give Peace a Chance”.

    Why cant we all just play Halo Reach and then we can hate the Covenant together in politcally correct heaven.

  23. Andrew December 29, 2010 at 5:11 pm #

    “Over analyze” usually means “come to a conclusion that makes me uncomfortable.”

  24. none December 29, 2010 at 5:21 pm #

    @ripley….I agree completely and personally find the commercial quite funny. What scares me however is that there are unfortunately people out there that have some sort of psychological issues that keep them from drawing a fine line between reality and the video games they play.

    Personally I play video games to compete and being a stereotypical adult male, I like guns, what can i say. I should point out that I don’t own any guns in real life and unless my life or the lives of those that I love were endangered, I could never kill someone. Ohh and I like exotic sports cars too, even though owning one in real life would be completely pointless and a huge waste of money, so instead I play Forza once in awhile.

  25. Andrew December 29, 2010 at 5:55 pm #

    Those examples are reductio ad absurdum straw men. The argument is not that the game makes you a killer, it’s that games and advertisements like these make war more acceptable to society in general.

  26. Hadrian999 December 29, 2010 at 6:21 pm #

    I don’t know if i can agree with you here, war and violence have been the foundation of our society since it’s begining, i don’t think they have ever been unacceptable or taboo in america

  27. Rufus December 29, 2010 at 6:22 pm #

    Thank you for that useless reply. I was stating that it was about money. I am no more comfortable with the media brainwashing we all receive daily than anyone else is, but if there is money to be made and no one stands up to this type of thing, it will continue.

  28. Guest December 29, 2010 at 6:25 pm #

    I wish I could go fly fishing. Can’t wait for spring!

  29. 100101 December 29, 2010 at 2:27 pm #

    its just a video game! GET OVER IT

  30. 100101 December 29, 2010 at 6:27 pm #

    its just a video game! GET OVER IT

  31. Andrew December 29, 2010 at 7:02 pm #

    Would “propagandistic media–these games and advertisements being only modern examples–have helped keep war acceptable to society throughout history” be more accurate?

  32. Hadrian999 December 29, 2010 at 8:15 pm #

    it’s a hard question, it’s along the same lines of the chicken or egg thing, are we violent because of our culture or is our culture a reflection of our nature. I would be happier if these games showed a more accurate reflection of the nature and morality of war, less about good and evil more about the grey area it really is. this game ignores all the morally questionable actions of the us govt during the cold war in favor of a simplistic good vs. bad story, it could have been much more interesting.

  33. Andrew December 29, 2010 at 8:59 pm #

    My reply spurred you to explain your point, and I agree with it, so it wasn’t totally useless.

  34. ken vallario December 29, 2010 at 5:10 pm #

    i play these games a lot…i am a visual artist, and the visual experience is too deep for me to avoid. I am a pacifist, and I do think there is a legitimate case to be made that these games nurture violent tendencies. but it is only a theory. there is also a case to be made that these games give an outlet to the hunting instinct, to the combative drive inside all humans, possibly more so on the male side.

    at the end of the day, i think violence is the issue, not any reproduction of violence. i would love to live in a world where the military was non-existent and yet, we could still play Call of Duty games. an argument about violence in a video game is as artificial as the violence itself. what we are appalled by is not the look, or the feel, or the experience of violence, it is the ‘fact’ of violence, the cessation of peoples’ lives, who cannot respawn, who do not see it as a game.

    when we are engaged in a Team Deathmatch, there is an understanding of immortality, that does not exist in real life. and this immortality, much like chess (which is simply an analog version of Call of Duty), allows us to engage in strategy, and this is what we are enjoying, we are enjoying a battle of wits. anybody who has ever played these games knows the thrill of being outsmarted by an opponent, who has figured out our thinking and used our expectations to take the advantage.

    the real soldiers, the ones who live as soldiers on the ‘outside’, those are the ones we ought to be arguing with, but that is a much more dangerous argument. who among you would feel comfortable in a battle of wits with a human being who sees no moral imperative against shooting you? these games appeal to a lot of pacifists for exactly this reason, because we are able to inhabit (at a distance), the life of those who are willing to play within a moral realm that we find reprehensible. when i play i am often amazed at the sheer randomness, and how my best laid plans are often destroyed by variables outside of my control, and i am comforted by the fact that my own life is not under siege.

    playing these games has only reinforced my belief that war is absurd and pointless, and so i cannot say that they would encourage young kids to kill, since i believe that there are some kids who grow up wanting to kill and there are those who wish to avoid it. and this is the mystery, and this mystery is ancient.

