Konami Pulls Controversial Iraqi War Game

I don't care. Who would anyway? When there is Modern Warfare 2 on the horizon.

And if you really wanna go to Iraq, enlist with the US Army. I am sure you can get there before they pull out.

@JahB:

Wait, what? Americans killing people that are dying to protect their freedom? You mean the "freedom" to do whatever Hussein told them, or be killed by him, depending on his mood? Or the "freedom" to be a part of al Qaeda and kill Americans and Europeans in terrorist attacks? That's a GREAT interpretation of freedom you have there, whackjob.

mtanous

@PatrickF**kingStar: The absolute fucking truth.

@El-Suave:

This game is by no means the big step into what you describe as "art". Nor is its cancellation the end of all hope that such a game might one day be published. Isn't this just a high budget version of Kuma Wars???

@Antiterra: Didnt GTAIV sort of already overcome these things? I mean, we got hookers in there and man wang (well 360 owners did anyway), and despite public outcry and crazy JT the game came out and became a giant success.

It's probably one of the most educational games to never be released. It made one douche bag from each game podcast study the battle of Fallujah to sound smarter than everyone else.

I dont know... this game seems more like a feeler. To see how the market and public woudl react to this type of game is what this whole news deal was about. They now know that the public would not go for it and so decided not to release it.

Mercsenary

@ShingoEX: Entirely true.

But Konami has shareholders and a reputation to protect, while the complainers have neither. In the end, Konami had to do what was best for Konami, even if gamers dont fully agree with that decision.

@lolgreg:
You're not alone, Gorilla. I'd be totally amused and tickled by it ;)

@JSPOOLE: -1 for reading comprehension.

"However, this action feels a little too harsh, and I feel it would have been better that this game at least was given a chance to approach its topic, even if it totally failed."

I will never understand people who dont entirely read what they're responding to.

+1 for APPROPRIATE, IRONIC RESPONSE: "reactionary idiots"

I am surprised that the Konami execs even thought it might be a remotely good idea to try to create this game.

Not that it wouldn't have been a good game, but speaking in terms of business... it was a dumb business decision with high risk. it is likely that it probably wouldn't have been a mega seller so they may not have even recovered production cost had it actually gone on sale.

Plus, isn't it a little too early? Most war games are released post-war.

Neer'mo

@actionfitz:

And books written about the war aren't? And the news industry is ALL ABOUT making money off of current events. This is a shame. This could be one of those games that was truly about showing real life events and extending the medium as an art form, as opposed to purely worrying about making something fun.

mtanous

This is BULLSHIT, Konami! Where's your cajones?!
You're gonna let a few Right Wingers dictate what VIDEO GAME gets released ? I wouldn't doubt these Right Wingers made death threats to the El Segundo branch against releasing "Six Days in Fallujah". FUCKING ASSHOLES! I hope President Obama puts you mother fuckers in-check. You're just as fucked up as those extreme jihadists.

@chup88: Don't worry, now that it's canned people will never shut up about it. It will always be "that game" that got canned because we just weren't ready for it.

dirtface

@Gorilla Snow is Maximum Risky: Faaaabbbulous!

Mixed feelings. On the one hand I feel like this is socially driven self censorship that stifles creative freedom and the potential growth of the video game medium's artistic integrity. On the other, many people seem to be genuinely mad about a conceived attempt to make money off of controversial events that involve massive loss of life. What would Konami really gain from having released the game? From a business standpoint there was potential for large sales from genuine interest, public exposure, and curiosity. However, there would also be major underlying damage to the company's image. Maybe (in spite of other questionable choices which I'm too lazy to Google), they are a more ethically concerned company than people give them credit for. Many businesses in this industry do evil things as big businesses tend to do. I also doubt they were thrilled about eating the costs of producing the game.

mrpibb79

The Asahi report is a bit unclear as to whether or not Atomic was ordered to stop work on 6 Days (unlikely) or Konami simply dropped their publishing agreement (far, far more likely). If the game was slated for a 2010 release, it certainly wasn't close to completion, so there's no sense of Konami simply giving up on a released game.

Honestly, this doesn't surprise me one bit from a business standpoint-- Konami USA has some pretty screwed up ideas of what will sell in NA, so the fact that they could misread the "complaints" so badly is not really out of character for them. Do I think this is censorship? On some level, maybe. I just happen to think that Konami's decision wasn't made out of political concerns, but rather thinking with their wallets.

While it's not a game I would particularly care to play myself, I hope that it does well when it's released-- probably by another publisher, and we should be hearing someone step up to that role any minute now (seriously, do you honestly think any publisher in their right minds would not be interested in a game that has this much attention, positive and negative, already? it's free advertising and Konami's execs are probably going to kick themselves in about a week or so).

JZeitler

@PatrickF**kingStar:
Hmmmm I nominate this comment for overreaction of the week.

CRRRUNK -AKA RedRing O'Houlihan

@excel_excel: Perfect.

@Gorilla Snow is Maximum Risky:what about....super?

@ShingoEX:

Tell me about it, ShingoEX...

@crunks: It was to be an incredibily sucky game anyhows, so i doubt we'll have any "what if's" about it.

@excel_excel: You only needed a one word reply. I would have went with 'great', but that's just me.

@phinehas: It is that simple though.

What's happening here is that Konami is afraid of drawing backlash from parties that have nothing better to do than challenge things they don't particularly care about just because of their own "high moral standards."

I like the fact that someone is trying to represent modern events in a more tangible fashion than news stories that just pop in to say "8 killed by IED." It's a shame that it would get shut down because of a few elitists that have a bit too loud of voices.

I'm Arab and I am not offended in any kind. I'm disappointed in the not so open minded fellas.

knight64

@jamesjohnson01:
They'll just reuse most of it for a very similar fps, then sell that instead.

Lozmaster

@Gorilla Snow is Maximum Risky: ?NWOD. GNIHTYREVE. TUHS

@FP_slomo788: One word. But it describes the situation quite well!

@PatrickF**kingStar: and to be fair.....that would be would be AWESOME!!

Disappointing. This is one game, just one game that tries to push gaming as a legitimate medium for examining real life situations like books and movies can do so easily and it gets booted. Konami should have stood there ground, there just as to blame for this.
Does it really matter whether the game would have been good or not? no it doesn't just like plenty of books and movies on the subject aren't good either.

@dodongski: FILTHY AMERICAN

YOU WANT HAMBURGER?

YOU WANT PIZZA?

AMERICAN PIG.

I don't know the rest of it but lol.

TaylorEatWorld has become a Never-nude!

@crunks:
Least they got paid and still have jobs.

If you wanna feel bad for a developer, feel bad for the guys who made Thrill Kill. Now that sucked!

This was expected.

Not sorry to see this cut either. I agree that this game is a bit to soon.

@PatrickF**kingStar: too true man, people flame him, flame people him....err....wat?

@misterx231: I'm not so certain that you know what censorship is. Go look it up.

@hitokirimaru:
EVERYTHING.SHUT.DOWN.
DOWN.EVERYTHING.SHUT.

That should about cover it.

@Alternate, I cho-cho-chose the impossible:

So you are glad a bunch of reactionary idiots got the game cancelled without ever giving it a fair chance?

Good for you.

JSPOOLE

@El-Suave: Very true. At this rate, video games will never reach the legitimacy of other media.

Maturity is not measured by realistically-rendered eviscerated guts or jiggly boob physics (though both are enjoyable in their own right...).
Wouldn't a good measure of maturity be the commitment to a project, notwithstanding the moral quandaries it may present (and even because of them)?

Games should be allowed to challenge in more ways than just high difficulty settings.

@Gorilla Snow is Maximum Risky: I was in the middle of writing a pretty long post giving my thoughts on this entire subject, until i realized i was just going off on a huge tangent and held backspace for a little while, so this entire post is pretty meaningless.

Atomic Games should just go to the extreme to piss everyone off by adding a waterboarding minigame and a playable Dick Cheney unlockable. I'd probably be the only person amused by that though...

lolgreg

@hitokirimaru: I think you're on to something.

@Gorilla Snow is Maximum Risky: DOWN. EVERYTHING.SHUT?

@Gorilla Snow is Maximum Risky: Wait, scratch that, reverse it.

@PatrickF**kingStar: SHUT. EVERYTHING. DOWN.

Knowing how much money goes into titles like this, I think another publisher will pick this one up, controversy is just another name for 'free advertising' Konami may have backed away but there are plenty who wont.

@misterx231:
like maybe letting you see the conflict from the eyes of an iraqi? like fuck.

actionfitz

Absolutely ridiculous. It's this kind of exaggerated controversy that really messes up this industry more than any of the other medias. I hope video games grow past this soon. I didn't really care about this game much, but this is, in effect, censorship imposed by overzealous controversy manufacturing. Video games will never be able to expand into these important areas while this nonsense keeps happening.

@Payka: I agree, this stupid.
You spend so much money developing and making something, and then suddenly decide not to release it, which is the only way you'll ever get any of that money back? Dumb.

@Gorilla Snow is Maximum Risky: My thoughts as well.

It could have been a good game, it could have been a bad game. Either way, it was garnering a lot of attention for just the subject matter.

Oh well! As long as video games exist, they will always have opportunities to show that they can be a serious art form in the 21st century. This wasn't our only hope....

was it?

Atomsk88

@Combine:
Well yes, but that's true of everything in the world

.@Payka:
I don't think you read the post I was responding to correctly.

@dodongski:

OH SHIT. IT'S THAT TIME AGAIN.

For those new to Kotaku, once a week, some idiot posts something incredibly inflammatory on a blog post, and we argue amongst ourselves for several hundred posts. This week's topic almost completely unrelated to the article will be "The Morality Behind America's Wartime Actions".

If you still have any hope of seeing Video Games as something of a mature pastime after seeing this game get pulled, prepare to have it dashed to the wind as we make utter asses of ourselves. Or you can just do the smart thing, and ignore this comment. Please. Do it. We won't hate you for it.

+ Watch video

@ShingoEX: This.

@pmur:
Even if the game was crap at least it could motivate others to go in this direction and put the subject out in the open. Those whiners seriously piss me off. "too soon"?

Payka

@lolgreg: Well played.

