Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Battlefield 3 Banned In Iran

Comments Filter:
  • by www.sorehands.com (142825) on Monday November 28, 2011 @06:46PM (#38196408) Homepage

    Banned in Boston used to be a selling point.

    Now Banned in Iran is badge of honor.

    • by lexsird (1208192)

      Dear Iran,

      Thanks for helping our game be more successful and making us more money! Please feel free to ban our products in the future.

      Thanks,
      The guys who made BF3 and their families.

      P.S. You would all get powned anyway.

  • Seems Reasonable (Score:5, Insightful)

    by blackpaw (240313) on Monday November 28, 2011 @06:48PM (#38196444)

    Pretty sure a shooter involving taking down the Trade Centre would be banned in the USA.

    Given the current USA/NATO warmongering mutters re Iran they probably view it as an attempt to get people used to the idea of the USA invading Iran.

    • by lexsird (1208192)

      .... as an attempt to get people used to the idea of the USA invading Iran.

      What? We aren't there yet?

    • Red Alert 2 had the Twin Towers aflame on the cover.

      The first mission was to destroy the Pentagon and install a mind control device to take over the brains of the US soldiers.

      • by drinkypoo (153816)

        The first mission was to destroy the Pentagon and install a mind control device to take over the brains of the US soldiers.

        Historical reenactment is apparently OK.

      • by artor3 (1344997)

        Just double checked since I thought that would be a bit weird given the release data, but I don't see the Twin Towers anywhere on the cover. The Empire State Building and Chrysler Building are both burning though. So same effect, just without the coincidence.

    • Don't think for a second that this wouldn't happen in the USA. Most recently, EA's Medal of Honor shooter in 2010 was boycotted in military stores [destructoid.com] due to fact that you could play as the Taliban. EA eventually caved in [wikipedia.org] and changed the enemy to "Opposing force".

      • by Jaysyn (203771)

        Oh look, someone doesn't understand the difference between a boycott & a governmental ban. How cute.

    • Russians have invaded and are blowing shit up. They've disabled US air defenses and so on. You have to fight through the trashed streets and go disable their jammer and so on and so forth.

      That is the opening mission in the campaign.

      The game sold 6.5 million copies in the first 24 hours it was out. You can find it on the shelves of every games store in the USA.

      Seriously, even if the US wanted to ban a game for content, it'd have a real hard time. That whole pesky "first amendment" thing.

      • by artor3 (1344997)

        That's very different from you playing as the Russian bombers, killing American civilians. While it might not be outright banned, it would get a de facto ban. The media would drum up controversy, stores would bow to the pressure, and next thing you know the makers would be modifying the game to meet our sensibilities, or canceling it entirely.

      • by Luckyo (1726890) on Monday November 28, 2011 @11:55PM (#38198958)

        The game paints russians as bad guys and american soldiers as valorous heroes defending their homeland.

        Hell, it even plays like a Rambo movie. Go out, kill a whole lot of russians, black guys and other non-american trash. The only good guys are americans, brits and a few russians, who, get this - betray their country. Turn this concept on its head and you won't sell a single copy in US, because no one will do the commercial suicide of putting it on the shelves. It would offend the very core belief that America is just and a force for good.

    • by h00manist (800926)

      Working on very detailed US maps and city images to practice invading pretty soon. Er, I meant play games on. So nobody will mind.

    • by ildon (413912)

      Pretty sure a shooter involving taking down the Trade Centre would be banned in the USA.

      No. It wouldn't. And that's the difference between the USA and most other countries (including ones that consider themselves modern liberal democracies). Retailers might refuse to sell it, but the government would not be able to (legally) ban it, and most responsible government officials wouldn't even try.

  • How about telling me when they don't ban something?
  • Not surprising... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by AngryDeuce (2205124) on Monday November 28, 2011 @06:52PM (#38196490)

    I mean, they would probably want to ban a Chinese game that allowed the player to kill American citizens and destroy American landmarks.

    Not saying it's right, but it's probably what would happen. Personally, I'd love to play a game about the United States from a Chinese perspective. It would probably be hysterical...

    • Re:Not surprising... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Sasayaki (1096761) on Monday November 28, 2011 @07:01PM (#38196600)

      I've always wanted to play a serious World War II shooter from the perspective of a German soldier. I mean, we've stormed Omaha beach so many times... it'd be interesting to defend it. And we'd get to participate in some really unique content that hasn't been completely done to death by every shooter ever.

