Support NeoGAF

[Pistolero]

A "good side to socialism" in a sarcastic question. Plus associating it with China and putting the USA on the other end of the spectrum...
Hum...My "unlearned people" detector is going crazy !

 

[BlueTsunami]

And talking about lies, just listen to your sony leader lies and spin each month when npd show ps3 selling like the Bush plan on iraq.

:lol

I can't believe your actually equating the lies of a company about an entertainment device to a war in a country where people are actually dieing. tsc tsc tsc etc :lol

 

[bud]

What ever you think is going on, or the reasons it is going on you are as clueless as anyone elses...You think you know whats going on? You havent a clue. And neither does anyone else on this board. So stfu and make games. The fact you know how to make good games doesnt mean you know anything else. And talking about lies, just listen to your sony leader lies and spin each month when npd show ps3 selling like the Bush plan on iraq.

 

[Norse]

Did you just pop up in this thread to take a shot at Sony?

He works for sony more or less.

 

[Norse]

:lol

I can't believe your actually equating the lies of a company about an entertainment device to a war in a country where people are actually dieing. tsc tsc tsc etc :lol

My post was edited by someone at GAF...I did not type all of that.......And thats not the point...Being in the game industry, Jaffe should stick to what he knows and deal with those lies.....Stating his beliefs on the war as fact is bs.

 

[Stench]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_industrial_complex

This concept is not mentioned enough during these kinds of debates.

 

[APF]

Plenty of games have explored, or have used the setting of, players being in-or-from an occupied or conquered nation, planet, or people; so too have many games explored the perspective of being negatively-influenced by the effects of an imperialistic and/or militaristic force. These ideas are neither novel nor are they interesting. From an objective perspective--that is, when one is not trying to shoehorn broad polemics into a complicated historical context--there are far more interesting and compelling issues to be explored. For example, from the linked description the player appears to be presented with the decision whether to fight against an occupying army or to flee to an allied country; yet in the context of Iraq this calculus is far more complicated (and therefore real): many fleeing Iraq are not fleeing to countries allied with the previous regime, but are fleeing to America itself, or other Western nations that have or have-had contributed troops or logistical support. In addition, the major conflict in Iraq is not natives vs occupiers, but natives vs natives trying to assert some sort of barbaric hold on whatever they can themselves occupy, at the expense of the stability of the country and the Iraqi people as a whole, with the Iraqi government and Coalition forces trying to contain the security situation and rebuild the country. These complicated realities are exactly why the situation is so ****ed and chaotic, and no real progress has been made within the last few years. A game which explores only the idea of fighting against an occupying army might have made sense as a protest against the initial push for war like five years ago, but is juvenile now and when such a game would be released.

 

[Y2Kev]

You are a ****ing moron. Sorr for saying this, but you really are. Holy shit, what a ****ing retard you are.

:lol

WTF is this shit about him not being able to "state his beliefs." He's a creative director. It is his job to creatively explore his mind. What exactly should he be working on if not an expression of something he's feeling?

 

[JB1981]

Plenty of games have explored, or have used the setting of, players being in-or-from an occupied or conquered nation, planet, or people; so too have many games explored the perspective of being negatively-influenced by the effects of an imperialistic and/or militaristic force. These ideas are neither novel nor are they interesting. From an objective perspective--that is, when one is not trying to shoehorn broad polemics into a complicated historical context--there are far more interesting and compelling issues to be explored. For example, from the linked description the player appears to be presented with the decision whether to fight against an occupying army or to flee to an allied country; yet in the context of Iraq this calculus is far more complicated (and therefore real): many fleeing Iraq are not fleeing to countries allied with the previous regime, but are fleeing to America itself, or other Western nations that have or have-had contributed troops or logistical support. In addition, the major conflict in Iraq is not natives vs occupiers, but natives vs natives trying to assert some sort of barbaric hold on whatever they can themselves occupy, at the expense of the stability of the country and the Iraqi people as a whole, with the Iraqi government and Coalition forces trying to contain the security situation and rebuild the country. These complicated realities are exactly why the situation is so ****ed and chaotic, and no real progress has been made within the last few years. A game which explores only the idea of fighting against an occupying army might have made sense as a protest against the initial push for war like five years ago, but is juvenile now and when such a game would be released.

I said wow. Excellent post.

 

[JayDubya]

Reading their exchange, its funny how mixed up philosophies have been mixed and confused over the years.

For instance, Ayn Rand's Objectivist philosophy has been a very important foundation for modern conservatism in the US. The same conservatism that has been fused completely with the Christian right. But the philosophy of Christ is pretty damn close to communism. Christ challenges religious/political authority throughout the gospels, and encourages people to love eachother, and more than that love their enemies. This notion is absolutely contrary to Objectivism.