@Clemenceau:
because we all know the game wouldnt have been exploitive of a real life tragedy/travesty promoting american propaganda... /sarcasm off.

actionfitz

I'm only glad this game isn't getting released b/c I'm not sure Konami really had what it tooks to give this issue/game justice. If it's going to be done, it has to be done right, and I'm not sure this was it.

@phinehas:

Then how simple is it?

@misterx231: the problem is it's a game about americans killing people that are dying to protect their freedom.

@Neonox: Dude, this isn't really that simple.

I was looking forward to this game (stupid, I know, as all we've really seen of it are developer interviews). I was hoping that maybe, just maybe, this would be the game that would kick the medium up from being perceived as just toys to a legitimate means of examining a difficult subject, like as books, movies, and television.

On the other hand, looking through Atom Game's back catalog shows that there was a 99.9% chance that wouldn't happen. All and all this is probably best for everyone involved.

@ca$h:
I really dont see another country complaining about this

Payka

@Hraesvelgr: Konami was the one who balked, so they're just as guilty.

ShingoEX

@ca$h: Chances are they could be better too?

Combine

On the one hand, Im glad that some action has been taken in response to the complaints and criticisms about this game. However, this action feels a little too harsh, and I feel it would have been better that this game at least was given a chance to approach its topic, even if it totally failed.

I feel bad for Atomic Games, who seems to have put some work into this game and understands the position they have taken with it.

Lastly, this move doesn't seem out of place, maybe because earlier on we also saw that Konami was taking a different stance with the game than Atomic. IE, they kept labeling it "just a game in the end" rather than Atomic, who made it very serious business.

If they're pulling the plug on a half-finished game, fair enough. If they're deciding not to release a finished product, its a pretty weak move on Konami's part. How 'bout they release it and the public can decide if they want to play it or not?

Jake VanDeventer

That is a huge blow to the developers. They seemed optimistic and glowing in their last few interviews. Didn't they shop the concept and preview build around?, wouldn't it get picked up if it had enough merit?.

This coming from the company that released a game based on invoking revolutions. It is NOT cool to kill aliens.

PsycheE

@ShingoEX: I have to say that they definately should of released it. Even though it is controversal. Instead of seeing that as a negative, it would really be positive as it would give the game a lot of extra free press.

pmur

To be fair, this game would probably just be Act 1 of MGS4 with MGS3's aesops.

What a bunch of fucking wimps.

I'm talking about the Americans who complained about it, not Konami.

Well thats a kick in the pants to freedom of expression. Seriously, I thought this game had recieved some positive reactions as well as negative... but I guess that doesn't matter in most media outlets, the more outrage the more revenue.

Combine

So much for the hopes of gaming ever growing up to be a serious art form. I had my doubts that Konami or any Japanese publishers would be the first to do it, but it's a shame that everybody is shying away from controversy.

If all the controversy this industry can handle is about the graphics style of a game or which platform it's coming out for, then that's a really bleak prospect for them and for us.

El-Suave

Despite all the controversy, I'm actually really surprised by this decision. I thought Konami expected this sort of reaction from people but felt that on release people would see it for something else. As much as I thought this was a bad idea initially, I'm disappointed they decided not to release it this far in development.

so there censoring a game depicting a war were people are dying to protect freedom IDK something didnt sit right with me about this game however I wanted to see it realesed maybee it could of brought some thing to the table.

@dodongski:
If it wasn't the US it would be another country, and chances are they would be a lot worse.

@dodongski: I guess you can say they tortured Konami into submission.

lolgreg

Sucks.

Hurray for not pushing the medium to become an art form to portray a somewhat realistic view of a highly controversial subject, thus providing an enlightening view of the situation to the masses!

Clemenceau

A shame. And it might have become popular too, what with all the publicity it's gotten. To be honest though, I wasn't even following it to begin with, so this news doesn't affect me.

Damnit, I was really looking forward to it too. If you don't like something about game, don't complain and ruin it for everyone else, just don't play the damn thing.

although I didn't really have much interest in the game, it's very disappointing for it to possible be scrapped just because a bunch of people complain about it....

chup88

Damn, sucks for the developers who put all that time and work into it.

great... USA's so sensitive about their warcrimes... call me a troll or whatever, i'm just sick of americans talking about liberty, freedom or whatever against terrorism and then you see how they "invade" other nations or meddle in other people's businesses for their own personal gain. bleah.

Another minority group of whiners ruining it for the rest of us...

ShingoEX

@ca$h: The real question is WHY were you looking forward to? Where did they show that they were even capable of delivering on their claims?

Personally, i doubt they even can deliver, because realism would mean that it wouldn't be fun (war simply is no fun) and who would like to play a game that isn't fun? Maybe if it was free and short but besides that?

develin

@aw3str1k3r: If it all was that simple, then any wifebeating or blackface game could be released on the market - why let a group of dissenters stop those games being played? It's not like they have to play it.

Not that I think this game is really as tasteless as that, but the "it's not like you have to play it" argument is a little too clean cut and disregarding a whole ton of other factors.

The biggest one for me being, does Konami really have the resources to do this up right the way it should be? I don't think they do. Props to them if they realized that and stopped working on it accordingly.

@Combine: What has that to do with freedom of expression? Konami noticed that nobody liked their game, so they canned it. Did you read any POSITIVE report about the game.

The most positive I read was, well we don't know if it will be a good GAME or NOT but it doesn't look like any of their claims of 'realism' were more than marketing.

develin

@Xcite79: The fact that you actually think that the issue was that "they want Iraq and the whole world to convert to muslims" shows that you sir, are the idiot.

And its Shi'ite, not Shitte.

forzak

@dodongski: You have a problem with America, yet the idea of Konami making a video game about a complex and uncomfortable current event simply to make money doesn't seem to bother you? Whose values are more screwed up?

@mtanous: Keep politics out of here in particular if you don't know what you are talking about.

develin

@mtanous: Have you even read any of the reports of that game? Yeah, full destructible environments, recharging health and a gameplay that makes CoD4 look realistic and the comment that 'after all it is just a game', don't sound like they tried for that.

Instead it sounds like they just wanted to get some cheap intention by their talk of talking to terrorists. Hooray.

Next to that, as long as games are supposed to be fun, they will never be art and I thank god for that. Anything else is just idiot talk.

develin

@El-Suave: I have followed the game a bit, and yeah, that's more or less what it looked like. Unless our troops really ARE equipped with Halo health- god knows they deserve it.

But I do agree with you- my biggest disappointment with CoD: World at War was that they didn't have the guts to make a Japanese or German campaign. I would really, really like to see a well done WW2 from the Axis perspective. It would be a really powerful gameplay experience. On the flip side, though, I would find an FPS where you played as an insurgent in Iraq deeply offensive and disturbing no matter how well it was handled. I guess it's just a bit too recent for me.

I think that it was cancelled not because of the message it was to send, but because it was clearly not going to sell well with all this negative press. I would cry over it more if it seemed like they were actually going the artistic route with it. I would applaud it, even, though I would find it difficult to play- I very nearly ended up there (Iraq), and my brother-in-law, a very solid guy, is there now. It would hit a little too close to home for me.

Dangeresque, Eliminating Targets

@aw3str1k3r: No it isn't. What happend that they went all out and claimed that they wanted to do a serious and realistic war game and what they showed was a Red Faction skinned as Call of Duty.

Every commentator who had been at the event asked afterwards WTF ? Not to mention that it was a bad idea in the first place.

Basically they made another CoD4 rip off and tried to sell it by claiming contacts to terrorists ... great ...

develin

@dodongski:

liberals brain washed you, huh? Your not a troll, your an idiot. I agree that we shouldn't have entered but Suddam Hussein caused "actual" crime. EVERYTHING would have turned out ok if the "true meddlers" (the terrorists) didn't interfere. They don't want to see a democracy. They want Iraq and the whole world to convert to muslims. I really wonder what you think are personal gain was. As far as im concerned it was to free a country from a dictator.

Now I said, I wasn't for the war. I wasn't. Iraq and Iran are enemies and it was good to have that balance there but now Iran is trying to influence Iraq's Shitte majority. As bad as it is, in no way should USA look bad. It was for a good cause. People like you are the ones ruining America.

The game should be released. Peer pressure is a bitch. I would like something other than continues World War games.

@misterx231: You are misusing the word "censor". To censor is to edit out content, usually due to its offensive nature. The truth is far less despicable than you make it sound- Konami thought to themselves "Wow, people really don't want us to make this game. That probably means they won't buy it, and thus we won't make money." So they chose not to back it. Similar to you not investing in the stock market when you know it's about to tank. It's smart.

Besides, honestly? I really think it's impossible for them to have handled it tastefully. It's a Japanese developer making a game about an experience that has traumatized many young Americas, quite recently. It's not Medal of Honor, about a war that happened decades ago. It's not Call of Duty 4, intentionally vague so as to not overly draw parallels. It's very specific, and very recent. They would have had to be mind-blowingly delicate, and I just don't think the creators of DDR and MGS have it in them.

And, of course, there is the part where you're telling another country how they should feel about horrible events that have happened to them. It'd be like if we made a Japanese-style RPG about surviving the atomic bombing of Nagasaki and tried to sell it to the Japanese. THEY WOULD BE UPSET. So are we.

Dangeresque, Eliminating Targets

wow. that is the stupidest shit ever. its shit like this that makes me cringe at being called an American.

for every Tom mother fucking Clancy game that I've busted into a broken Mexico and slaughtered a bunch of hard working Mexicans, it's about time i had the chance to off a few american soldiers.

p.s. Im not mexican, or even hispanic, Ive just noticed that that race is the enemy in almost every Tom Clancy game. it's rather bizarre.

@ca$h: Reset the world . txen eht nepO

@Netnavi: granted...I don't know the whole story of the incident.

@Lozmaster: "the names and locations were changed to protect the innocent"

seriously just bring the game out with a new "location" and let the hypocrite soldiers baww it out. WTF are they playing video games?

I know why Konami scrapped the title but man it could have been a way to tell a story of what happened. How accurate was the Black Hawk Down game. Is it only ok to make a videogame about war if the Americans are the protagonists? When they fuck up then they baww about it.
Do Germans or Japanese people baww about being the enemy in WW2 games?

Blahh!1! Whatever!