      Or even an alternate history, something like Modern Warfare series, but in World War 2 where some critical decision -- such as Hitler not deciding to turn the ME-262 into a bomber and mass produce it -- causes the stop of round-the-clock bombing, which leads to a revitalization of German industry, and a swing of the war against the Allies...

      That'd be interesting.

      • I've always wanted to play a serious World War II shooter from the perspective of a German soldier.

        Red Orchestra 2?

      • by Nidi62 (1525137) on Monday November 28, 2011 @07:20PM (#38196778)

        You know, when I played World at War, and I'm playing the final Russian missions where you're attacking Berlin and storming the Reichstag and all that, all I could think about was that, in real life, those German soldiers defending Berlin were mostly 14-16 year old boys and 40-60 year old men. Not only were they completely untrained, but they were using horribly made weapons (worse even than many of the later war year manufactured Japanese weapons). The Volkssturm weapons showed just how desperate the situation was: for example the Volkssturmgewehr VG.1-5 (http://world.guns.ru/rifle/autoloading-rifles/de/vg1-5-e.html) and the Volkssturmkarabiner VK.98(http://world.guns.ru/rifle/autoloading-rifles/de/vk9-e.html).

        Off topic, I know, but with a little knowledge of history, these games have a lot more impact and a lot more emotion in them. If people knew a little bit more about history, we would have games such as what you and I want, where we get to play as the Germans. However, it has become PC to dehumanize the Germans and the Wehrmacht particularly, and downplay the fact that many Germans and most of the military weren't fighting for Hitler, or an Aryan nation without Jews, they were fighting for what pretty much every soldier fights for: their family, their country, and their comrades.

        • by Hatta (162192) on Monday November 28, 2011 @07:46PM (#38196998) Journal

          However, it has become PC to dehumanize the Germans and the Wehrmacht particularly, and downplay the fact that many Germans and most of the military weren't fighting for Hitler, or an Aryan nation without Jews, they were fighting for what pretty much every soldier fights for: their family, their country, and their comrades.

          This is intentional. If people understand that the Germans were just like us, they would understand that we are subject to the same forces that the Germans were. With that awareness, we might look around us and see what is happening. If we learn that they control us by manipulating our allegiances to family, country, and comrades, then we're less likely to be affected by such manipulation in the future.

          It's an uncomfortable truth we have to accept if we're going to stop atrocities. Most people, in the right circumstances are fascists. Consider the Milgram experiment, 65% of people will obey an order to kill a man on the flimsiest of pretexts because of their deference to authority. Or the Stanford prison experiment, where people who took roles of authority became cruel simply by taking that role. We have to be aware of these tendencies in ourselves, and reject them. Do not accept or obey any more authority than is absolutely necessary.

          • by Phrogman (80473)

            Look at the various companies and individuals that supported the Nazis in some way or another, either by direct allegiance or by doing business with them. I don't know if this information is accurate (its on the web after all) but I found this page pretty quickly on google:
            http://www.11points.com/News-Politics/11_Companies_That_surprisingly_Collaborated_With_the_Nazis [11points.com]

            • by Nidi62 (1525137)
              I knew there was a reason why those uniforms looked so sharp....I do have a couple points with that website, however. One, I thought it was common knowledge that Hitler was a big inspiration behind VW and the Beetle (on a related note, he also built the first autobahns). Second, with regards to Henry Ford, up until 1938 (and really even a little after that), Hitler appeared to be a good model. He had brought Germany back to prominence, bringing the economy back from the humility of the Versailles Treaty,
          • by Wahakalaka (1323747) on Monday November 28, 2011 @08:28PM (#38197382)
            As a Jewish kid growing up one of the most important lessons I learned about the Holocaust was not to dehumanize the Germans as a people or as individuals for what happened, as that would make me no different than the Nazi's themselves, rather I should understand why and how they did what they did so that I could do my part in preventing it from happening again. When I try to apply that logic now to Islamic extremism, and Israeli extremism for that matter, I'm surprised at the vehemence of the pushback I get, even from people that really ought to know better (I think deep down they do, that's why they deny it so hard). To say that we "can't understand terrorism or extremism so don't even try" is insane to me. They're just people. Hell international business and finance these days is way more complicated and at least as sinister as any terrorist...
      • I've always wanted to play a serious World War II shooter from the perspective of a German soldier. I mean, we've stormed Omaha beach so many times... it'd be interesting to defend it. And we'd get to participate in some really unique content that hasn't been completely done to death by every shooter ever.