Oddly enough, LaVeyan Satanism borrows heavily from Objectivism. I've even read that Anton LaVey plagiarized Rand's work.

So at least in the US, you have millions of Christians supposedly believing in a socialist worldview, but allying themselves politically with Conservatives who base a their beliefs on a philosophy that also inspired "enlightened" Satanism.

Is it just me, or is somebody getting duped here?

Where to begin with all the wrongness in this post? Ugh, I'll keep it simple.

Ayn Rand believed (and Objectivists believe) altruism doesn't exist.

Jesus Christ's teachings have nothing to say about the state. He tells people how they can be good followers of his God, and otherwise stays out of matters of politics. "Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's" and all that. You're not going to get a political endorsement from Jesus.

Of course, if you're not a Christian, and not concerned about being a "good Christian (or other religion that preaches altruism as virtue)," then there goes one reason for acting strongly altruistic. Of course, when worshiping the state becomes the religion, as in the state atheist communes that have sprung up in various parts of the world (North Korea would be a good modern example), the whims of the leader become the de facto local Bible, and a cult of personality surrounds the dictator. And of course, they tell you to serve the hive... :lol

Your average right-wing person may or may not believe altruism exists, but at the very least they do not think it is the role of the state. A center right person would likely want to reduce the role of state altruism but retain some of it.

In short, there is nothing incongruous with hating socialism and being Christian, nor do many people ascribe to the philosophies of Ayn Rand or Anton LeVay.

 

[Stench]

http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm2003/03jan-feb/jan-feb03corp2.html

Each major element of the George Walker Bush administration's national security strategy -- from the doctrines of preemptive strikes and "regime change" in Iraq, to its aggressive nuclear posture and commitment to deploying a Star Wars-style missile defense system -- was developed and refined before the Bush administration took office, at corporate-backed conservative think tanks like the Center for Security Policy, the National Institute for Public Policy and the Project for a New American Century.

Unilateralist ideologues formerly affiliated with these think tanks, along with the 32 major administration appointees who are former executives with, consultants for, or significant shareholders of top Defense contractors, are driving U.S. foreign and military policy.

The arms lobby is exerting more influence over policymaking than at any time since President Dwight D. Eisenhower first warned of the dangers of the military-industrial complex over 40 years ago.

It is not just industry-backed think tanks that have infiltrated the administration. Former executives, consultants or shareholders of top U.S. defense companies pervade the Bush national security team.

Exploiting the fears following 9/11, and impervious to budgetary constraints imposed on virtually every other form of federal spending, the ideologue-industry nexus is driving the United States to war in Iraq and a permanently aggressive war-fighting posture that will simultaneously starve other government programs and make the world a much more dangerous place.

The overarching concern of the ideologues and the arms industry is to increase military spending. On this score, they have been tremendously successful. In its two years in office, the Bush administration has sought more than $150 billion in new military spending, the vast majority of which has been approved by Congress with few questions asked. Spending on national defense is nearing $400 billion for fiscal year (FY) 2003, up from $329 billion when Bush took office.

It's not terrorism you Americans should be afraid of, it's your own goddamned corporations.

As I said above, this issue is not given enough attention, mostly because it directly involves American jobs, no doubt.

 

[bud]

My post was edited by someone at GAF...I did not type all of that.......And thats not the point...Being in the game industry, Jaffe should stick to what he knows and deal with those lies.....Stating his beliefs on the war as fact is bs.

why would someone want to edit your post?

it's not like your usual posts lack the funny

 

[Jonm1010]

No one is ignoring that. It's talked about on a daily basis. It is not good news, no one likes it.

Americans don't deliberately target women and children. Spin. Crazy ****s are the root cause of this shit. Some people can just get along unlike others. Sure glad I don't live over there with all those psychopaths. Iran has great interest in the country taking a dive so they can move in.

The WMD argument is lame as well. That would mean that there was a conspiracy of epic proportions between Bush, Clinton, plenty of other foreign intelligence that said they did have WMDs. Also, it's not an impossibility that things could have been shipped out of state before the US invaded. Who knows. No one does. It's a ****ing mess, but the fact remains that it's evil terrorists that are creating unrest in Iraq and the government does not want us to just up and leave. Yes, Americans are dying. I pray for our boys over there every day.

It's hip to rail against the US. Bush is evil. Blah blah blah. I've heard it all. It gets tiresome listening to misguided BS.

People who desire freedom can have it. Those who don't (the crazy zealots) won't ever because their crazy fascist Islamic fundamentalism prevents them.

This is what Bush didn't realize. Murder committed by the Islamic fascists is by them and that is it.

just stop dude, seriouslly, your lacking a lot of knowledge on this. We had Hans Blix on the GROUND IN IRAQ with NO SUPERVISION just days before invasion. Blix asked for two more weeks and Bush said nope, get out, were going in. The terrorists werent there before us, we created them, (deBaathification, disbandment of a loyal 300,000 mixed army) that was the start of it. The absolute embarassment of the running of Iraq for a year by attempting a neo-con playground instead of attempting practicality.