@excel_excel: Exactly. Games will never reach the same artistic level of other mediums not because of the nature of a game, but because no one in this industry has the balls to actually try and lift itself out of the "14-year-old-killin'-things" image.

It doesn't matter if this game turned out to be good, or even tasteful. What mattered was someone tried something serious and genuinely mature, and our industry said "na, put some boobs and chainswas in and then we'll talk"

Granted they may get another publisher, but that isn't likely. GOD DAMN I'M PISSED TOM!!

@mtanous: if this had been a movie (or book, as you say), no one would've said a thing. the people commenting in the linked article protesting the game are all idiots, and it's only because this is a video game that they're being given any publicity at all. people know they can have this effect with games if they act like a victim, but when was the last time a movie was actually canceled after being filmed because someone complained?

lordofsword

@Alex_Mexico:
The most logical answer would be passage of time.
Oh and that america won(people love being portrait as heroes,no?).

I just did some research and wrote up a little timeline about the publishing history of Six Days in Fallujah, thought you guys might be interested in giving it a read. [www.onelastcontinue.com]

Wasn't mad about the game, but disappointed to see Konami fold under pressure so early. I do agree that America can't have it their own way all the time, I sometimes get the sense that even games set in Vietnam are 'a little to soon' for Americans.

If Konami could have made the game more of a tribute to the troops who fought there, and if it gave folks a chance to see how tough war can be, then I see no problems with the game being set where it's set.

Guess America just don't like having themselves put before a mirror.

I guess we can forget about ever seeing the Hurricane Katrina survival game?

..wait...is that too soon too?

I suppose it's too soon to have a Holocaust game too? Or, hunger survival in Africa? Darfur? Spanish Inquisition? Abortion?

As long as subjects remain "too soon" or taboo to talk about, we'll never move on from them. Having open discussion about these kind of things does allow for healing. People are WAY too easily offended these days.

@Alternate, I cho-cho-chose the impossible:
There is no "softer" way here without konami giving up on the goal they set for the game.
They wanted to fully and realisticly portrait the conflict.
So either they go the whole way or pull the project.

Neither do I agree with applauding them for taking any kind of action in response to complaints suppressing this topic.

I just want to know, why is it totally ok to keep bringing year after year World War II shooters but if anyone mentions an Iraq game everyone jumps out of their seats???

oh americans...

sigh...

@francoamerica: Sure thing, as a matter of fact I haven't followed the game except for the pr basics, so I know nothing about the quality. It might have turned out genereic and controversial only for the sake of that being a selling point for them.
Still I wish the industry had the guts to stick to their guns and to push the limits of what you can do in a game. If this game hadn't pushed those limits and it was all just a pr stunt, then they would have and should have been heavily critized for it.

For example after all these years we still haven't gotten a WW2 shooter with a serious, non cliched German single player campaign. There are countless movies that depict the war from the German side's point of view - most of them even what you would call anti-war movies, and they're excellent. Games, and apparently gamers just aren't mature enough and I'm disappointed about that.

El-Suave

@ShingoEX: Not too sure who exactly you mean. Seems like both sides involved in this conflict has something to say about it.

Nevertheless, I completely agree that this is an irrational move to appease, perhaps, a small population that is much more vocal than the rest.

What a shame.

@Chris3000: The pulling of this titles was the result of a small group of people bitching and complaining just enough to get Konami to pull it.

ShingoEX

@Phazon: There's plenty of them in japan. And plenty of them is available to import/buy with credit card and download.

And people play them.

But you don't seem to
1) play them
2) care about them
3) even know about their existence

So, yeah, it's that simple, hey.

@phinehas: Well, game, like any other medium is never sure to be done right way. Every side of conflict wants to show the story their way and it's hard, for bystanders to see what exactly happened. Books and movies can do it wrong way sometimes(usually) so why not games?

Areinu

@Phazon: I'll be sure to say that about whatever games you like, whether it makes sense or not.

Valnen

@HueyFreeman: That's a good question. Maybe EA?

Probably not a Japanese-based company, tho.

@MrKlorox: So? God forbid we have something that might offend some people.

This is cowardice.

Valnen

@develin: Re: WHY? - Read the second sentence of my original post.

One could argue among those lines for movies, too. War isn't entertaining, so how could they possibly make s realistic movie about it that is at the same time entertaining? But it's been done a whole bunch of times. It all depends on how the narrative is handled. I think that is true of games as well, its just that so far no one has figured out how to do it.

CoD4 came pretty close, but it was more Stallone than Spielberg.

@Xcite79: So.. the reason USA tortures, kidnaps and so on are "the true meddlers"? Wow.. You are just so smart.

Fisketryne

@PatrickF**kingStar: Hehe.. Your penetrating gaze misses nothing. I´m guessing your midichlorian count is way up.

Fisketryne

@excel_excel: more like Faaaabbbulouth!

avprox777

@Alex_Mexico: there's a world of difference here - WW2 was an absolutely justified war in which the enemy was a genocidal army led by a fucking madman that planned to eradicate entire peoples. in other words - invading germany and shooting nazis is entertainment material, because it has the good vs evil mechanic that entertainment usually provides.

iraq on the other hand - a relatively stable country (a long shot from perfect, but still) invaded and plundered by the world's most powerful army. there's no good vs bad here. only bad vs bad and lots of civilians caught in the crossfire.

@excel_excel: This game wasn't the game to do that. The gaming media wanted the game to be respectable and flat out good enough to carry such a sensitive name but the actual game itself fell so ridiculously short of that. Therefore Konami is doing what is probably an excellent PR move in the long run and not releasing the game in its current state.

As for being completely canceled, that is silly. Konami is likely rebranding the game so folks won't be so critical when it doesn't do the subject matter justice.

MrKlorox

Yes, Let's go play Call of Duty 4 now, where we can make everything okay by changing the bad guys into Russian terrorists in an Arab country instead.

@Chibirazi: Yes but I dont see germans complaining about every WWII shooter they make where you kill germans all the time.
Im not pro war games (in fact I've never bought a WWII game before) but Im against double standards. If half the world makes WWII games why cant a japanese company make a videogame about the Iraqi war? Thats it.
Either make both, or make none.

Doesnt matter who won, or who lost. Geez.

@mtanous: uhm, you might want to stop watching fox news. it still makes me lol that they pass as a "news" network in the states...

Hi. It wasn't just because it was set in Fallujah. It is because it is set in Fallujah and the actual game is kindof silly. The actual game itself isn't respectable enough to hold a title with such sensitive undertones as this.

Think before you comment, people!

MrKlorox

@Xcite79: Hey there, Mr. Conservative. I'm a Liberal. I'm just dropping by real quick to say, we absolutely do not take responsibility for this guy's words. Honestly? We thought he was with you. If you say he's not, we believe ya- you an' me may have our disagreements, but we both try ta stay civil, eh?

So yeah. If he's not with us... and he's not with you... maybe he's with the Libertarians? I dunno man. But he ain't a Liberal.

Dangeresque, Eliminating Targets

@dodongski: hmm... what do you have to say about it being an american video game developer making the game... Atomic Games is based out of North Carolina...

@dodongski: Germans + Holocaust
Japan + Nanking
England + Colonialism(especially South East Asia)
Australians + Aborigines

Try again bro

Black-Dog-Howls

@Xcite79:

"your not a trool, your an idiot."

SaanZ

@phinehas: And what company do you think DOES have it takes?
I hate Metal Gear Solid, but it didn't get 8+ from every magazine for no reason.

HueyFreeman

@develin: Seconded. Oh, and as a preemptive strike- if we get any "What's wrong don't you love your country" I swear to God....

Dangeresque, Eliminating Targets

Konami are fucking pussies.

HueyFreeman

I'm glad this game was canned. It was in extremely bad taste.

Phazon

@Hraesvelgr: Normally, I would agree... but I feel a little more understanding in this situation. There are two elements to this that I see... first, why they would likely not do it justice, and two, why complaining seems fair to me.

First, it's a Japanese studio. The Japanese had no troops committed to Iraq, at least not that I'm aware of (as I recall, they aren't permitted a standing army, just the JSDF), and thus their society really hasn't had to deal with the issue like ours has. They haven't had relatives come home scarred emotionally and physically, haven't had friends die, haven't had that experience. I'm not trying to be racist- it's not because they're Japanese that I feel they would do it wrong. It's because their society had no real involvement.

And why is it okay to complain? Well, let's say for a moment that they actually did this game right, that they did give us a game that was artistic and realistic and honestly like being on the ground at Fallujah, within the limits of a game of course. Why would we want that? Art should be free to express what it chooses, but... well, I believe that there is an unspoken "statute of limitation" on traumatic events. An amount of time where it can reasonably be called "too soon." We are well within that window. It's too soon after the events there for anyone to be very objective, either the creators or those experiencing the game from the consumer side. There is still too much emotion, and there is still too much we don't know. Give it time. Make the game five years from now, when (hopefully) we're out of Iraq, and beginning to move on as a society.

I believe greatly in artistic expression. If they'd censored the game, banned it in stores, or petitioned it? I would have been deeply upset by that. But it sounds like it was just some people writing letters that said "Please don't." What is wrong with that?

Dangeresque, Eliminating Targets

@Payka:

Maybe IRAQ! the place where the was actually happened

SaanZ

Well this is a brilliant win for the first amendment. (/sarcasm)

@Archaneus: Controversity? Wasn't that what they WANTED. I mean, what do you expect when a developer goes out and says: Yeah, we spoke with terrorists to get our point of view balanced.

Besides the fact that that is most likely a lie on both ends, why not just say, that they tried to keep a objective view based on the reports they had? Why throw in the "insurgent" talk? Yeah, to stir controversy. And THAT is JUST stupid!

Serious movie 101 - stir controversy with what you have to say, not with how you made the movie.

develin

@jamesjohnson01:

I actually wonder about that, it looks like a wargame based off of MGS4 in certain aspects so it might be mostly recyled assets. My guess is the budget didnt go too high.

SaanZ

@Neonox: Yeah and why don't we have a game where you get to play as a rapist or a pedophile and if people don't like it they can just not play it, simple hey.