  35. ken vallario December 29, 2010 at 9:10 pm #

    i play these games a lot…i am a visual artist, and the visual experience is too deep for me to avoid. I am a pacifist, and I do think there is a legitimate case to be made that these games nurture violent tendencies. but it is only a theory. there is also a case to be made that these games give an outlet to the hunting instinct, to the combative drive inside all humans, possibly more so on the male side.

    at the end of the day, i think violence is the issue, not any reproduction of violence. i would love to live in a world where the military was non-existent and yet, we could still play Call of Duty games. an argument about violence in a video game is as artificial as the violence itself. what we are appalled by is not the look, or the feel, or the experience of violence, it is the ‘fact’ of violence, the cessation of peoples’ lives, who cannot respawn, who do not see it as a game.

    when we are engaged in a Team Deathmatch, there is an understanding of immortality, that does not exist in real life. and this immortality, much like chess (which is simply an analog version of Call of Duty), allows us to engage in strategy, and this is what we are enjoying, we are enjoying a battle of wits. anybody who has ever played these games knows the thrill of being outsmarted by an opponent, who has figured out our thinking and used our expectations to take the advantage.

    the real soldiers, the ones who live as soldiers on the ‘outside’, those are the ones we ought to be arguing with, but that is a much more dangerous argument. who among you would feel comfortable in a battle of wits with a human being who sees no moral imperative against shooting you? these games appeal to a lot of pacifists for exactly this reason, because we are able to inhabit (at a distance), the life of those who are willing to play within a moral realm that we find reprehensible. when i play i am often amazed at the sheer randomness, and how my best laid plans are often destroyed by variables outside of my control, and i am comforted by the fact that my own life is not under siege.

    playing these games has only reinforced my belief that war is absurd and pointless, and so i cannot say that they would encourage young kids to kill, since i believe that there are some kids who grow up wanting to kill and there are those who wish to avoid it. and this is the mystery, and this mystery is ancient.

  36. ken vallario December 29, 2010 at 9:10 pm #

    i play these games a lot…i am a visual artist, and the visual experience is too deep for me to avoid. I am a pacifist, and I do think there is a legitimate case to be made that these games nurture violent tendencies. but it is only a theory. there is also a case to be made that these games give an outlet to the hunting instinct, to the combative drive inside all humans, possibly more so on the male side.

    at the end of the day, i think violence is the issue, not any reproduction of violence. i would love to live in a world where the military was non-existent and yet, we could still play Call of Duty games. an argument about violence in a video game is as artificial as the violence itself. what we are appalled by is not the look, or the feel, or the experience of violence, it is the ‘fact’ of violence, the cessation of peoples’ lives, who cannot respawn, who do not see it as a game.

    when we are engaged in a Team Deathmatch, there is an understanding of immortality, that does not exist in real life. and this immortality, much like chess (which is simply an analog version of Call of Duty), allows us to engage in strategy, and this is what we are enjoying, we are enjoying a battle of wits. anybody who has ever played these games knows the thrill of being outsmarted by an opponent, who has figured out our thinking and used our expectations to take the advantage.

    the real soldiers, the ones who live as soldiers on the ‘outside’, those are the ones we ought to be arguing with, but that is a much more dangerous argument. who among you would feel comfortable in a battle of wits with a human being who sees no moral imperative against shooting you? these games appeal to a lot of pacifists for exactly this reason, because we are able to inhabit (at a distance), the life of those who are willing to play within a moral realm that we find reprehensible. when i play i am often amazed at the sheer randomness, and how my best laid plans are often destroyed by variables outside of my control, and i am comforted by the fact that my own life is not under siege.

    playing these games has only reinforced my belief that war is absurd and pointless, and so i cannot say that they would encourage young kids to kill, since i believe that there are some kids who grow up wanting to kill and there are those who wish to avoid it. and this is the mystery, and this mystery is ancient.

  37. Yep its me December 29, 2010 at 5:36 pm #

    I’ve got to disagree a bit. Im as big of a peacenick as you could find…and as non-violent as they come. Yet I’d be lying if I said such games didnt appeal to me…if not so much now, then most certainly in my youth. Its the same as the whole ‘Comic Books can make your children a degenerate” type of arguement…or the “D&D encourages Devil Worship”……its just a game….chill!

  38. Yep its me December 29, 2010 at 9:36 pm #

    I’ve got to disagree a bit. Im as big of a peacenick as you could find…and as non-violent as they come. Yet I’d be lying if I said such games didnt appeal to me…if not so much now, then most certainly in my youth. Its the same as the whole ‘Comic Books can make your children a degenerate” type of arguement…or the “D&D encourages Devil Worship”……its just a game….chill!

  39. Liam_McGonagle December 29, 2010 at 9:43 pm #

    Well, it does all bring to my mind the question: “Why don’t we ever see big rollouts for games w/ titles like: “Medic: Life Saver” or some shit like that?”

