Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
PC Games (Games) Entertainment Games

War Game To Use Troop-Filmed DoD Footage 80

Posted by simoniker from the definite-case-of-reality-bites dept.
Thanks to Yahoo!/Hollywood Reporter for the news that a new videogame will incorporate exclusive raw video shot by U.S. troops stationed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Liberia, and elsewhere. The PC action title, called Kuma:War, launches next February (there are screenshots available via Blue's News), and intends to allow you to "play the news" with a CNN-style filmed introduction to each real-life themed game level - the article explains: "players could get a first-person perspective experience of what it was like to rescue Army Pvt. Jessica Lynch or participate in the raid that killed Uday and Qusay Hussein - staged authentically, right down to such details as the type of grenades that were used in the mission and the exact location of the snipers."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

War Game To Use Troop-Filmed DoD Footage More

War Game To Use Troop-Filmed DoD Footage

Comments Filter:

  • More video? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by ChibiLZ ( 697816 ) <john AT easygoldguide DOT com> on Thursday August 14, 2003 @03:02PM (#6697893) Homepage Journal
    I think today's games are going a little overboard in the amount of video and the importance of it. Take for example Metal Gear Solid 2. You spend more time watching than playing. At first it was neat to have the whole 'interactive movie', but it does get slow after a while. I am all for a realistic war game, but the developers should make sure that the video is used solely for accent, not the whole thing. Of course, having the talking heads in between levels might be good, but it could turn out to suck. Film at 11.
    • Actually, you're spot on with that.

      I bought a copy of MGS2 a while back from ebay (once it got cheap...) I had rented the game once, but since had deleted my save file. Well, tell ya what, playing the game again was downright annoying until I got to the same point that I was when I rented it.

      There's almost no replayability because of all of the information they cram into the cutscenes... Kinda like a scary movie. It's only good once through....
  • I hope not. Saving Jessica Lynch or killing the Husseins, being in the action is really nothing like what a video game should be, from what I hear. It's not the drama and pace that most of us look for in a game. Plus, capitalizing on these war stories sickens me just a little bit too. Hed.

    • Re:Just like real life? (Score:5, Funny)

      by Phronesis ( 175966 ) on Thursday August 14, 2003 @03:15PM (#6698077)
      Come on! Dont' you think it would be dramatic to go save Jessica Lynch? Unlike traditional war games, there would be no enemy soldiers and no killing. The object would be not to let reporters see that the hospital is filled with unarmed civilians offering to help you find her and take her home.
  • allow you to "play the news" with a CNN-style filmed introduction to each real-life themed game level

    I hope not. There are plenty of fictional video games out there already. I'd like one like this to be somewhat based in reality.

  • Make it realistic.. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by tprime ( 673835 )
    Some sort of forced feedback pain might make it realistic.. Maybe something similar to the video game Bond plays that could electricute. This does seem a little odd though, to take situations where REAL people died and make a profit off of them. Fictional deaths in games, no matter how realistic looking, are OK with me. But when you start acting out the real areas where people died seems to be an insult to the soldiers that died there.
    • So you are totally against all war games unless they are fictional correct? Well there goes Battlefield 1942, the Medal of Honor series, VietCong, and countless other turnbased war games that are out there. All of those games use real situations as a basis for their gameplay. Your argument that using real theaters of battle is immoral will shut down thousands of games, some you likely enjoy. If your problem is with perfect recreations of battlefields I can understand that, but representative situations o

  • What we won't see (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I presume the game is too politically correct to give us the chance to authentically shoot up carloads of women and children at checkpoints.
    • Checkpoints in war zones are designed so that you can have a secure area. In order to preserve this security, and therefore not risk the lives of your troops, anyone who tries to pass a checkpoint without showing identification and getting clearance, should be considered an enemy. While it is certainly not pleasing to anyone when women and children are killed, the simple fact is that in order to ensure the safety of our boys, people who are breaking the checkpoint need to be stopped. This has been the case
      • Part of running a checkpoint competently is to let civilians know what it is and how they should behave there. This was clearly not done in the early days of the occupation.

        I agree that soldiers must protect themselves, but it is clear that there were a number of incidents in which they just did not run the checkpoints competently and their incompetence put them in the position of having to shoot unarmed civilians because they had not bothered to get things right when they set up the checkpoints.