Phazon

You know what, I thought it was a bit "too soon" that they're were movies like United 93 and the other 9/11 movie with Nicholas Cage, but those were still made and with very little controversy about them.

now could you imagine if those had been games? people would bomb the offices of the developers, and why? because games just lack the overall respect that films or literature have, and it drives me crazy. and I'm starting to see that some of it, maybe even most of it, is our fault as gamers and devs and publishers.

when a company as big as Konami cops out like this it just restates the fact that games are just games, not art and that even industry giants can get pushed away from their goals instead of being pushed towards proving people like Rosenthal wrong.

I wondering what made them chicken out.. this game had many conterversial sides.. but one side I didn't expect that people where holding torches over the developer approach to communicate with the "terrorist" side of the fence, because its somehow unpatriotic to talk with insurgents.

Plsk1n

@phinehas: Why does it matter what country makes the game. If its made by EA does that give them any special insite into the game? No. The world is global and I hardly see why people believe that you have to be an American to make a game about America fucking up.

ddhboy

@phinehas: In case it wasn't apparent, the first sentence was referring to the rape/pedophile games. That's nothing to say of my suggested blackface/wifebeating scenario games.

@Areinu: Just b/c they exist doesn't mean they should. imo, they shouldn't.

Games are still a budding medium that are markedly different from movies and books, particularly because of the interactive element. They are not the same and cannot be boxed the same way. I think that games can and should show this kind of stuff, even if they're not perfect, but only if the proper respect is shown to the medium. To do a game about something potentially controversial as a mere cash-in is foolish. I'm not saying it has to be the most epic masterpiece of our time or anything at all like that - but if this is just Call of Duty reskinned, it's probably better off not having been made.

@deanbmmv:
Americans+Native Americans (Technically, it was British, French and Spanish imperialists that started it.)
Americans+Nagasaki/Hiroshima (The Japanese most definitely started that one, and the Chinese and Koreans would probably say they deserved it.)
Americans+Vietnam (The North invaded the South, we tried to help, much like Korea.)
Americans+Iraq(Twice)(Both times sanctioned by the UN, once to expel the Iraqis from Kuwait, the second time to enforce UN WMD inspections, since Saddam kept kicking the weapons inspectors out of the country.)

@Alex_Mexico:
That really isnt true.
There are enough germans complaining about this.
Thing is neither the media nor the government want to risk speaking up in that matter simply because of the still large ignorance(or fear thereof) of many people comparing todays germany with nazi germany if even remotely bringing it up.
JahB proves that ignorance pretty much as you can see.
A tip on the sideline JahB,if you proclaim a army "genocidal" learn your historic facts first.

Horrifically disappointed. Seriously was on my list of must by games, regardless of the end quality.

ddhboy

@JahB: "Plundered" implies a transfer of wealth, material or otherwise. Given the bill for operations in Iraq and the apparent situation that we didn't bother to pay for the thing with their oil revenues, I'm not entirely sure we've "plundered" them.

Maybe somebody got rich off of Iraqi wealth, but it sure doesn't appear to have been the United States' treasury.

@chup88: The post doesn't go into great detail but just uses a blurb to say they got a lot of reaction. The extent and true nature of the reaction is not discussed. For all we know, it could have been Ma and Pa or it could have been a Islam relations group. There is just not enough info to make a judgment based on the post alone. I would like to think that Konami did some serious reflection on the issue before they decided to pull their support.

BrokenSoul

Yanks prolly thought it was out to promote terrorisum and decided to bomb konami for 2 days until they had to give up

@Gorilla Snow is Maximum Risky: Somehow Willy Wonka is not the person I would be quoting on this topic. But I suppose candy wars can be close to international conflict. Did you get your golden ticket?

BrokenSoul

@Zenrick3.0: These fish sticks are hard as tits.

I see that someone has been thoroughly castrated.

shame

mrmud

Does anyone here like fishsticks?

@Black-Dog-Howls:
Is that a "everyone else has done it, why aren't we allowed"

Oh
Americans+Native Americans
Americans+Nagasaki/Hiroshima
Americans+Vietnam
Americans+Iraq(Twice)

You guy's need to stop though, you guy's are starting to catch up.

@Dangeresque, Eliminating Targets: very Insightful, yes sir You are correct I misused the word censor I was not thinking straight. However the point I was trying to make was that in concept this could have been an expansion of what the videogame medium could of been used for, sighting the documentary style narative the game was to have. but I whole heartly agree that konami was not the best company to make this game.

@OMFGLOL: But don't you get it? Movies are art and games are just stupid toys...

@ShingoEX:
Not being entirely sarcastic when I ask this, were you really looking forward to buying it?

Psudonym

@Netnavi: i dont think it was realy soldiers that criticized it. Infact Kotaku published some quotes from soldiers who were for it.

Although its retarded they get so much shit for this, yet World Trade Center and United 93 films where released, and I am sure they made profit on them....only 5 years after the attacks

OMFGLOL

what the hell, come on.... Why does the squeaky wheel always get the grease? I want this game released! People need to let game devs do what they want. We have a billion movies that people could have said the same things but they still got made.

boots555

@crunks:
Calm down, I'm sure they'll release the game.

It's just they'll replace Iraqi's with robots and Americans with pixelated space invaders.

I'm just surprise that the US said not to release a game about the US in Iraqi war,
Actually,no,no I'm not

Really just because its about a Iraq War Game(US vs Iraq) does not mean to Cancel it for the US

I mean really if it was a war about US vs. Russia or like that it would be okay.

But about the Iraq War?
I have never read or heard of illegal War Games for consoles and/or PC

I hope Konami has the balls to put the game in really
just because people in the US didn't want to play it

If they don't want to play it then don't buy it.

If you see it in the TV/Radio/Computer just switch the damn channel/station/website

Really it is really not that hard to do so.

All they got to do is rename the game and resale it as is without a change in code whatsoever and it'll just be another fps. I don't see much difference at all from one game to the next anymore in that genre. If you own one damn war game you've owned them all.

Thai Tea

maybe they just realized it wasn't gunna be that fun of a game

(not saying that they need to be fun, but the general populous wants GoW, not a actual war sim)

pandafresh

@Dangeresque, Eliminating Targets: Sorry dude, not with us... I thought he came with you guys, fuck, the guy's just there drinking our booze and hitting on our girls... damn, what is he?

@dodongski: Obviously 100% of Americans disagree with you, which is why John McCain is president.

justlikejames

@develin: I read a fair few, where they got impressions from people who actually served in war who thought it wasn't going to be that bad a thing.
Just because you didn't read any positive report about the game doesn't mean there wasn't.

The reason this project is being shutdown is becasue Konami saw the ridiculous levels of controversy that will surround this game just made it so it wasn't worth releasing for them.
Thats a pity, it stopped a developer being able to release their personal vision and statement about war, terrorism etc.
The reason it was pulled was because angry letters/reactions from whats likely to be a small group.

Combine

@dodongski:

You sound pretty butthurt, maybe some water boarding will cheer you up.

Also another shitty war game canceled. Most definitely a case of "Nothing of value was lost", if i ever saw one.

@Black-Dog-Howls:

USA + Nuking - Fallout 3

Lame

BrinstarBrew

@dodongski: This is why we can't have nice things.

Sullyville

they should tom clancy it and say it take place in 2015 and change the names.

cihx

WHY!!!? This game looked great.

I'm going to complain about everything from now on, so i can ruin other people's things.

PenitentPenguin

It's sad that our hobby's industry doesn't have the balls to release such controversial titles. It's releasing games like this that will stir positive debate about games as art and social commentary.

It's easy to sweep games under the proverbial rug and dismiss them as toys when you're talking about games like BoomBlox (not picking on the game, love it, actually) or Mario but when it's a game that takes place in a roughly historically accurate time frame and setting that makes you uncomfortable to think about, then you realize games truly are more powerful and relevant than other certain media. I say, if movies like Black Hawk Down or United 93 can be released, then why not a game like this?

Anyone who spent the time to complain about this game or write Konami emails or what have you should be ashamed of yourself. You just halted our forward progress. Congrats.

Good, good.

Now maybe they can put the money into a game that makes America look like the white knight marching in to save everyone. You know, the standard war FPS.

Nslick

That is a shame

NeoSamurai

@deanbmmv: Actually, notoriousEIC already pointed this out to you, and in better detail.

Jimbotron

This is truly unfortunate. People will always be offended by things, but in a capitalist society, they have the right not to support it with their money. This will be a real missed opportunity for the industry to mature, or at least have a chance to mature.

@deanbmmv:

Americans+Native Americans...throw in British+Native Americans and French+Native Americans. All of them did underhanded things at some point.

Americans+Nagasaki/Hiroshima = the end of World War II, which is a good thing. Otherwise the fighting in Japan could have gone on for much longer, and more people could have ended up dead than with the atomic bombs.

Americans+Iraq(Twice): this one is just wrong. The first Gulf War was a United Nations mission, with the US contributing the most to it. But it was still a UN mission. The second one involved more than just the US, though again, they contributed the most to it. Had it not been for the terrorists coming into Iraq after Saddam was removed since he was keeping them out, things would have turned out a lot different and a lot better.

Better luck next time.

Jimbotron

I was really looking forward to what Konami was going to do with this game. I was hoping that it was going to be the first of a new genre of documentary like games. But leave it to conservative America to condemn it without ever learning anything about it. Yea for ignorance!!!

@Valnen: Seriously? You can't respect that someone has a view point that is different than yours? Grow up.

@Dangeresque, Eliminating Targets: Libertarians aren't that stupid. Well, the non-celebrity ones anyways.

Jimbotron

@Dangeresque, Eliminating Targets: Konami had nothing to do with the game's development (the actual developer, Atomic Games, is an American company).

And this is exactly why we are stuck with games from WWII

Woz

@excel_excel: "Konami should have stood THEIR ground, THEY'RE just as to blame for this." THERE, I fixed it for you. :-)

@OMFGLOL: The film World Trade Center wasn't about the attacks; it was a story about two firefighters stuck in the rubble. It was centered around them.

I was kind of looking forward to this game. It would have been an interactive way to learn about the battle in Fallujah and what it was like.

Jimbotron

and Mc. Donalds just sold another 1000 macs.

I'm not surprised. There's still some controversy over how the US handled Fallujah. The bleeding heart liberals are still crying about the damage done to the mosques and the civilian casualties.

