Videos
(47)Screenshots
(18)Cheats and Walkthroughs
(50)
Videos
(51)Screenshots
(18)Cheats and Walkthroughs
(51)
Videos
(42)Screenshots
(18)Cheats and Walkthroughs
News
(6)Previews
Review
Videos
Screenshots
Cheats and Walkthroughs
News
(6)Previews
Review
Videos
Screenshots
Cheats and Walkthroughs
The upcoming war game Medal of Honor is gaining a lot of attention, but perhaps not the kind of attention Electronic Arts would like. The company has come under fire from a variety of sources for the decision to allow players to inhabit the skins of the Taliban in the game's multiplayer. British Defence Secretary Liam Fox even criticized the game, calling on retailers not to sell Medal Of Honor in order to "show their support for the armed forces."
Specifically, Fox said:
"At the hands of the Taliban, children have lost fathers and wives have lost husbands. It's shocking that someone would think it acceptable to recreate the acts of the Taliban against British soldiers," he said in a statement. "It's hard to believe any citizen of our country would wish to buy such a thoroughly un-British game. I would urge retailers to show their support for our armed forces and ban this tasteless product."
EA, however, says it's standing fast on its decision. In an interview with Develop-Online, EA's Games president Frank Gibeau said the decision to allow players to be Taliban is a "creative risk," but he won't allow protests to "compromise our creative vision and what we want to do."
“There’s a lot of furor around games that take creative risks – like games that let you play terrorists in airports mowing down civilians,” Gibeausaid said. “At EA we passionately believe games are an artform, and I don’t know why films and books set in Afghanistan don’t get flack, yet [games] do. Whether it’s Red Badge Of Courage or The Hurt Locker, the media of its time can be a platform for the people who wish to tell their stories. Games are becoming that platform."
The last time this came up was over another war. Konami's Six Days in Fallujah was canceled due to a public outcry over the game's realistic depiction of events of the Iraq War. Although developer Atomic Games says it will eventually see the light of day.
For now, EA is holding steady with it artistic decisions, and we hope to see this game released, unchanged, on October 12, the expected release date. We also hope that the game, like The Red Badge of Courage and The Hurt Locker, is a great work of art that honors the dead, as opposed to a cheap cash-in.
Source: Develop-Online
Comments are Closed
Comments
Displaying 21–40 of 82
1123453
esseff
EA need's hype to sell this game and thats exactly what they are doing by puting the Taliban in the game. People coplain and threaten to boycott=CHACHING!!!!
Nub Salad
Well, there are two ways of looking at it. You can't tell people what games not to make or buy or sell. That's just not how things work in this country. On the other hand, no one wants to play as those guys just as im assuming no one wants to play as nazis in a ww2 game. Now, I'm not entirely sure but i think you can play as the Germans in some ww2 games. Is Medal of Honor recreating any specific battles? or is it just all make believe?
Basically, it sucks that people got killed and I'm sorry for people that have lost someone, but we all lose someone at some point and we are allowed to put whatever we want in games, movies or whatever.
tyrrin
I am a soldier, I have fought in both Iraq and Afghanistan, I think this is going to be a great game!
Atavax
@ toothofymir, Mr. Fox's argument was not that the people producing the game and the people buying the game are being insensitive to the people suffering at the hands of the taliban, but that the people that play the game and the people selling the game are anti-british for playing such an evil character that has been responsible for the deaths of many British. so my comparing it to Napoleon was completely appropriate.
my main problem isn't even with the inconsistency with the outcry, playing one british villain is ok, but not the other; but that if someone wrote a book about the taliban, or if someone made a painting with the taliban, no one would say its inappropriate without at least reading the book or looking at the painting; but if a video game includes the taliban, its inappropriate no matter the context...
power-o-pwn
I see why people would see this as a bad thing but in other games you play as murdering russians or nazi's and many other evil militia in video games, heck I could probably name several games where you play as a barbaric criminal in multiplayer: gears of war series, halo reach, call of duty series, medal of honor series, star wars battlefront series it's not new people like games like these for entertainment and it's the truth shooters would be nothing without people to hate enough to shoot thus no fun.
Tmidiman
SJ you better not bet on this one. Learn from the last time.
Just like Tiger Woods golf and that whole mess, NOTHING will come between EA making a buck.
Nothing!
Noble 6
IMO this game is made in very poor taste. EA is cashing in on a conflict going on right now. COD games are either in the past or fiction. I'm not buying this or Black Ops; Halo: Reach FTW.