Now as for that absoulutelly STUPID theory of, well he, he, he probably shipped em out. Think about that for a second, why do you build or have military arms and weapons in the first place? anwser: to protect your country from invasion and/or to use for invasion yourself. Why WHY would Saddam, in the time that he needs them more than any other time in his life say to himself "hmm maybe if I just take these WMDs and give them to this country here, they will be really really nice to me and let me go?" No he wouldn't think that he would be firing them off at everything he could muster to stop us from getting him. That conspiracy theory lacks all sorts of logic, its laughable.

so your saying that the 75% of Iraqis that surveys have shown which state they want us out and around near that same percentage approve of our murders are all zealots? So i guess we should bring in the nukes huh?

The fact is Neo-cons believe democracy can be derived from the barrell of a gun and they were wrong, they were going to Iraq regardless on that presumption, its why meetings were in place about it numerous times before 9/11.

You seem to believe that too but its an ignorant idea and if Iraq hasnt changed your perception that invading and occupying countries isnt the route to take then I dont know what to tell you. its costs lives, resentment home and abroad, huge losses of treasure, and a throwback memory to imperialism. The French thought they were gonna "civilize" the Vietnamesse too, what Vietnamesse ended up doing was largelly rebelling against western Democracy even into today.

I will say it again middle easterners in most places hate occupation, they will not accept it and any time it is us they especially despise it, Iraq even more so. Saudia Arabia anyone? Its what fed Bin laden his largest following at first. plus Iraqis are nationalists, just with much different views of how the country should look like and whos in power. There one agreement is they want us out.

 

[Stench]

I think the biggest deception the Bush regime's pulled is how they've made their citizens believe the War or Iraq is actually about Iraq.

 

[BlueTsunami]

I think the biggest deception the Bush regime's pulled is how they've made their citizens believe the War or Iraq is actually about Iraq.

Pretty much. Revisionist History done multiple times over within the span of a few years :lol

Bush is one of the Charmed ones :O

 

[JB1981]

I think the biggest deception the Bush regime's pulled is how they've made their citizens believe the War or Iraq is actually about Iraq.

I thought it was about the military industrial complex wanting to drop bombs somewhere, so they decided that brown people would be the easiest target.

Spoiler

that's what you want me to believe, amirite?

 

[theBishop]

I thought it was about the military industrial complex wanting to drop bombs somewhere, so they decided that brown people would be the easiest target.

Spoiler

that's what you want me to believe, amirite?

Actually, this is what it was about: January 26, 1998

 

[Vyer]

I think the biggest deception the Bush regime's pulled is how they've made their citizens believe the War or Iraq is actually about Iraq.

I think it was more how easily people believed in the jump from 9/11 and Osama to Iraq.

Using 9/11 as an emotional launching pad for justification to this whole Iraq mess. It disgusted me then and it still disgusts me now.

I was more than happy to see us mobilize and hit Afghanistan hunting Bin Laden.

Then all the sudden we were in Iraq.

 

[speculawyer]

The only justification i can think of for us remaining in Iraq is to find some of that 12 billion in cash we misplaced. ... nothing to see here folks...

It would be nice to find that money, but I don't think we are gonn find it there any more. It has been spread around Iraq as bribes to tribesmen, politicians, etc. And rest of it is probably safely in swiss bank accounts . . . or being used for home improvements in New Jersey.

 

[Jonm1010]

Actually, this is what it was about: January 26, 1998

Bingo, this was planned back in the 90s or at least desired, its the Neo-con philosophy, democratize the world(even if you have to use force,cause afterall were the big guys and we should make the world better any way we can - the end justify the means) then set it up with our economic ideals. I

Iraq was supposed to be the best place to do this in between Iran and Saudia Arabia and the others. They believed that democracy was something that will solve everything, they based it on the states of the soviet union who when communism fell they embraced the U.S. They thought this would happen in Iraq, all they would need to do is fix a few things and set up the system to there ideals(neo-con free market) and all would be glory. Its why in every ministry the Bush admin put in place loyalists, however unqualified(and boy were they) instead of the best people for the job -hence, Neo-Con playground. They couldnt have been more wrong from the beginning.

 

[Stench]

I thought it was about the military industrial complex wanting to drop bombs somewhere, so they decided that brown people would be the easiest target.

Spoiler

that's what you want me to believe, amirite?

If you were an elected official, and you knew that if you were to vote against the War on Iraq, or any other type of military engagement, thousands of your constituents' jobs would be on the line, what would you do, in order to guarantee yourself a job?