If a game is going to be divisive on grounds other than the merits of the game itself... then it was probably best to shelve it.

VoodooHack

@deanbmmv: You forgot a few, US/El Salvador, US/Chile... hell, half of Latin America. I don't really like saying America Vs Anything else, since well, there's also South America, Central America, and we feel a little forgotten :S

BTT, it's the fact that the US (Goverment) has decided to police the world the reason so much dirt get thrown at them. The corruption doesn't help either (that is, they never intervene where there's no money, etc).

Pretty idiotic, I know someone who was actually IN Fallujah and he was looking forward to this game.

Weak!

NoobSmasher

@dodongski:

troll.

MooglesInMyFace

@ddhboy: I personally don't think a Japanese company could do it well. If Poland or Swaziland wanna have a crack at it, then all the more power to 'em.

@notoriousEIC: Well if my memory serves me correctly it was americans who invaded Japan when japanese were still having that law which prohibided any foreigners being in Japan and when japanese started to force americans to leave the americans put Japan into embargo which forced Japan to attack USA...I hope you understood my engrish there.

@fisho420: rookie move fish rookie move

href="#c12391187">cornunderscore2x:Hello, I bought your toothpaste the one with tatar control and it made me feel like a piece of ....

@Psudonym: Actually, yes. I get a kick out of these games, and the authenticity factor as far as setting and events sold me.

ShingoEX

@dirtface: Oh god, if only we had Frame City Killer, there would be no more rrod.Rrod is the 360's heart breaking over the cancelling of Frame City Killer, you know?

Really though, the cancel is likely the work of a microcosmally small group of idiots with way too much time on their hands.

KenogaBrave

@OMFGLOL: The same kinds of arguments were raised for these films, although I can say for United 93. They actually used some people who were involved in the event as "actors".

cinemandrew

@Netnavi: I don't know that many (if any) were complaining about this game making America look bad. I think the general complaint was more that this was a horrible tragedy on both sides, and people didn't see think it was right to use it as entertainment. I would have loved to have seen a game with a message, which what the developers were saying it was going to be, but then you have Konami saying that it's just a game, and it's designed for entertainment. So of course someone's going to shit a brick. If I went through a situation where I got shot at, had friends and co-workers shot and killed in front of me, and had to shoot and kill someone else, I know I'd sure as fuck be a little sensitive about someone calling it entertainment.

cinemandrew

@ShingoEX: That's how it always goes. I wanted to play this game. well poo...

@dodongski:

Imagine China invading the US to liberate us from our oppressive Maobama. Then imagine them killing your family members, which is exactly what the US government has done in Iraq (not we, I didn't vote for any of the more popular candidates).

So yes, a war crime is exactly what the US gov't has committed, they've effectively raped an entire country of its sovereignty and bred countless insurgents thanks to their bombing raids and urban warfare, killing thousands of innocents.

Delano_J

@MrKlorox: Sorry didn't mean booted to equal cancelled! I don't see anywhere how it fell ridiculously short of being respectable and carrying the sensitive name?

@Mr.SithNinja: VOCABULARY POLICE....I got a few speeding tickets alright :)

@phinehas: Konami is just the publisher. The developer Atomic Games is based out of Raleigh, NC in the USA.

[www.atomic.com]

...Just sayin'.

@Thorax: agreed 100%. When will this perception that video gaming can't cover what books and movies do change? Seeing a fucking penis in GTA means nothing!

@Chris3000: And that's the thing. People are always quick to attack an action, but rarely do people think to defend that same action. So in a situation like this, you get people complaining about the game to no end, but very few people actually defend the game, until it gets pulled. Then everyone comes out of the woodwork to say "What the fuck? The minority ruined it for all of us sane people!" If it truly was a minority ruining this for the rest, then the majority could have easily come to it's defense, and proved to Konami that the majority of the community was ok with this. Perhaps (and I'm only speculating) Konami decided that it wasn't the majority of gamers they were worried about, but the majority of veterans.

"Nevertheless, I completely agree that this is an irrational move to appease, perhaps, a small population that is much more vocal than the rest."

What's so irrational about "appeasing" the more vocal side? If one side is making their issues heard, and the other is not, then the people up top are going to see that as a lack of interest from the other side. They're not going to assume you care. That's why we vote, because no one's going to hear your voice until you open your mouth.

cinemandrew

At this stage in the games development, wouldn't it have been more appropriate to just throw an alien in the game and be all "look, see, it's not real, mmmkay?"

Sucks ballz. A lot too.

Laurent_Wolf

@cihx: ž
Exactly.

Laurent_Wolf

Personally, I don't think they had a change in hell to actually meet their goals of delivering the real experience of soldiers in fallujah anyways. It would have just been another FPS game only where they try to shove shock factors down your throat like some of the Vietnam games that came out during the Vietnam War game boom.

RiotControl

I guess the difference between playing a disturbing history-based game and watching a disturbing history-based film is that in the game, you are taking part in what you find disturbing rather than viewing it at an higher, more objective level. I don't see how games can get past this hurdle, but if they can't, games that portray an uncomfortable or disturbing scene that ruffles historic/religious/political feathers will never be accepted. WWII games get around this by making the player feel very heroic.

This is a shame, but I guess I'll just go kill people in somehow less "offensive" games. Thanks, Call of Duty!

Next time fictionalize it, but keep the themes and events the same or similar. Wouldn't want to touch on real world events, no no..

All you silly ass kids who didn't want to actually maybe see your government as anything but GI Joe got your wishes. Assholes.

theMoJo

@Dangeresque, Eliminating Targets:
In other words, no one said: if it's actually authentic and tries to tell the story of a soldier, and maybe even give us a new perspective on things - then I'll buy it. Instead, they didn't want to risk getting their sensibilities upset.

@PatrickF**kingStar: Where do I sign up?!

It is self imposed censorship. I have no problem with that. No one MADE them pull the game, they did it because of the reactions they are receiving from the public. The public has every right to disagree with the subject matter and way this game is presented. Would you guys be pushing for Super Columbine Massacre RPG to get a commercial release on the DS because, after all, games are art now and everything should be mass produced for public consumption, regardless of how tasteless they are. Like I said re: the baby shaking app on the iPhone, I'm all for stuff like this existing and for allowing artists to make whatever games they want but Im also not gonna throw a shit fit when PRIVATE corporations decide not to release those games because of real or perceived public outcry. It may be art but its also a business and no one wants their products to be boycotted or portrayed in a negative light.

Gray665

@Dangeresque, Eliminating Targets:
Uh, yeah. Well, just as Americans want to play heroic soldiers killing Germans and Japanese and Vietnamese of good fighting ready age - I want to play an insurgent, killing American soldiers. For example being a sniper called Juba shooting the heads off nineteen- year old US marines. It would be very therapeutic, and entertaining at the same time. And yet, no one is making that game.

Conclusion: capitalism does not work.

@Convair 990A: certainly not the treasury, no. But Haliburton and Exxon secured their paychecks for the next 2 decades.

@Chibirazi: uhm, lolz. JahB is Austrian. Lost his great-grandfather in the Wehrmacht. So please don't lecture me on WW2 history.

And yes, the army was genocidal. I know that from people that were there and told the stories of how they killed people indiscriminately; and in their opinion, rightouesly. In case you're German, please don't come with the "they didn't know" excuse, because the lowly foot soldier knew damn well what was going on. And so did the wife at home. Don't believe me? My great-grandma is still cracking jokes about how they used to send people "off to the east" back in the day.

@notoriousEIC: Basically, what you're arguing is that America was 100% right in it's actions in every war. In doing so, you're conveniently ignoring the topic of the news article itself, Fallujah. Unless of course you think the outcome there was fine too.

2c-b

Bad things happen, bad things will happen, bad things are going to continue to happen, it's human nature for us to be greedy dicks so stupid wars will happen blablablabla.

Wars are not fought on the grounds of morals, they are fought for basically only two things, business and defense. Once you accept that, you will be a much saner person :D

And we keep wondering why games never approach complex themes in a mature fashion.

Danin

@Delano_J:
You act like US troops just stormed into the country and shot everyone on site, and just kept doing this for years.

An unfortunate consequence of art being a business. It's a shame, because if we're not going to sometimes say controversial or offensive or even evil things, we're not going to be much of an art form, but what can you do?

I figured the second that Atomic went public with their stupid "oh we talked to the insurgents to get their view of what it's like for them, nevermind that they tend to blow up innocent civilians more than US military" talk that it would never see the light of day. Even if they did actually talk to insurgents, they never should have mentioned it.

This game wasn't art. It was just a COD clone with a gimmick of setting it in a non-fictional situation, which they most likely weren't going to cover in a non-fictional way, unless they really planned on having civilians running for cover and you are supposed to try to not shoot them as you are in firefights with the enemy. Even if it did do that, do you think it would have an impact the way that reality would? Or would gamers just chuckle and try to kill as many civilians as they can?

Cutedge

@ColombianBan:You mean like in Somalia in the early 1990s? When we tried to feed hundreds of thousand of starving people and got nothing but a bunch of dead GIs for our trouble? Yeah, there was lots of money to be made there. Or how about Haiti or Bosnia?

@OMFGLOL: You're right. However, the WTC movie and United 93 were ok because Americans were unquestionably the GOOD GUYS in those.

I hate this shit so much. A bunch of whiners, many of which were right here on this site, have successfully caused Konami to censor itself.

Way to go, hypocrites.

Moral_Avenger

@RyuSaarva:Your "invasion" consisted of parking a ship in a harbor and opening trade negotiations. Nice try.

@phinehas: "Games are still a budding medium..."

Evolving yes. Budding, no.

cinemandrew

Why can't they just apply a nice little coat of fictionalizing paint to the title and still release it? Call Iraq someplace else, or call the troops "Ghost Recon" and slap a Tom Clancy name in front of the title. Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Six Days in Madeuplaceistan. Boom, problem solved.

If Modern Warfare can portray a thinly veiled Iraq war, any game can.

jcb231

I'm going to draw a parallel here so bear with me.

I remember the Super Columbine Massacre RPG that received much public outcry when it came out and almost won an award. The knee-jerk reactions were negative, but the content treated the tragedy event with an insight and respect that people noticed when they actually played it.

