Support NeoGAF

[DjangoReinhardt]

yes, but its a videogame! why do we believe in fictions like metal gears, halo´s universe, but can´t believe in a war? of corse there´s a lot of questionmarks, but it´s a game...

it was set sometime in the future...not sci fi at all

I think that the verisimilitude, in this case, would entail not having to rely on the "it's a game" excuse.

 

[.dmc]

Man I wish people wouldn't discount the possibilities of this sort of scenario.. imagine if you're told to go into a house and kill a family, you walk in there and they're huddled crying in the corner. You can shoot them and see/hear their screams/they clutch each other as they go etc. You could spray the walls/ceiling above them and walk out to leave your superior with the assumption that you killed them. You could walk out & do nothing, only to have your superior go in and do it for you. Then you could wait outside and do nothing, or you could go in and kill your supervisor to stop him.

Then in terms of consequences.. imagine if your rank went up or down due to your actions..

- You kill the family/obey orders then you'd go through the next section in charge of a squadron that you could direct - it gives you a tactical advantadge to pass that level.
- You don't obey orders then you're sent into that next section as a grunt that has to follow directives even if they send you into the line of fire - you have to get through that level with a greater deal of luck/skill
- You kill the superior before he can kill the family, they give you some supplies out of thanks and you have to make it out of town while avoiding both your own soldiers and the enemies - you have to get through the level relying on stealth.

Interactivity & non-linearity are the greatest areas of potential to advance games as a storytelling form unique to cinema or literature, but it feels like noone is taking advantage of it at all. So please Jaffe, or someone, hold onto that idea and make it happen.

 

[AltogetherAndrews]

I'd imagine it'd be difficult to balance this so that it didn't come off as forced and heavy-handed. It really has to be a consistent vision. There was this one scene in Killzone, I think it was right before you get the sniper rifle, where on of the NPCs say something along the lines of "oh no, they killed [some dude], he was just a boy", and that one felt entirely forced. I think had the developer bothered telling the story of this boy prior to that particular scene, then simply coming upon the corpse would have been more effective than any spoken line like the one above.

 

[Y2Kev]

I'd imagine it'd be difficult to balance this so that it didn't come off as forced and heavy-handed. It really has to be a consistent vision. There was this one scene in Killzone, I think it was right before you get the sniper rifle, where on of the NPCs say something along the lines of "oh no, they killed [some dude], he was just a boy", and that one felt entirely forced. I think had the developer bothered telling the story of this boy prior to that particular scene, then simply coming upon the corpse would have been more effective than any spoken line like the one above.

Kind of Schindler's List style. Nobody had to say anything when you saw the red coat.

 

[AAK]

Man I wish people wouldn't discount the possibilities of this sort of scenario.. imagine if you're told to go into a house and kill a family, you walk in there and they're huddled crying in the corner. You can shoot them and see/hear their screams/they clutch each other as they go etc. You could spray the walls/ceiling above them and walk out to leave your superior with the assumption that you killed them. You could walk out & do nothing, only to have your superior go in and do it for you. Then you could wait outside and do nothing, or you could go in and kill your supervisor to stop him.

Then in terms of consequences.. imagine if your rank went up or down due to your actions..

- You kill the family/obey orders then you'd go through the next section in charge of a squadron that you could direct - it gives you a tactical advantadge to pass that level.
- You don't obey orders then you're sent into that next section as a grunt that has to follow directives even if they send you into the line of fire - you have to get through that level with a greater deal of luck/skill
- You kill the superior before he can kill the family, they give you some supplies out of thanks and you have to make it out of town while avoiding both your own soldiers and the enemies - you have to get through the level relying on stealth.

Interactivity & non-linearity are the greatest areas of potential to advance games as a storytelling form unique to cinema or literature, but it feels like noone is taking advantage of it at all. So please Jaffe, or someone, hold onto that idea and make it happen.

That is just way too ambitous. A game like that would take like that with almost no linearity would have a development cycle longer than Duke Nukem Forever.

 

[eXistor]

Are you saying games shouldn't have emotional content? Because, if so, bullshit. Games absolutely should involve emotional content where appropriate to the game. They're in a unique, amazing position to directly engage their audience with the story, which opens up the possibilities of engaging experiences no other entertainment medium could ever hope to replicate. I don't think many games have done that well, but something like this definitely could and certainly ought to.

Hell no, emotion is an important aspect in any game. Why else do we play games? Fun/ happiness is an emotion. What I meant was that I just don't see this happening succesfully. If you want to make an emotional game and wanna make people cry, that's not a good reason to make a game in the first place imo. I guess i'm not smart enough to really put into words what I mean, but I hope you understand.

Also, David Jaffe is no Spielberg, Spielberg, for al his sentimentalism knows how to pull the heartstrings with just visuals. Judging from his past work, no God of War or Twisted Metal ever made me wanna cry. I'm not saying he can't do it, but I've not seen anything he's done that remotely suggests he can pull it off. Him wanting it to be on psp is a clear indicator to that. Know where your strengths are.

It is a very interesting concept and to just let it die would be a shame, but at this point i'm glad he decided against it. It can become a very cool game, but at this point...no.

 

[Kittonwy]

Hell no, emotion is an important aspect in any game. Why else do we play games? Fun/ happiness is an emotion. What I meant was that I just don't see this happening succesfully. If you want to make an emotional game and wanna make people cry, that's not a good reason to make a game in the first place imo. I guess i'm not smart enough to really put into words what I mean, but I hope you understand.