        Have you heard of Battlefield 1942 [wikipedia.org]? It is one of the most popular World War 2 games ever and is a multiplayer game -- meaning that you can play both sides of the war. It even has a Omaha Beach map. [filefront.com]

      • by Hadlock (143607)

        I remember defending the beach at Normandy in Wolffenstein: Enemy Territory and a few other games. Pretty sure BF1942 had this map either in the base game, or one of the early expansion packs.

    • by swanzilla (1458281) on Monday November 28, 2011 @07:05PM (#38196630) Homepage
      I'm still holding out for a game about Italian-American plumbers from a Japanese perspective.
    • by Nidi62 (1525137) on Monday November 28, 2011 @07:09PM (#38196666)

      Personally, I'd love to play a game about the United States from a Chinese perspective. It would probably be hysterical...

      I have actually always wanted to play a WW2 game from the perspective of the Germans. Imagine sitting on the beach on Normandy watching thousands of ships headed towards you, or the chaos of having troops dropping out of the sky at night randomly, and not knowing when you will run into an enemy patrol. Or moving into Russia, fighting on the outskirts of Stalingrad, then having to fight your way out before you are cut off and doomed to be captured (of which only about 5,000 out of around 100,00 ever made it back to Germany, the rest died in captivity). Finally defending Berlin as it is slowly overrun by the Russians. It could be done well, and done tastefully, without touching on all of the Holocaust stuff and other atrocities (of course, when CoD:WaW came out, no one made a fuss about playing as the Russians, even though they murdered thousands of German and other civilians, as well as working to death thousands more German POWs), but of course there would still be a huge controversy. A shame really, a game like that could actually have some really powerful moments to it.

  • KH2002 License (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 28, 2011 @06:55PM (#38196522)

    I want to know if EA/DICE paid money to the Iranian government.

    All weapons appearing in the game (sp and mp) are licensed, meaning the owners got paid for permission to use the guns likeness. The KH2002 is a bullpup assault rifle designed and produced by the (government run ) Iranian defense industry which appears in the game as a usable weapon. Who did EA/DICE pay to license this gun? Is this in violation of any embargo, considering there is a complete ban on any weapons exports (presumably including designs) from Iran?

    • by game kid (805301)

      Better question: Is licensing gun likenesses and other "IP" something EA even cares about, unless it's that of their games?

    • by Jonner (189691)

      It's easy to find detailed images of the rifle. That, combined with general knowledge about its operation (easy since it's based on existing designs including the M-16) is all the designers needed. Since the game designers knew they'd be pissing of the Iranian government with the basic plot, do you really think they cared about "licensing" images of Iranian weapons?

    • All weapons appearing in the game (sp and mp) are licensed

      Oh really? Can you provide a source on that?

      • by Xest (935314)

        Agreed, if I've noticed anything about affiliation and licensing it's that many Western military games are happy to license from companies like Boeing, Lockheed and such for their aircraft, but that you rarely see guns like the AK-47 licensed.

        It's a classic example of the hypocrisy of American IP enforcement - everything American or to a lesser extent, Western must be licensed for use, but if it's something Iranian, Chinese, or Russian? Meh, just stick it in, who cares about licensing from them.

        I'd be supri

  • by Greyfox (87712) on Monday November 28, 2011 @06:58PM (#38196562) Homepage Journal
    They should just not ban it and instead imprison any Iranian team who loses on Defense (Or wins on Offense, for that matter.) That would be much more fun, from a Department of Rightness and The Iranian Way perspective!

    "So... Ahmed... I see you lost in Battlefield on defense of Tehran... Why do you hate Iran, Ahmed?"

  • BF3 and MW3 where the NYC, Berlin and Paris are bombed to shit by the Russians?

  • They may have lost tens or even a hundred dollars.

    On the other hand Iran probably gave EA enough free pub to make it a net gain 10x over.

  • I wrote a book where the heroes are Chinese and Iranians (and one EU member from Belgium), shameless link-whoring here [lacunaverse.com].

    Would this book be banned in Iran? Or lauded? I wonder what they think of it...

  • EA is an American company. The US currently does not allow exports of most things to Iran, including software, and doing so may qualify as a capital offense (treason). Iranian residents were unlikely to purchase BF3 regardless of how the Iranian gov't decided.

    • by blackicye (760472)

      EA is an American company. The US currently does not allow exports of most things to Iran, including software, and doing so may qualify as a capital offense (treason). Iranian residents were unlikely to purchase BF3 regardless of how the Iranian gov't decided.

      Not just that, the hardware to run it (PC or console) is not exportable to Iran either (officially)

Organic chemistry is the chemistry of carbon compounds. Biochemistry is the study of carbon compounds that crawl. -- Mike Adams

Working...