This begs the question: Would Konami have treated the second battle of Fallujah with that kind of thoughtfulness? Based on what little we saw of the game, I think they were very far from it yet. Alas, we will never know now.

VoodooHack

@Delano_J:Actually, we've provided the people of Iraq (and Afghanistan) with their own sovereignty. I don't believe they were able to vote under Saddam or the Taliban.

Also, if you had been around at the time, would you have been as indignant when we "invaded" Germany and raped the Nazis of their sovereignty? God knows we dropped plenty of bombs and killed thousand of innocents back then. The bottom line ... some countries get invaded for a reason.

@phinehas: The biggest one for me being, does Konami really have the resources to do this up right the way it should be?

If they pulled the game after this short amount of time, then I would be willing to bet they didn't have much confidence in the game.

cinemandrew

@KrylonBlue:

Wait, you played it? Dude, pass me the demo, or something. I was looking forward to it.

BOO! Grow a pair. How many of those whiners buy ANY of your video games? I'm going to guess not many, so it's not like you're losing a big chunk of your sales here.

thebigcheese

congrats US, ruin it for the rest of us.... whats wrong with shooting a marine every now and again?

@ShingoEX: I don't know too many details about this game but it seemed like a solid attempt for video games to start covering more adult themes in a more adult way. If this artform is going to get taken seriously by people other than those who are already gamers, there are going to have to be controversial releases that get criticism. I see this as a setback.

@kNZA: Unit 731 in japan, US P.O.W Cannibalism in ww2 by Japanese soldiers and etc. Shit gives me the creeps, dood. T_T

Also, I agree with you. I think it's the bad case of "If anything is big and famous, people will have to insult it and degrade it."

Even through all the controversy that has surrounded this game, I kind of secretly wanted it to be released. I just had this inkling to see how it would turn out, whether or not it would change the minds of the people it offended or vice-versa with those who thought it could do no real harm.

@Neonox: dammit! and this was going to be a day one buy for me. i hate it when this happens.

abort_user

@notoriousEIC:

Japan was doing awful things in WW2, few would argue with that.

The problem is, America had beaten Japan already.

Then America nuked two cities. Civilian cities. Not military targets.

Think about Iraq.

Iraqis want America out. If they attack the American soldiers in their country, are they wrong? Does that make them insurgents or freedom fighters?

Why is America the only country that can decide who deserves freedom and what freedom looks like?

kNZA

dang, I was really looking forward to this game, our society needs to change, its freedom of speech, and obviously we don't hold true to that often enough

@mrpibb79:

Those people would complain all the same if Konami gave the game out for free. They just don't want to see the ugly side of things.

Bricked

@darkgodofdeath:

What difference does it make if it was released now or ten years ago? People that died are still dead. "Waiting" only trivializes the event portrayed at the end.

Bricked

@phinehas:

On the other hand though, if it was developed by a foreign company, it would likely be easier for them to be more objective about it. Being a third-party removed from what's going on.

Bricked

@dd528:

I don't think there should be a thing as "too soon" period. Whether we publish the game now or ten years from now, won't change the events that happened there. Waiting until it's not "too soon" merely trivializes the event being portrayed in my opinion.

Bricked

@cinemandrew:

Oh and I forgot to mention.
What's wrong with appeasing the more vocal side? Ever hear of a thing called Prohibition? That definitely wasn't the majority of the country.

Bricked

@dd528:

Having said that, this article:

[kotaku.com]

does kind of suggest that maybe publisher and developer weren't quite seeing eye-to-eye in terms of what the game's intentions are.

dd528

@cinemandrew:

I've been defending this game since it was announced here.

Bricked

Aw come on Konami! Don't be a pussy!

Bricked

@Dangeresque, Eliminating Targets:

I do not believe there is such a thing as "too soon" if the work in question is intelligent and sincere in its aims and execution. Who knows if that would have been the case with this game. Unless a new publisher is found, I guess we'll never find out.

dd528

@SocraticMethod: Same here. I would have thought that they would have had an appreciation for how controversial the game might be very early on in the development process. The tone of the interview seems to suggest that they genuinely didn't see this coming. I am disappointed they've not stuck to their guns. Hopefully another publisher will have the guts to step up in Konami's place.

dd528

@actionfitz: Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

dd528

@kNZA:
1. It's obvious to you that America had beaten Japan now, 60+ years later. However, at the time, it wasn't obvious to the Japanese, and the Americans weren't willing to sit back and wait for them to figure it out. How do I know, because we had to nuke them, not once, but twice, before they accepted defeat. And Hiroshima and Nagasaki were considered military targets, by the way.

2. Your argument would make sense if we were actually fighting Iraqis, which we're not. The insurgents are almost exclusively from other countries, and they really don't care about Iraq, they just want to kill Americans. As for the Iraqis themselves; because of us, they now get to vote. And insurgents kill them for that.

@Cosmitzian: What possible means can you have at your disposal to know that this game wasn't going to be any good, long before it was even released?

dd528

@cinemandrew: You're playing word games. This industry hasn't been around for more then what 30 years? Budding is an appropriate term.

Hrm, do you think a bunch of people saying that WiiFit and WiiMusic are "too soon" and are fundamentally offensive will convince Nintendo to put Shiggy on another Zelda/Mario project? I mean it's worth trying, right?

@2c-b: I don't think America is always 100% right. The examples given are obviously a small sampling. My basic point is that things are generally more complex than "right" and "wrong" and that some things can be justified or at the very least explained.

@Dangeresque%2

Gundragon

@develin: Um...fully destructible environments have a legitimate place in any game trying to portray a war in a somewhat realistic fashion.

I don't recall seeing anything about the CoD4 stuff or recharging health, by the way. If you wouldn't mind providing us with a link? Furthermore, the "It's just a game comment" was made by one of Konami's marketing executives, NOT one of the developers.

Why do people only bring up the fact that they talked to the insurgents? They also talked to war historians, military officials, and Marines. In fact, it looks like they are trying to portray the horror of the event rather than attempting to portray the US as an evil, imperialistic nation attacking an innocent nation.

And there's no reason games cannot be both art and fun. There's a place for both - if you don't want the artsy games, then don't buy them. But some of us would like to see games as art. All entertainment has the capacity to become art if executed correctly.

Personally, I think games could easily transcend the games/art barrier to create something interesting and new, if not for cynical, jaded idiots like yourself who claim that games shouldn't be art, who claim that anything which tries to be art will be boring or generic, and who claim that it's attempts to become art will merely be a marketing gimmick for a bargain bin title.

I also believe that above all else:
Games should be good.
It's possible for something to be good without it being "fun". Would you call Schindler's List fun? Would you call A Clockwork Orange (the book, not the film) fun? No, but they are still undeniably compelling and powerful.

Even if Six Days In Fallujah ended up terrible, at least it TRIED to do something new.

Brmarlin

@ShingoEX: Why is it that only cool stuff gets pulled because of complaints but shit like DragonBall Evolution still gets released even after pretty much everyone complained about it? D:

@ShingoEX: Yeah. Konami's decision is weak, but predictable. I thought it was too soon for such a game, but to ask for its removal is deplorable.

Hey_Blinkon

@kNZA: "You would prefer another target, a military target? Then name the system! I grow tired of asking this so it will be the last time: *Where* is the rebel base?"

@justlikejames: Naturally 100% of Americans will disagree with me. They don't like it when someone tells them they made a stupid mistake.

@Zenrick3.0: I do! I like putting fish sticks in my mouth. Hehehe.

Frankly, I do hope to see games like this about the Iraq War... but to be fair, you need perspective to talk about history. You really can't make good movies, literature, or games about something on going... when caught up in the moment, you can't see the whole picture. Ever wonder why the best Vietnam movies were made in the late 70s and early 80s? Because they were able to get perspective to approach it tastefully and artistically.

So... basically... too soon.

@notoriousEIC: I don't think Konami's values are that screwed up. Don't you know, people around the world are just waiting and watching for America to fall like the Roman empire?

@Xcite79:
"As far as im concerned it was to free a country from a dictator."

.... seems you're the one brainwashed. You really think that's the MAIN reason why the US entered Iraq? You REALLY think America gives a damn about another nation's problems? You really think I'm the idiot here? If you still don't have ANY idea what I'm talking about, I suggest you do your research and think.

@Gray665:

"Would you guys be pushing for Super Columbine Massacre RPG to get a commercial release on the DS..."

No, I'd want it on PSP.

Bricked

@Cutedge:

Well if they're going to have civilians running around, they could have a "courtmarshalled and sent to military prison" ending for killing too many civilians.

Bricked

@jcb231:

Then the message is lost...

Bricked

@Netnavi: Yes. Fortunately, they don't get ditched, because they're not the USA

FunkyMunxy

@MrGhandi:

Well if they could make a game very open ended with multiple paths/endings, then you can opt not to have your character "do some thing bad" and if you decide to one ending can be you get busted, courtmatialed and sent to prison.

That way if you find it disturbing, you can be the strictly by the book guy, or if you're some arm-chair Marine who thinks the U.S. can do no wrong, then you can see what is happening to some of those people over there who thought the same thing.

Bricked

@Tyr4nt: People have direct ties to what happened in Fallujah. Can't say the same for MGS4.

VoodooHack

@cihx:

Then that just destroys the whole point of what they were trying to do.

Yeah the game would get out and would sell, but on the other hand the message is lost, and the game just becomes yet another shooter.

Bricked

@Nslick:

Yeah exactly. Like that time the America came in and brought peace to Sri Lanka! Wait what... or really...? America doesn't give two shits about what happens there? What about Central Africa? Oh... don't care about that either huh? What the hell are we going to make a game about then?! Oh wait, I know, WWII!

Bricked

@notoriousEIC: The bomb was dropped to avoid substantial losses on the ground. I hate to be a selfish fuck, but had the Manhattan Project been a fruitless endeavor, it could have been any of our grandfathers getting killed in a campaign that would have made Normandy's casualties look like a pillow fight.

As a quick FYI for all the aspiring history buffs who argue online, Hersey's "Hiroshima" is a phenomenal read. One of those you may have had forced on you in high school, and consequently not really cared about, but worth rediscovering later in life.

@MrKlorox:
You were on the dev or QA team?