    Theoretically, at least, wouldn’t it be possible to situate more morally appealing games in equally adreneline-pumping scenarios?

    Or is there just a quicker, cheaper or somehow more “satisfying” biological payoff to squashing someone’s skull instead of rescuing someone?

  40. Hadrian999 December 29, 2010 at 9:57 pm #

    i didn’t make the games about more moral actions, i meant show war as less a good vs. evil morality play and show what kind of consequiences and situations happen in war.

  41. Liam_McGonagle December 29, 2010 at 10:20 pm #

    Sorry if I made it sound as if I was portraying a moral agenda in your comment.

    I tried (apparently not successfully) to take credit for my own interpretation of what I saw as the “culture vs. biological nature” issue touched upon, even if only briefly, in your earlier comment. I guess I was wondering if there is some a-moral biological imperative being catered to in these games, and the extent to which they might be culturally re-moulded.

    But fuck that cloud talk for now. To get to your point about games displaying consequences/actual situations of war, that strikes me as a tough one.

    It’s probably one thing to understand intellectually, but I imagine it’s quite another to experience first hand the way that the most basic assumptions civilians take for granted are violated, sometimes casually, sometimes gleefully, in actual combat.

    I get pissed off when a waiter fucks up my order at a restaurant. But I’m not quite sure how I’d take it when I stop by the roadside to help/inspect an apparently “stalled” vehicle and find out it was all a set up to splatter my guts all over the place, etc., etc. That is a violation of trust of a whole other magnitude.

    Not sure how a game could begin to address that issue without trivializing it.

  42. Hadrian999 December 29, 2010 at 10:43 pm #

    it can go both ways in war sometimes the stalled vihicle is a bomb ambush that gets you, sometimes it’s just a stalled vihicle and a family gets wiped out because a soldier expected it to be a bomb or that car speeding up to a convoy really is just a stupid driver and he gets killed because of it, in games the choices are always too clean, a soldier on deployment has to live with uncertanty 24/7 and with the consequences of the actions he took even if there were no alternative, games like this do a disservice to soldiers by portraying life in combat as a clean morally clear environment.

  43. Rufus December 30, 2010 at 4:32 pm #

    touche’

  44. Dimitri Dee December 31, 2010 at 3:41 am #

    But what happens when you give that Stephen king book to an 8 year old, or a 10 year old. And to answer below? who cares if america has violence as some sort of foundation? Maybe its time to change that. Look where it got us so far. Do you think that its okay for someone to go and play massive violent video games to unwind? I mean its like anything else, moderation. But we see it EVERY WHERES in our society.

    This is why I worry sometimes. Our society is crashing all around us and we keep making excuses as to why we should just keep things the way they are. People its not working. Take ur heads out of your asses before its too late.

    Its not an issue of video game violence. Its an issue of violence in our culture.

  45. Seven Dowdell June 2, 2011 at 2:54 am #

    Awww man……i really like this commercial…it’s so badass but what i really dont like -especially since in the campiagn your playing through the cold war- is that there background is middleeastern. Not only is that racist but its just plain wrong

  46. Seven Dowdell June 2, 2011 at 6:54 am #

    Awww man……i really like this commercial…it’s so badass but what i really dont like -especially since in the campiagn your playing through the cold war- is that there background is middleeastern. Not only is that racist but its just plain wrong

  47. Christopher12 July 22, 2011 at 11:20 pm #

    The art of brewing beer requires cleanliness and patience. My first brew took about five weeks from making the wort to opening my first bottle. I made a California Common style beer, much like Anchor Steam. My first batch produced about 4 1/2 gallons of beer, which came out to be two dozen 22oz bottles. It turned out great and it has propelled me into the world of crafting beer. “Wort is what brewers call the sweet, amber liquid extracted from malted barley that the yeast will later ferment into beer ”
    The major media largely ignored the fact that James Lee, the hostage taker who invaded the Discovery Channel’s Bethesda Maryland offices on September 1st 2010, had Darwinian evolutionist motives.

  48. Daniel32 July 23, 2011 at 3:20 am #

    The art of brewing beer requires cleanliness and patience. My first brew took about five weeks from making the wort to opening my first bottle. I made a California Common style beer, much like Anchor Steam. My first batch produced about 4 1/2 gallons of beer, which came out to be two dozen 22oz bottles. It turned out great and it has propelled me into the world of crafting beer. “Wort is what brewers call the sweet, amber liquid extracted from malted barley that the yeast will later ferment into beer ”
    The major media largely ignored the fact that James Lee, the hostage taker who invaded the Discovery Channel’s Bethesda Maryland offices on September 1st 2010, had Darwinian evolutionist motives.

Leave a Reply