Ben-DutkaIt was bound to happen. In fact, we're honestly surprised it took this long.
Because the new Medal of Honor involves the current war on terror, and there is the option to play as the Taliban, it was inevitable that EA's title would garner plenty of controversy and criticism. The first to latch on has been a member of the Gold Star Moms, who voiced her displeasure on Fox News; you can watch the Fox and Friends video below and draw your own conclusions. A woman who lost her son in Afghanistan, Karen Meredith, had this to say:
"War is not a game period. Right now we are going into a really really bad time in Afghanistan. We've just come off the worst month of casualties in the whole war and this game is going to be released in October. So families who are burying their children are going to be seeing this and playing this game. I just don't see that a video game based on a current war makes any sense."
We find it interesting that she specified the fact that the war is "current," and that we never heard any such controversy during years and years of shooters based on World War II. …as usual, time heals and somehow makes things okay for everyone. But anyway, EA has responded to this whole mess with the following official statement:
"Medal of Honor is set in today's war, putting players in the boots of today's solder. We give gamers the opportunity to play both sides. Most of having been doing this since we were seven. If someone's the cop, someone gotta be the robber, someone's gotta be the pirate and someone's gotta be the alien. In Medal of Honor multiplayer, someone's gotta be the Taliban."
Unsurprisingly, Meredith believes that's an unfair analogy and although the Fox reporter does mention that the average age of the gamer who will purchase Medal of Honor is in their mid-to-late 30s, Meredith doesn't budge. She simply says she doesn't see the need for such a game in the first place, and cites more sensitive publishers like Atomic Games, who decided not to publish Six Days in Fallujah and Sony, who didn't produce a game called Shock and Awe .
We will only add one additional bit of commentary: we would like to point out that, in our eyes, the most important individuals in such controversy are those who are risking their lives; i.e., the very individuals we are playing as (or against). That being said, EA collaborated with the military and Tier 1 operators to make Medal of Honor authentic and true-to-life; those directly involved with the war on terror voluntarily and enthusiastically lent their time. If they don't feel offended or uncomfortable about this – the very people we owe so much to, and those who really are respected in the campaigns of most games – then we're fine. How's about you?
Related Game(s): Medal of Honor
This is getting taken out of context and blown way the hell out of proportion. The only time you play as the Taliban is during the multiplayer. The single player is where the actual story and character developement begins, a story that EA has stated goes out of it's way to respect the soldier.
Don't take my word for it, watch the E3 trailer.
Think it's insensitive to portay "real" combat? Look back at Modern Warfare. You played as a terrorist countless times and killed hordes of American soldiers. Does that bother you? Think about what you're proposing. This complaint could be made about every war game, but then again not every game is labeled as "controversial," and you don't have to worry about those. All you would have to do is change a few dialogues and slap on a couple more desert scenes and wham bam you're playing the Afghanistan war.
If it bothers you that people die in war, that they get shred to pieces and left for the maggots, tough. That's your reality. Get used to it.
And isn't it strange to say that this game in particular sets off negative emotions and grief over lost loves when every little thing from the stores you visit to the other people in your life can set off the same reaction?
The game isn't making light of War. It's not a "game," not a joke. The game takes war seriously and so should you.
So what it's fine to play as a American soldier in an illegal war. In which the US goverment as well as others cover up the fact they also kill civilians and friendlys, tbh I barely know who Fox News are.
They don't cover it up, they just don't go around flaunting it. Civilians and friendlies die in every war, the difference is that the US and its allies don't go out of their way to target them. Unfortunately, mistakes do happen and civilians will die.
Can't speak for how the story unfolds or on the war sentiment the game will garner, but if it's anything like previous titles, it will be authentic. Especially with the Tier one involvement.
If it's ok to make war films on current wars, it's ok to write books, it's ok to make games. Not much more to it really.
I'll also add, that if violence isn't upsetting, in any media I think that is obscenity. If you don't show it realistically and the way it is that is harmful and immoral.
omg lighten up you tards… theres countless movies about war on terror ffs.. ._.
Im just gonna put my true 2 cents here; this topic is hogwash, like ben said FIRST of all, the military and real soldiers helped create this game in terms of scriptual/factual/strategic and tactical accuracy and clearly they have no problem with it.
This somewhat ignorant woman, who i do feel sorry for, its never easy to lose a child, comes out with nothing more than her PERSONAL opinion. Everybody has one like everyone has an A-sphincter. I can't understand her pain but while i respect it, its largely ignorance which isn't her fault.
If you don't like the game…don't play it. I watch the Military channel up here in Canada and you will see TRUE war footage, of Russian, German and other soldiers being killed or lying dead on camera. Massive wounds, bodies torn…
Many families of these people would likely hate to see this footage, as it would cause them great pain. However the same that applies here, applies to MoH…if you don't like it, don't order or watch the channel and in MoHs case, buy the game.
I find it funny though as usual certain sects of America find this game horrible, twisted and evil but only because it will be American soldiers being killed virtually by Taliban. If it was any other race like the Russians who fought Muhadjedin(spellcheck) everything would be okay.
For the strongest country in the world, no sarcasm intended, it amazes me how sensitive you are…
You(Meredith) still barely care about Hiroshima and the 70+ thousand that died JUST on initial blast let alone all who died/affected by radiation sickness…yet you can't bare the thought of a G.I.s being killed in the virtual world.
It's not cool playing as the Taliban. Have you seen that picture of the Afhgan lady with her nose cut off. They behead people and get their money from Opium. They should not be glorified in any light.
That is true…they fight and conduct themselves without morals…the Germans in WWII were viscous but the taliban does do some really evil ****…maybe they ought to change their in game title to "Afghan Militants/Rebels" to not shed any glory.
It is spelled Vicious, not viscous. Viscous is used to describe a thick solution. Also, you are a moron. Read a book.