        • Communicating with people in the Middle East isn't as easy as telling people in Cleveland that they should boil their water. Just ask the Israelis how easy communication has been with Arabs. I don't think the military is above critcism or anything BUT I also haven't seen any evidence that no communication with civilians was attempted. In fact, I recall that quite a bit of money was spent on leaflets and such. Do you have any evidence that troops did not follow protocol?
          • Here's an eyewitness account [guardian.co.uk]:

            According to Branigin's testimony, Captain Ronny Johnson, in charge of the troops manning the checkpoint, ordered them to fire a warning shot.

            "Fire a warning shot," he told them as the vehicle kept coming. Then, with increasing urgency, he told the platoon to shoot a 7.62mm machine-gun round into its radiator. "Stop [messing] around!" Capt Johnson yelled into the company radio network when he still saw no action being taken. Finally, he shouted at the top of his voice: "Stop

  • How much detail? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Palshife ( 60519 ) on Thursday August 14, 2003 @03:12PM (#6698039) Homepage
    players could get a first-person perspective experience of what it was like to rescue Army Pvt. Jessica Lynch

    So you're saying I could do everything including silencing key witnesses, faking injuries, inviting Fox News along for the ride, and paying off a military officer to take part in a massive madia fueled fabrication?

    Jeez, forget Doom. Where do I sign up?

  • Jessica Lynch! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by metalhed77 ( 250273 ) <`andrewvc' `at' `gmail.com'> on Thursday August 14, 2003 @03:15PM (#6698085) Homepage
    What a PR stunt for the Army. Jessica Lynch's rescue has been thoroughly discredited by now. (The hospital tryed to return her first, instead the Army ignored them and decided that exploding walls and using flash bangs was the best way to get into the hospital, the alternative being to call them up and ask for her).

    The saddest part is jessica's claim of not remembering anything about the ordeal. I'm sure she was ordered to simply say that. This is a shame, and an insult to the doctors who so cared for her during her stay.
    • What a PR stunt for the Army. Jessica Lynch's rescue has been thoroughly discredited by now. (The hospital tryed to return her first, instead the Army ignored them and decided that exploding walls and using flash bangs was the best way to get into the hospital, the alternative being to call them up and ask for her).

      Obviously the Gov't played up the Lynch rescue, you'd be a fool if you didn't.

      But...

      the Army shot at the vehicle carrying Lynch, because they didn't know she was in it, or what it was doing.

      • But there's more (Score:5, Interesting)

        by metalhed77 ( 250273 ) <`andrewvc' `at' `gmail.com'> on Thursday August 14, 2003 @04:22PM (#6698941) Homepage
        the govt. refuses to declassify large portions of the lynch rescue taking place. The hospital doctors had attempted to contact the U.S. BEFORE sending the ambulance. Lastly, if I was lynch, I'd be outraged at the amount of lying our government has done so far. Let's also not forget that lynch really didn't do that much. I'm not saying anything bad, but she is not a hero in any conventional sense. She didn't hold any bad guys off till her ammo was out as was said early on. And really didnt' do anything than be in the wrong place at the wrong time. The U.S. army has held her up as a model of courage, when all that really happened was that an unlucky G.I. got in a car crash, got taken as POW, and got busted out in a bizarre case of miscommunication a few weeks later. A hero is proactive, or has to undergo extreme situations. Lynch's situation was a fluke which she passed through essentially in shock. I'm not blaming Lynch at all, she did nothing, but the media is absolutely horrid when they call her a Hero as doing so robs the word of its true meaning.
        • Haha. The Iraqis wanting to return Lynch should probably have waited until they heard back from the U.S. before driving around in a war zone. I mean, they meant well and all but that was a pretty dumb thing to do.

          The mainstream media isn't making her out to be a hero. It's been mostly a 'yay, she's okay!' kind of deal.

          And the reason it's getting so much exposure is beacuse it's a pretty interetsing to people. I mean, christ, she's my age! And have you seen the pre-war photo of her, in cammies and aga
          • I'd like to add that it was indeed an Ambulance that was fired on, and Ambulances tend to have a big ass Red Cross on them. Are you saying the Army fired on Red Cross?
        • The worst part is she was awarded the PURPLE HEART. Talk about dishonoring the other recipients...

          She's America's little sweetheart, that's the extent of it. It's sickening.
          • The purple heart is awarded for being wounded in combat, which Lynch was.

            I think you're confusing the Purple Heart for the Medal of Honor.
            • D'oh. Good call. I've been looking for the story I read listing the various awards she got, I can't find it though. I do recall there being one medal regarding valor in combat which really didn't seem to fit the bill. It's like one of the local Boston talk radio folks had said, first her convoy was attacked and she was captured. The next day, the story changed to her killing a few Iraqis with her sidearm. Then it was a dozen. Then it turned into her wiping out half the attacking force. It's a bit crazy...
              • Yeah, the details are kind of really fuzzy. I forget which versions of events I've heard from FOXNEWS! and which from the gov't, and which were just wild speculation.