Otherwise how can you call it "kindof silly" when it's not even out yet? What is wrong with the game itself that is lacking in respect?

Bricked

@Phazon:

How so? Without saying the words "too" and "soon".

Bricked

@Xcite79: How is the fact that the Taliban wants everyone to be fundamentalist Muslim objectively different than The Christian Right wanting all americans to be fundamentalist Christian?

Indiedog

@WillSerenity:

Damn right!

This whole "too soon" argument is nothing more than a half-hearted attempt to water down or just hope people forget about the events in question. Releasing a game 2 or so years after an event occurred as opposed to 10 years isn't going to change that fact that the people who there are still dead.

If the people who were a part of said event are willing to talk about it, what's the problem?

Bricked

@kNZA: We had not beaten them, they had not given their unconditional surrender and seemed to have no plans of doing so. The alternative would have been to invade mainland Japan which probably would have been devastating to American forces and Japanese forces. President Truman was truly caught between a rock and a hard place.

WTF! They can release MGS with it's Middle Eastern setting in tact and COD4 didn't get ANY flak despite showing executions and a nuke going off.

COME on Konami!

Tyr4nt

@notoriousEIC:

"Americans+Iraq(Twice)(the second time to enforce UN WMD inspections, since Saddam kept kicking the weapons inspectors out of the country.)"

US used Article 51 of the UN charter as Justification for their invasion; HOWEVER, they did not have the security council's backing to invade. Britain and US used abstract interpretation of loosely related legal precedence to justify invading Iraq without the Security Council's support since the UN SC forced a withdrawal of the draft resolution for Iraq instead of endorsing it.

Basically, the US used a bunch of legal misdirection in order to hide the point that THERE WERE NO WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION. And yet it is 8 years later and they still occupy Iraq?

"Americans+Vietnam (The North invaded the South, we tried to help, much like Korea.)"

Was simply a proxy war for U.S.A and U.S.S.R. masked by political hogwash like GOOD vs EVIL. I wonder where I've heard that before.

Sorry bud, but you don't know what you're talking about.

Clovis-

@Indiedog: oooh, I like where you turned that becasue for a second I was a little worried.

I think it's worth pointing out, even though it should be obvious, that fundamentalist Muslim and Christian != the ideal Muslim or Christian. That is, actually read the guidelines and interpret according to the text instead of personal agendas and it's impossible to come up with anything close to either "fundamentalist" camp.

@Delano_J: What are you? 12? I don't think I've heard a worse analogy in my life...and I read a lot of gaming sites.

*Subnet6 busies himself looking for Obama's secret childrens prisons and the mass graves filled with the bodies of Obama's political opponents, because you know, Saddams Iraq is JUST like Obama's administration.

@D Mitsuki : Gotta have guts kid!: War man. Wow... I mean... war.... wow.... Alright, time for my ping pong ball trick!

After I heard that it will have regen health in it I really started to care a lot less about the game in general.

@dd528: Grumpy from the invisible walls podcast ranted about the game. he said the destruction was laughable among many other negative things. The least of which was the controversy. He didn't really care about the controversy so much as others in the group did being a Brit.

@Indiedog: Christians don't bomb non believers with suicide bombers? They preach. Preach a lot. Annoyingly so. But traditionally the conversions muslims attempted (yes I know, not all of them, no argument that half the bombers were either lied to or not true believers.) were either believe or die.

Eville1 rocks out with his rooster out.

I'm hoping some company like Rockstar, Ubisoft, EA, or Activison picks this game up.

I'm rooting for Rockstar because, controversial game+ controversial company= match made in heaven.

vlv723

To hell with this game and anyone who would glorify the travesties of the United States using this medium.

You think this game could be considered a step forward for the medium? If anything it's a monumental step back. They claimed a balanced approach to the conflict, but no matter how you look at it America is the invading, occupying force that rapes, murders, and pillages it's way through the middle east and I doubt they'd show that side of the conflict.

@misterx231:

They should have known better and use world war II as a set up. It's fine, it's old. Or Tootsies and Hutus, nobody would have cared.

Fabrice

How lame to put out an ad campaign about giving us the most accurate if somewhat fictional portrayal of the war only to tuck tale and run. I really wanted to see how good this game is and possibly buy it.

...and nothing of value was lost.

they must not have had much confidence in the title.

@chup88: i know, its like just over 2 weeks ago a friend/classmate was killed by by a suicide bomber, i personally wont pick the game up, i think im just not ready, but this is sad.

its okay for there to be movies and such, but not a game, i really wish this game could be published, and theres no reason for it not to be, but i wouldnt pick it up.

@phinehas: It isn't that simple, but it SHOULD be. But, companies have the right to pull the plug too, if it isn't worth the risk to them. Just a shame that complainers win.

Hey_Blinkon

@right, jawshoeuh...: forgot about that. D'oh.

Dangeresque, Eliminating Targets

@Dangeresque, Eliminating Targets: Hey, us libertarians don't want to be associated with stupidity either. There are people's political positions. There is also people's dumbassery. Sometimes The groups mix, they are (unfortunately) not mutually exclusive.

Hey_Blinkon

@notoriousEIC: just a quick FYI, the french fought alongsidethe natives, because they desperately needed the support against the british.
as for spanish conquerors it's too complicated a story, you could say similar to america in afghanistan and Iraq, but in the end, they declared that natives should be treated fairly. that's why blacks started being used as slaves in their stead.
the mexicans later did horrible things to other native races, but I see that as natives killing other natives, which actually was being done since the ages of the mayas...
now move along, nothing to see here.

laencythe

@RockyRan: Actually, he's omitting a lot of pertinent facts. Considering this is a gaming site, I'd say he's doing it just about right.

@Clovis-: You're bringing logic and facts. You're doing it wrong.

RockyRan

@[kotaku.com] is that you could give the game some credibility as historical media if an entity like The History Channel were to publish it (assuming they got into game publishing).

@Eville1 rocks out with his rooster out.: Actually, muslims are more along the lines of believe in God or die. Not believe in Islam or die. According to the Koran (Qu'ran (or whatever) Christians and Jews will also go to heaven but not the same heaven because they misinterpreted god's true words. Christian's don't bomb non believers? Uh.... have you not heard of the Catholic v. Protestant war in Ireland? They slaughtered millions of people back in the Crusades and Inquisition.

SnprSlick

@Nitro378: What does that even mean? How do comments like this get into this thread?

@dodongski:
Well, we truly invaded Iraq because of the chemical weapons we gave them earlier. Which they disposed of a while ago. Then the media changed it to WMD searching, oil, and Saddam Hussein overthrowing. The true objective for Iraq isn't really clear, I believe we should still be in Afghanistan in full force searching for Osama.

SnprSlick

@RyuSaarva:
ACTUALLY. The Japanese attacked China. After they attacked China, America shut down trade with them because China was our ally. As far as Japan attacking America, I can see it as being justified, but the same to the Americans.

SnprSlick

@Jonaconda:
Hey, I don't disagree with dropping the bomb just for the reasons you mentioned. Some other people around here just don't seem to get it (Japanese apologists).

@dodongski:
And who would you want to take our place? And trust me, we'll unleash an unholy amount of nuclear hell before that ever happens.

@Xcite79:
Oh, and the people who were opposing this game were actually conservatives, not liberals ;)

SnprSlick

@Xcite79:
They want to turn the whole world to muslim? You mean like the Christians. Oh wait, they're the protagonists.

SnprSlick

@Clovis-:Sorry, Bud, but we don't really need the UN's permission to defend ourselves. And you admit that we didn't act alone. Personally, I feel better knowing that there aren't any WMDs than wondering if there were.

As for Vietnam, you mention that it was a proxy war. Where's the indignation for the USSR (and the Chinese, by the way)? Where's the indignation for the fact that the Chinese invaded in 1979? Or how the communists killed millions in Cambodia and Laos?

@dodongski: America gets a free pass on war crimes... again. Nice one Justice.

Nitro378

@mablung:
That pretty much sums it up.

No, they're changing the name to Halo 4 or Call of Duty 6.

sentroshi

@Sir-Lucius: That's exactly what I was getting at.

On gaming sites, conversations about politics are laughable. I was just mentioning how silly that guys comment was about "being logical and having facts" when the comment he referenced omitted all sorts of facts. I don't want to get into politics on a gaming site. Hell I don't want to get into politics on a political site. The web is full of crazies you know!

just repackage it and reship it! how hard is that?

for all you whiners. I dare you, double dare you to make a game about the "glorious crusade" of the Europeans against the middle east countries.

ssh83

Since the world evolve around US, there are few topics we should never discuss or even make games about them:
[list]
911
Any wars raised by or against the US
Any-US-Congressmen-gate
Other countries are living fine even if they are not standing by the US
[/list]
For most that matters, Konami is going to draft up a story or simply pull one off from the internet to accommodate the game.

momo

@crunks:
Yeah, this is a pretty disappointing and pathetic move from Konami.
Hopefully a better, more appropriate publisher will pick up the game. If it's not going in that "deep and meaningful" direction, then maybe the new publisher will push it in that direction.

Blah8

Are you kidding me? A few people barely complain, and Konami drops it? Grow some fucking balls, Konami. Who knows, it could have even turned out to be a genuine smart commentary on the Iraq war. Now we'll probably never know.

@subnet6: What's the point of arguing politics on a gaming site anyway? 99% of people don't know jack shit about what they're talking about and just cherry pick their facts to validate whatever one sided belief they've had ingrained into their souls anyway.

Notice how not a single reference has been made in this entire thread. Not. One. Not that it would matter since even when you prove people wrong they just ignore what you've said, no matter how much evidence you may have stacked up against them.

Sir-Lucius

@JahB:
The Wehrmacht and even for the biggest part the SS werent any more "genocidal" than every other army was too(probably even less so than the russian).
Its really irrelevant who of your ancestors you lost in the war as there was barely any family on either side of the war who didnt.
Even worse now you are declaring even the not-fighting population as accomplices?Seriously?
There is a huge difference between the acknowledgement of a situation and the active involvement in such(especially in a background as propaganda strong faschistic germany had).
No I will stop this here from my side but let me tell you a historican would slap you thousand times over for the assumptions that you are putting out on the word of your elders.