Also, David Jaffe is no Spielberg, Spielberg, for al his sentimentalism knows how to pull the heartstrings with just visuals. Judging from his past work, no God of War or Twisted Metal ever made me wanna cry. I'm not saying he can't do it, but I've not seen anything he's done that remotely suggests he can pull it off. Him wanting it to be on psp is a clear indicator to that. Know where your strengths are.

It is a very interesting concept and to just let it die would be a shame, but at this point i'm glad he decided against it. It can become a very cool game, but at this point...no.

The thing is games that tugs at the heartstrings have already been done, for example ICO. But games that evoke emotions tend to cause the player to have an emotional attachment to the characters, something that I haven't seen in Jaffe's previous games, which tend to be very polished and focus-tested but didn't really have characters that one can get attached to.

 

[Fady K]

Mr. Jaffe,

as soon as Calling All Cars is complete,

please finish this game, on the PSP, PSN, PS3 whichever :'(

 

[buckfutter]

Hell no, emotion is an important aspect in any game. Why else do we play games? Fun/ happiness is an emotion. What I meant was that I just don't see this happening succesfully. If you want to make an emotional game and wanna make people cry, that's not a good reason to make a game in the first place imo. I guess i'm not smart enough to really put into words what I mean, but I hope you understand.

Also, David Jaffe is no Spielberg, Spielberg, for al his sentimentalism knows how to pull the heartstrings with just visuals. Judging from his past work, no God of War or Twisted Metal ever made me wanna cry. I'm not saying he can't do it, but I've not seen anything he's done that remotely suggests he can pull it off. Him wanting it to be on psp is a clear indicator to that. Know where your strengths are.

It is a very interesting concept and to just let it die would be a shame, but at this point i'm glad he decided against it. It can become a very cool game, but at this point...no.

What's odd is that Shigesato Itoi had a similar motivation when he penned the story for Mother 3 on the GBA. Although Itoi's body of work makes his success with the idea more believable than Jaffe's (not shitting on David, just pointing out the difference in their backgrounds).

 

[eXistor]

What's odd is that Shigesato Itoi had a similar motivation when he penned the story for Mother 3 on the GBA. Although Itoi's body of work makes his success with the idea more believable than Jaffe's (not shitting on David, just pointing out the difference in their backgrounds).

That's true, but that's an rpg. Rpg's have the most opportunity to be emotional thanks to character development. As soon as you set out to make an fps with a war as background and you give players the freedom to shoot innocent people...you're not gonna cry when you do it. You might feel discomfort, but you'd have to go full-on to really get tears flowing and if you do that then I'd say the censors have something to say about it. It's one thing do kill people in an over-the-top, cartoony way (GTA), but to do it realistically would be pushing it. There are a lot of sick f*cks in this world that get a kick out of this kinda stuff instead of feeling all teary-eyed. But again, just because I can't see it work doesn't mean it can't work. That's why he's a game developer and I'm just playing games

 

[Aaron]

That's true, but that's an rpg. Rpg's have the most opportunity to be emotional thanks to character development. As soon as you set out to make an fps with a war as background and you give players the freedom to shoot innocent people...you're not gonna cry when you do it. You might feel discomfort, but you'd have to go full-on to really get tears flowing and if you do that then I'd say the censors have something to say about it. It's one thing do kill people in an over-the-top, cartoony way (GTA), but to do it realistically would be pushing it. There are a lot of sick f*cks in this world that get a kick out of this kinda stuff instead of feeling all teary-eyed. But again, just because I can't see it work doesn't mean it can't work. That's why he's a game developer and I'm just playing games

All you have to do is make the impact of killing that innocent, or heck even the non-innocents, felt. If anything, the censors and people that bitch about vg violence would be behind it because instead of glorifying violence, it would actually show something near to the true result. If I had to do it in videogame form, I'd probably reach for a semi-cheap trick of making the main character having the power of glimpsing into the future to see what effect pulling the trigger would have to that person and those around them. Let the player actually feel the weight of the moment instead of a quick, meaningless kill.

 

[Router]

Im all for developers pushing for more emotion in games. Its one of the reasons I still play adventure games (even if I have to sit through way too much talking).

The basic idea sounds good. I have no interest in it as a PSP game though. Bring it the the PS3 and I will give it a go.

 

[Amish_Gramish]

I wonder if it would have been a great game.

Let's just hope that DJ (LOL) brings it back in a couple years...

 

[Choabac]

Interesting concept, but it's very scary to imagine this game being released because of the political implications. I can appreciate the underlying theme, though: Appreciate what we have now, because our way of life could be over before we know it and there are things we can do to make sure we don't **** it up everything. Pseudo-reality (like Children of Men) stories are projections of perceived futures which can help us appreciate what we have now and prepare us for what could happen in the future.

I saw it more as a comment on multicultural America.

Do immigrants and children of immigrants that were born and raised in America, feel American? Are they truly seen as American? Would a 10 year old Caucasian male that was born in America been seen as more American than a 20 year old male that was also born in America but of Chinese or Middle Eastern descent?

I don’t live in America, but I do live in another multicultural society – Australia. I was born and raised here, but my parents immigrated to Australia. I find the questions raised from this title uniquely fascinating. It’s something that I would expect from a book or a movie, but not a video game.

If not this title, then I hope at least a similar concept would be picked up one day by a world class development studio.

Oh, and if there was any likely country that could have the resources and power to invade America, China seems like the most appropriate one.

It's an emerging superpower, people.