                I can (as opposed to can't) wait till she writes her book, or whatever. That'll hopefully clear some things up.
        • "I'm not saying anything bad, but she is not a hero in any conventional sense. She didn't hold any bad guys off till her ammo was out as was said early on. And really didnt' do anything than be in the wrong place at the wrong time."

          Dude. What the fuck is wrong with you? If any American gets attacked any time for any reason they are instantly heroes. It's in the fucking law.

          I'd also like to take this opportunity to honor all those brave brave auto mechanics, fixing our cars for exorbitant prices in our

      • Re:Jessica Lynch! (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        being held captive by a hostile nation that didn't follow the rules of war...

        Just to clarify, was that the Iraqis or the Americans?

        Remember, it's only a war crime if they have chemical weapons, fund terrorism, detain without applying the Geneva convention, use non-uniformed special forces, order assassinations of other heads of states and parade war dead for the media. If we do it, it's patriotic.
  • finally i can realistically clusterbomb people, or watch them run screaming (could we get real recordings of screams? that would be kewl) on fire!

    i sure hope there is a 'kick the prisoner in the head' option or some such!

    f64 : can i throw up now, please?
  • Wow! So, we'll get to knock down doors and scream "Go, go, go!" while the hospital workers look at you like you're stupid.

    Extra points if the blanks you're firing makes your ranger buddy in front of you jump!

    And, maybe we have realistic muscle flexing in front of the cute Iraqi nurses?

    Realistic AI like that'll add some time to the dev process..

  • That's why we haven't found Saddam and Osama! (Score:5, Funny)

    by phamlen ( 304054 ) <phamlen&mail,com> on Thursday August 14, 2003 @03:23PM (#6698188) Homepage
    It makes perfect sense!

    They claim not to have found Saddam and Osama because they're keeping the film secret to make a surprise ending for the video game!

    "Want to know what really happened to Saddam and Osama? Buy the game and find out!"

    [ I also hear there's going to be cheat codes that allow you to find the weapons of mass destruction on the final level.]

    -Peter

  • sounds good... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Frac ( 27516 ) on Thursday August 14, 2003 @03:25PM (#6698209)
    Sure I'll buy the game... ... but only if I get to catch Geraldo drawing battle plans in front of a cameraman. (and only if I get to run after him with a couple of Bradley's after he's fired.. heh)
  • And how long before a mod so that you can play as Iraqi soldiers who participated in a raid in which there were U.S. casualties ? My point being, it is all "fun and games" until one takes a different perspective on the situation. Mod me down as flamebait or offtopic if you please.

    • Re:A new low... (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Lord_Dweomer ( 648696 )
      " And how long before a mod so that you can play as Iraqi soldiers who participated in a raid in which there were U.S. casualties ? My point being, it is all "fun and games" until one takes a different perspective on the situation. Mod me down as flamebait or offtopic if you please."

      Very good point, wish I had mod points for ya. I don't think people would be very happy if someone made a mod where you had to take planes hostage and crash them into buildings (although I have to admit, a mod like that would

  • the reference to the Iraqi war and the others too (Score:4, Insightful)

    by atari2600 ( 545988 ) on Thursday August 14, 2003 @03:34PM (#6698307)

    Money MONEY!
    Kinda makes me wonder...the Iraqi war that hasn't been justified yet (remember the justification was some WMD and now the experts say the trailers were for producing hydrogen) and here you have people cashing in on the tragedy again in the form of computer games. Sure it was great for CNN and MSNBC and other agencies - great business ... but from the article

    A subscription component keeps the action up to date with events in the real world (news - Y! TV). The initial PC game, due out in February, will come with eight to 12 missions in a traditional retail package for about $40. After that, players can choose to download an additional mission every week for a monthly fee of about $10.

    Does this sound ethical? Isn't this promoting war in a way?...also from the article

    The first title will include missions based on actual happenings in Iraq, Afghanistan (news - web sites), Liberia (news - web sites) and Korea. The game's missions will allow for both single-player and multiplayer experiences, which will vary depending on the actual events that are being re-created in the realistic, virtual worlds.