What outrage? Who was outraged? The only place I even heard about this game was here. Such nonsense.

@Bricked:
Ok.. We say "too soon", instead of saying: "any depiction of these events will undeniably be skewed and inaccurate. And even if they're not, they will create a political storm overshadowing the subject- matter, since the country in question is not ready for a reasonable discussion of the topic".

In my opinion, it may never be not "too soon" - but does going to the military for background really strike you as a particularly good idea? ..Instead of being something maybe along the lines of calling Kremlin about your school project on Gulags, since "they would know"?

@subnet6: Lol, it's true, but at least those crazies have the good sense to back up their claims with some kind of evidence, even if it's a site claiming George Bush is really an alien reptile who brought us the pyramids and is bent on bringing in the New World Order.

Sir-Lucius

They didn't see people being uneasy? I thought it was a rather brave (which sometimes ends up being stupid) move that took some balls to try to pull off.

Though I can't say the cover and recover health system filled me with warm fuzzies.

GorbyGipper

@notoriousEIC:

Look, you've already been proven wrong about what facts you know, and personal opinion really means nothing when you are talking about international politics and war crimes.

1. Trying to justify a war on idealism is how Nazi Germany got started.

2. Making sure that something is NOT there, has cost an innocent civilian death toll of over 100,000 (not including Americans); if you truly feel better knowing that 100,000 innocent people had to die to make you feel safe, then I sincerely question your ethical standards.

3. Just because one or more nation electives supported the U.S. does not justify a invasion in any sense of law or justice; so I don't see why it matters that the UK supported the US. Both countries entered the war with a majority population AGAINST the war. So you can't even say that the U.S. or Britain as nation even supported the war themselves.

4. The cold war involved many atrocities through proxy wars from both the Soviet Union and the U.S.A; I understand you are patriotic; but the U.S.A is not GOOD, and the Soviet Union is not Evil. There are a culmination of factors that lead to the war, and most prominently it was to establish a dominance of power between two different ideological sides.

I don't think the U.S.A is intrinsically bad; nor do I think the German people were evil for partaking in WW2. They are simply cases of minorities inflicting their will upon majorities for their own personal goals.

Clovis-

Ridiculous. Konami was in a position to publish what appeared to be a truly groundbreaking piece of software that seemed to be less a "game" and more of an "interactive history" of the events that took place in Fallujah. Now they've backed down because a bunch of whiners were unable to accept that there are multiple viewpoints to every conflict and that they only way to end the sort of violence occurring in Iraq and other places around the world is to understand the motivations of the people we're fighting. Blindly shooting Muslims isn't going to get us anywhere.

kylenalepa

@Clovis-: I've tried not to get involved in this, but the ignorance is getting out of hand.

1. Irrelevant. Yes, the Nazis were nasty. But no, a single comparison to them is not damning. "OMG the nazis did that same thing!" Lame.
2. That death toll quoted laughable. Not only is it poorly substantiated, but it includes deaths due to insurgent attacks against the civilian population , things like suicide bombings. In any event, the number is far fewer than would likely have died under Saddam in the same time period. The guy was a killing machine. Don't even get me started on the son who was being groomed to take over. People who accuse the US of "torture" make people like Uday Hussein roll over in his grave laughing.
3. The invasion was easily justified, both legally and morally. I personally wish we weren't there, but there was plenty of reason to go. Hindsight is always 20/20 and civilian death is always unfortunate but the civilian casualties are not as conveniently blamable on the US and you'd have us believe. Don't forget, Saddam was given dozens of opportunities to make things right after he invaded Kuwait. He gave a big fat finger to the world. Now he's dead. Hopefully, some other megalomaniac will learn a lesson from it. That alone may have made it worth it and ended up saving lives as a result.
4. A country can be good, while doing bad things. No nation is perfect. Certainly the US has done bad things, both in the open and in secret, but it's obviously more good than bad. Its the most generous and beneficial nation in the history of the planet. More of its sons have fought and died for other nations liberty than any nation in history. It's unfortunate that some of those nations give such low value to that liberty, but it's unavoidable and it won't keep those sons from doing it again.

Well if they're not going to sell it, why not give it away?

@subnet6: +1

@subnet6:

1. I agree, ideological arguments are irrelevant; that was my point.

2. That the current official death toll is JUST under 100,000; but it does not include deaths due to the economic/political/structural/environmental clusterfuck that is currently Iraq post war. To say that 100,000 is a laughable is a naive comment.

3. I'm a law student, and have studied this case extensively, and have yet to find any LEGAL justification for why the U.S.A was allowed to invade Iraq; as I have stated above; in order to enact Article 51 of the UN charter; they needed the approval of the security counsil which they did not recieve. If you say it is so easy to legaly justify, then explain to me in accordance to legal documentation (UN Charter), why the U.S.A had the legal right to invade Iraq.

As for the "moral"/"idealogical" reasons for invading; that is always up for conjecture because everyone has different standards for what is moral; and even when you consider the majority of American citizen's, they were certainly not unanimous about invading Iraq. The U.S. Government even changed its reasons for invading Iraq multiple times, going from Al Qaeda connection which it did not have, to WMD which it did not have, to liberation of the Iraq people which it will not provide.

The moment the U.S.A. runs out of use for the oil pipes which they are currently stationed around and ships its troops back home; the unstable economic/political/structural/environmental clusterfuck that is post war Iraq will only usher in a new dictator to take over Iraq. You think Saddahm and his son are the only bad people in Iraq? They're LINED UP waiting for their chance at the top; and once the US steps out, they're going to have an all out bloodbath until one of them is left.

4. Just to get this straight; I never once said that the U.S.A. is the evil, or the wrong, or the bad. The actions of their government however(which were were illegal as shown above) have set in motion the events that lead to thousands of civilian death, and even more Iraqi and U.S.A fighters whose lives are not to be ignored. Therefore the U.S.A cannot shirk the responsibilities for the consequences of their actions under a guise of a conceptual Good/Evil. I honestly think your current government body is doing a better job acknowledging that than most defensive Americans.

Finally, you have no empirical evidence to suggest that the U.S.A. is the most generous and beneficial nation in the history of the planet. To make such a claim is just naivety.

Clovis-

@Clovis-:

1. It may have been your point, but it was also factually false. Trying to justify a war on idealism is NOT how Nazi Germany started. The Nazi movement was well underway before WWII was even a twinkle Adolfs eye.

2. That's why it's laughable. It includes all sorts of deaths that are unattributable, not to mention foreign fighters who probably would have died in Afghanstan or whereever else the conflict might be taking place. You use the words "clusterfuck that is post war iraq". How does that compare to the clusterfuck that was prewar Iraq? You think all those kurds and shiites died because Saddam was running a smooth country? Prior to Saddams takeover and multiple purges, Iraq was a bastion of learning in the middle east. That came to a grinding halt. There are estimates of 500,000 to 1,000,000 bodies in unmarked mass graves. You want to talk dead bodies? You don't want to be defending Saddam Hussein.

3. Law students are the worst. Get back to me when you graduate and have a practice in international law. Then I'll care what your legal interpretation is. Until then, you're just a commenter on a game site, like me. In the mean time, I suggest a better understanding of UN Resolution 1441 and how it relates to Resolution 678, and Resolution 686.

"And yet it is 8 years later and they still occupy Iraq?" I guess you don't need much math to study international law.

"You think Saddahm and his son are the only bad people in Iraq? They're LINED UP waiting for their chance at the top; and once the US steps out, they're going to have an all out bloodbath until one of them is left."

So, what? Now we don't stand up to the bad guy because there are lots more bad guys? That's ridiculous. If you don't stand up to the bad guy, the other bad guys just get crazier. You gotta take out the nutjobs like Saddam every now and then just to keep the others looking over their shoulder. I'm reminded of a quote. It goes something like this....

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

4. "The actions of their government however(which were were illegal as shown above) have set in motion the events that lead to thousands of civilian death, and even more Iraqi and U.S.A fighters whose lives are not to be ignored."

It can just as easily be argued that those actions saved lives.

"Finally, you have no empirical evidence to suggest that the U.S.A. is the most generous and beneficial nation in the history of the planet. To make such a claim is just naivety."

Surely you're joking. There is AMPLE empirical evidence. The US gives (generous) more money, more food, more aid of all types. They produce (beneficial) more food, more medicines, more cures, more almost everything that saves lives. The US provides food and medicine for the world in a way no other nation ever has. They've given more blood and treasure to protect the freedoms of other countries than is even measurable. It's indisputable. You call me naive, but I say you're comments are simply ignorant. I understand, you're still a student though and I had pretty whacky ideas back then too. Youthful exuberance is both a blessing and a curse.

@Phazon:

Sure, because rape and pedophilia are just as bad as questioning the war in Iraq.

@ColombianBan:

Maybe the 3000 civilians killed under U.S. orders in Mexico, 1968 - or the Pinochet regime, when the U.S. killed the democratically elected Salvaor Allende and caused the death of about... 5,000 civilians?

All of Central America too, in fact?

ColombianBan, I'm sure you won't see this message, but you're still 100% right.

@ShingoEX:

God damn it, this sends the cause for videogames as a serious medium back AT LEAST five years.

And all because stupid soccer-moms and moral crusaders were worried that our "toys" were disrespectful to their war.

Damn it, we'll never get any respect like this. Bad show, Konami.

wtf why? I mean seriously, its a freaking game.. how stupid can someone be to produce a game only to cancel the release of it because of some stupid people saying that the game is bad because it touches on certain themes....

Jeez, its a game. The world wont end because of its release.. o.0

@subnet6: I find your petty arrogance even more "silly", but hey, what the hell do I know?

RockyRan

@RockyRan: I'm not sure what you know but what I know is you made a comment with no purpose but to call me names. That's fantastic.

@lolgreg: I lol'd.

This is just ridiculous, the game sounded really cool. I guess us Americans just can't handle games about wars we're in.

I hope they at least sell this internationally, I don't want to see the game shitcanned just because of my country's inane whining.

Sniktbub

@Valnen: As usual, your minuscule mind has completely overlooked the fact that the game wasn't as serious as it should have been. It's not the fact that people are offended. It's the fact that people demanded a certain level of quality that the press shows wasn't in the game.

MrKlorox