Check the Wikipedia link:

In the case of the United States, it is difficult to estimate the degree of dependence of the U.S. economy on its military and defense spending, but it is clearly enormous, and legislators resist defense cuts that affect their districts tooth and nail. In Washington State, an economist estimated in 2002 that in Western Washington 166,000 jobs, or about 15% of the workforce, depended directly or indirectly on military installations alone, not counting defense industries. In Washington State overall in FY2001, about $7.06 billion arrived in U.S. Department of Defense payroll, pensions, and procurement contracts—and Washington State was only seventh among the fifty states in this regard.

Sure seems to make sense, then, why American officials insist on continuing this imperialistic agenda of theirs, doesn't it? The only difference is that instead of the Cold War being used as a guise, it's now the "war on terror".

 

[Stench]

The corporations have gotten too big, and now they've become an extension of democracy itself: all in the name of a healthy economy.

There are other factors at play, I'm sure, such as a convenient, stable oil source, but anyone who honestly believes this engagement was for the "liberation of the Iraqi people" isn't really examining the big picture here.

But then again, people will openly and willingly defend a government that blatantly lied to their faces about the presence of WMDs in order to justify this bullshit endeavour, so whatever, I guess.

I'm sure if it wasn't Iraq, and soon-to-be Iran, there'd be somewhere else that Americans could blow up in order to keep their economy going. Maybe some of those dictatorships still kickin' around in Africa - a "war on human rights violations" or something.

 

[Kittonwy]

If you were an elected official, and you knew that if you were to vote against the War on Iraq, or any other type of military engagement, thousands of your constituents' jobs would be on the line, what would you do, in order to guarantee yourself a job?

Check the Wikipedia link:



Sure seems to make sense, then, why American officials insist on continuing this imperialistic agenda of theirs, doesn't it? The only difference is that instead of the Cold War being used as a guise, it's now the "war on terror".

Every superpower engages in an imperialistic agenda, if you don't want to be the big dog and push everybody else around, someone else will, don't believe for a second that China isn't drooling over Iraqi oil or that they won't continue to undermine the US economically. I don't believe it's in your best interest to have China being THE superpower in the world and constantly pushing the US around.

 

[Kittonwy]

The corporations have gotten too big, and now they've become an extension of democracy itself: all in the name of a healthy economy.

There are other factors at play, I'm sure, such as a convenient, stable oil source, but anyone who honestly believes this engagement was for the "liberation of the Iraqi people" isn't really examining the big picture here.

But then again, people will openly and willingly defend a government that blatantly lied to their faces about the presence of WMDs in order to justify this bullshit endeavour, so whatever, I guess.

I'm sure if it wasn't Iraq, and soon-to-be Iran, there'd be somewhere else that Americans could blow up in order to keep their economy going. Maybe some of those dictatorships still kickin' around in Africa - a "war on human rights violations" or something.

What do you expect the government to use as the excuse then? A lot of jobs are on the line so we're going to stir some stuff up in another country to support our defense spending? DO YOU WANT TEH TRUTH? DO YOU WANT TEH TRUTH? YOU CAN'T HANDLE TEH TRUTH!!!111!!!

 

[Bizarro Sun Yat-sen]

Socialism, communism, and fascism are not American ideologies, we reject them all as a way of life.

I also reject them!

 

[vitaflo]

It's unfortunate this game was canceled. I think there should be more games with a social commentary. It's the one thing we do not have in gaming, and something I think we should have more of, personally.

 

[Battersea Power Station]

:lol

WTF is this shit about him not being able to "state his beliefs." He's a creative director. It is his job to creatively explore his mind. What exactly should he be working on if not an expression of something he's feeling?

Silly rabbit, games are just products, like toasters or canned beans. They're not art.

 

[Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew]

Silly rabbit, games are just products, like toasters or canned beans. They're not art.

wow. so u bumped this thread for your 2 cents about absolutely nothing?

all i can say is bravo.

 

[SapientWolf]

Silly rabbit, games are just products, like toasters or canned beans. They're not art.

Did you resurrect this thread just to get the last word in? Please tell me this is the only time you've dug up something dead and gone to get your jollies.

 

[Steroyd]

Silly rabbit, games are just products, like toasters or canned beans. They're not art.

Hooray there'll be rules preventing exactly this from happenning. \o/

 

[Rorschach]

burn him

 

[Flesh Into Gear]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=159418

 

[sado]

Just the way I like my games - Preaching political views.

Sony does know what is best, keeping Jaffe's mouth shut.

 

[sprsk]

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=159418

-_-

 

[lastendconductor]

Just the way I like my games - Preaching political views.

Sony does know what is best, keeping Jaffe's mouth shut.

If you don't like the game to have a message, DONT BUY IT. But you don't have the right to tell other people to "shut up" or "don't do this", just because you don't care or because you disagree. That's moronic.