    Sure Sure you are re-enacting history but wtf - who needs to re-enact war really and these kinds of wars....? Ok Afghanistan was justified but I see Liberia above and Korea - is it North Korea - does this mean North K is gonna be "liberated"? Also when i say these wars have to be justified, seriously apart from the innocent civilians, don't the americans care about losing their soldiers? How sad would it to be lose your only son, to lose your husband...lose a father...Jeez mod me as troll or flamebait but making money off these kinda wars(Iraq) is in my opinion unethical besides being bullshit.

  • Hrmm.. (Score:2)

    by kmak ( 692406 )
    One can only wonder if this is a game, or propaganda...

    Hrmm, what am I talking about, it's the US..
    • This [americasarmy.com] is more likely to be 'propoganda'. Since when does playing game based on factual events classify as propoganda? If anything, it serves to produce the reality of battle planning and team/individual management that makes success possible in modern warfare. I'm not saying that maybe it isn't propoganda, but sometimes a game is a game and more likely out for profit than political reasons. Of course, this stricks very similiar to this [novalogic.com]; so if anything, this Iraq game is more of a stylisitic ripoff.
  • I'm all about games. I really like first person soldier games.

    But this is kind of twisted. Its just not right to be playing games based on the life and death situations that our military is facing this very moment. I'm not going to have fun taking down an Iraqi insurgent with my simulated M-16, when a very real soldier or Marine is doing the exact same thing on the other side of the world.

    Now, with games set in the past (like, at least ten years ago) or games set in a hypothetical future (like the Rain

  • Aside from the moral problems... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Lord_Dweomer ( 648696 ) on Thursday August 14, 2003 @04:02PM (#6698702) Homepage
    "A subscription component keeps the action up to date with events in the real world (news - Y! TV). The initial PC game, due out in February, will come with eight to 12 missions in a traditional retail package for about $40. After that, players can choose to download an additional mission every week for a monthly fee of about $10."

    Anybody else get outraged at the audacity of that pricing? I'm sorry, I will NOT pay $10 a month for a new fucking level. This isn't even a MMORPG. This would be the equivelant of asking people to pay $10/month for a new mod for halflife or bf1942.

    And what if you signed on after a few missions had been released. Does the $10 entitle you to all the old missions? What if you don't want a certain months mission, do you still have to pay for it? Aside from the fact that charging a large fee for a new mission is insulting and will not work, I think what would stand a better chance is charging a VERY LOW fee, like $1-$2 per new mission. That way you could get the ones you want, and avoid the ones you don't want. But fact is, with every other FPS game out there (that will always be a step above this made-for-marketing crud) giving free updates and levels away fairly frequently, and extensive modding communities, this game won't stand a chance.

  • 200 vs 4, someone is going to yell "TEAMS!" (Score:4, Funny)

    by Numeric ( 22250 ) on Thursday August 14, 2003 @04:05PM (#6698755) Homepage Journal
    Okay the Uday and Quasy shootout was 200+ American soldiers with armor vs 4 guys with Ak47s and pistols. I can hear people who are on the Iraqi side yelling "TEAMS!?!"

    Stick with www.americasarmy.com.

  • So, how many people who are upset about this game ever saw Titanic, Saving Private Ryan or Schindler's List? All those movies were seeking to profit from events in which many real people died. I bet you all saw all of them.

    I personally have only seen the last one and only because it was shown in school and I would be tested on it.

    Please keep your inconsistent poser activism speechs to yourself. You can surely get karma points other ways, eh boys?
    • I'm no history buff but I think the soldiers in World War II had a little bit more of a reason to fight then "liberating" Iraq from a cruel regime. To me American Soldiers in WWII are heroes. They were fighting for the future of the world. Who knows what the world would be like if it weren't for the landing at Omaha. I love WWII movies and WWII video games because brings me closer to understanding what happened and what kind of events the people had to suffer. The entertainment I get isn't entirely fro
      • I assure you I don't need karma points Mr. Flake. I fail to see how time is relevent to a tragedy. If people died in the incident, why should anyone be able to profit from that?

        So it comes back to you defending your actions of participating in one insensitive act while condemning another. Hyposcrisy!
        • I fail to see how time is relevent to a tragedy.

          Because as time passes, it's less painful to the people who were affected by it. I'm sure when Otzi the caveman died it was a tragic event to some one. Are you saying that you feel pain for when Otzi died? Please.

          If you killed some one to save your mother, but condemned killing in general? Would that be hypocricy? Probably.