Wownerds
I say put it in!!! I mean who really cares cause its a stupid game, its not like a taliban reqruiting gig or something. If there so worried about medal of honor then why dont they say anything to call of duty or any other modern warfare games that have terrorists. Is it just cause EA decided to title there insurgants then make some stupid made up terrorist cell?? I am a US Veteran and say put it in and eat a fat one great britain.
frictionman
I dont really see a problem with it in the game's multiplayer...I dont see how this is more offensive than MW2, where part of the game is you mowing down civilians and cops...are people really so hyper sensitive that the name of a real terrorist organization invokes more ire than playing actual terrorist act. We all know that troops are fighting the taliban, so changing it would be like calling the nazis something else in a world war 2 game...
ZBlaster700
I, too, hope EA keeps this aspect of telling the real story. But...wait a minute... Six Days in Fallujah is CANCELLED?! WTF! I'm pissed. That could have been a great chance for the industry to mature.
orangecrow
A game is a game! just play the game for what it is, only a game
BigBadBOOM
Considering the war with the Taliban is still going on, I can see why people feel as though this game is in bad taste. Playing a terrorist in a multiplayer deathmatch (and having to listen to all the immature comm that goes on) while killing our armed forces is not the same as the "infamous" airport level in MW2.
I dont think EA should change anything if this is the game that they want to put out, but at the same time I can easily see why people dont want it. For me, I wont be buying the game, but mainly because I thought the beta was crap (a little CoD, a little Bad Company, not as good as either).
Taboo5289
It's funny how the fact that the Taliban is an army made of humans and so they too are fathers and sons and so on is completely unspoken about by the powers of the coalition forces. Is the Taliban a good group? Certainly not but they to have families and they bleed just like anyone else. They have a story and a side to the conflict and any artistic medium that looks at the conflict should feature some form of acknowledgement that the enemy the coalition forces take on are not some faceless entity. Bravo to EA for sticking to it's guns and not backing down. I will happily buy this game and play it's multiplayer and not care what side I'm on.
zobocho
Armed Forces kill more citizens than the Taliban. I guess if you say "oops" it doesn't count?
soccrman9
Bravo EA, bravo. The only way gaming is going to gain respect as an artfrom is for companies that are well known to stand up for the rights that designers and producers have and do it justly and appropriately. I feel that Medal of Honor is going to be a good example of this and will be a step in the right direction for the gaming industry.
Jackal904
Good. I'm glad EA stuck to their guns.
Rogue4Twenty
*Cough cough * publicity.
It's funny that EA can do what Konami can't. EA is just that powerful.
Hey, don't get me wrong though, I'm a Metal Gear dude.
cardinalsfan1122
EA really did the right thing and good for them. Either way it is just a game it's not like people are going to fly across the ocean and join their cause. It's not like their endorsing terrorism, The game is about being realistic (to some extent) and telling the story of what our soldiers face every day. I think its good to see thing from a different perspective in this case terrorists, in our eyes were doing the right thing and their wrong and in their eyes it's the opposite, face it no side is innocent americans have killed civilians and oppositioning forces and so have the taliban, either way they are only multiplayer skins if the game had you planning an attack as terrorists it might be a different story. But the truth is it's still only a game.
Zzanzabar
Ok, yeah I get it, it is just a GAME! But I thought that the gaming industry was trying to get everyone to believe that it is MORE than that. All I hear is that these pixels are 'so much' more that they can even be considered ART! Alright there is freedom of speech and EA is standing behind that and if a group of gamers want to set off bombs on American and British troops represented in the game, fine.
But when will this industry begin to accept some of the responsibility that goes with presenting a product to the public. The heart of the Taliban is to kill Americans in any way they can now American gamers can vicariously experience the same thing. Supposedly that is what the soldiers are fighting for, right? As for me I will not buy the game or allow it in my home, period (that is also my choice).
brokendemon
Okay, two things bother me.
1. the statement "children have lost fathers and wives have lost husbands"
So no women have died? I mean let's be serious here, I'm pretty sure at least one woman has died at war here.
I realize that is just a small gripe, but the point still stands.
2. In my lifetime, I have seen video games where we play as a past enemy many times over. Nazis, Japanese, Hell, I'm pretty sure we have played as the British soldiers somewhere in there. And didn't we separate from them somewhere around 1776?
So why is it such a big deal if we go from a past enemy to a present one?
Wait, I got a great idea. If someone really has a problem with the game, see if someone will let J.T. back in court. He has a GREAT track record for video game lawsuits.
Displaying 21–40 of 82
1123453