          But if you wouldn't be save your mother in order to avoid being a hypocrit, not only would you no longer have a mother but you wou

    • I should be and will be blunt. How many 10 year olds go out to see Schindler's List alone on a Saturday? How many 14 year olds see Titanic the whole of their summer? But when this game comes out, you can be sure these kids would download the demo from the internet if a demo is available or get a copy from godknowswhere and start fragging and learning some history - oh yeah - little Tommy playing this game gets the impression that all Iraqis, NorthKoreans and all Afghans are terrorists - oh yeah no innocent

      • I made no such comparisons as you enumerate. People dying = bad. People profiting from other people dying = really bad. Don't justify your arbitrary distinction.

        • People profiting from other people dying is really bad indeed. Movies such as the Schindler's List attempted to highlight the work of a man who had humanity in his mind. Titanic was about a love story - sure they made money and people cried but the point is with your assumption everything on earth could be reduced to person A profiting from person B's death. Like a son waiting for his father to die - an young executive waiting profiting from his CEO's death - events that occur no matter what. NOW, movies t

    • I think there's a significant difference between reenacting historical events for the sake of telling a story, and taking actual footage of events, and real people dying, and turning them into a form of entertainment.

      if someone suggested an "America's Greatest Executions" TV show, would you be so quick to defend it?

      Furthermore, I doubt that this game will encompass the type of critical thought and self awareness that would be required to redeem it. Perhaps if you could play from both sides of a conflict
      • I am not defending anything. I am saying they are all bad. I am calling anyone who watched Titanic, and then blasts this proposed game, a hypocrite. No more, no less.
        • bah!

          so if i know anything about any human history, and found it intriguing, i'd be a hypocrite to object to the game?

          titanic and saving ryans privates don't matter. they're fictious, and are not made more real because they are using historical events.

          the critique of this game, as i see it, is basically that it will be showcased as a "real" simulation of events because it will be so closely integrated with what's shown on the tv that those kids (or adults, for all i know) playing it might not see
    • So, how many people who are upset about this game ever saw Titanic, Saving Private Ryan or Schindler's List?

      I saw Titanic (a girl friend made me do it years later) and Saving Private Ryan. Neither of those movies are historically accurate recreations. I mean, the Titanic was a horrid love story that was made up. The setting attempted to be realistic. I believe Schindler's List also tried to be accurate (as accurate as anything from Hollywood anyways). These are movies telling stories that many peopl
  • Awesome idea!

    The previously recorded video will make it look REALLY realistic when your troops find weapons of mass destruction!

  • If you want to "play the news" why don't you just get some balls and join the army or be a reporter. Pretending to be part of current events doesn't sound like a whole lot of fun to me, in fact I find that it would trivialize real problems that people face every day.
  • "... staged authentically..."

    Just like it was when the US army did it.

    "... a new videogame will incorporate exclusive raw video shot by U.S. troops..."

    I can see it now: "US invades Germany, Russia, Iran and France for video game sequel footage."
    • Same with the pharse "playing the news"...

      Do they mean me re-playing the news or we hear about "WMD found", "terror trailers", "children's prisons" and the "the noose is tightening" in headlines and then retractions, corrections, clarifications and caveats on page 32 under the fold?

      =tkk
  • It's sad that the questionable origins of this game overshadows the fact that this is another attempt at episodic gaming. Episodic games are one of those holy grails for small-scale developers, by cutting down on up front costs, and ensuring that revenue lasts longer than a few weeks. In another sense, we've still been looking for something to make online gaming stick -- maybe providing new content on a regular basis is the way?

    Seeing how this is a more "mainstream" title than previous attempts, I will be
    • Also, Tim Schafer likes episodic gaming [penny-arcade.com].

      (Personally, episodic games would make me as happy as a million rats dying, but opposite-style [doublefine.com]. That might have to do with how repetitive, and filler-filled I think most games are, or it might just be that a short attention span was the reason I liked ICO [icothegame.com] so much. ;)
    • Episodic games are one of those holy grails for small-scale developers

      Speaking as a small-scale developer, episodic is not on my holy grail list. Innovation is there, originality is there but looking down the list I just don't see episodic gaming anywhere.

      I think you may be thinking of large-scale corporate developers looking to decrease any and all risk by cashing in on existing 'proven' (in their eyes) ideas.

      {rant}Now speaking as a human being, I find it pretty disturbing that executives are so

  • Bleh (Score:1)

    by luekj ( 692478 )
    Interesting, but i'm not sure it's really a good idea to have games based off of harrowing us army experiences. Can you say, desensitisation?

    Oh, I guess that's what teh army recruiters are counting on.....

    Hmmm

Slashdot Top Deals

UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things. -- Doug Gwyn

Close