• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Why the lack of Vietnam War FPS games?

I really loved Vietcong. A new game like that, man I would so fucking love it

Vietcong_Coverart.png

Came to post this, I really enjoyed the campaign. The mp was also a blast playing as the Vietcong and laying traps.
 
If you call unified communism a "win".

Lets not forget this was an allied effort at that time to stop the spread of communism. France and other nations were involved well before the USA ever was. The goal was to support the South Vietmanese with hopes they would be able to fight on their own and declare their independance from the communist North, not level the country of Vietnam. Once it became clear that would never happen, America pulled out. No reason to keep fighting for South Nam when they would never be a le to fight for themselves. America nor any country could stay indefinitely, as soon as they left the North would over run the South and that was clear.

back on topic, YES, a Vietnam War era shooter done right would kick ass.

Are you implying that unified communism is a lost to Vietnamese people then? To be honest, from my understanding of my country history, we don't really give a damn about communism or democracy, our first and foremost aim even before the US came in was to gain independence from French colonial rule. Where were the "democracy" super power then when uncle Ho Chi Minh traveled the world and tried to ask for support for our cause? The North and South divide was there to act as a buffer region for the French to GTFO after they lost, and US just so conveniently, jumped in to "prevent spread of communism" and tried to separate our country.

Anw, I think I will just stop here, I'm not that good arguing in English + I'm not an expert in political ideology, but looking at my country now, even though corruption is high and we are kinda sorta in deep shit thanks to bad economy management, we sure as heck came a long way from 1975 to where we are now and I'm enjoying my country's stability so yeah, it's a win for us in my opinion.

Oh and Black Ops is a terrible representation of some of the famous battles, especially Khe Sanh one.

Edited: I missed the bold part at first, no, France's involvement in Vietnam was purely colonization no matter how you look at it.
 
I've also wished for more games based on the Vietnam war for all the reasons the OP stated. More than that however, I also wish the existing games were available on GOG or Steam. (Or even Origin in EA's case.) I have a retail copy of Men of Valor around here...somewhere but I've never had a chance to even play Vietcong or any of the other games mentioned because they're just not available as far as I can tell.
 
Ok, I think it is much more a technical aspect than anything else:

(besides unpopular, and not won by America)

Not untill recently were developers able to create attractive looking jungles. More often than not the jungle levels in a FPS did NOT feel like a jungle at all, but more like a room with shitty green textures.

Because they had a hard time to make it look believable the games never took off.

Nowaydays they are a lot closer to creating realistic looking jungles. HOWEVER even till this day creating realistic plants and fauna is not achieved regularly. This because, in the end, plants and fauna are living things, and replicating living things is obviously the hardest to do in a video game.
 
Ok, I think it is much more a technical aspect than anything else:

(besides unpopular, and not won by America)

Not untill recently were developers able to create attractive looking jungles. More often than not the jungle levels in a FPS did NOT feel like a jungle at all, but more like a room with shitty green textures.

Because they had a hard time to make it look believable the games never took off.

Nowaydays they are a lot closer to creating realistic looking jungles. HOWEVER even till this day creating realistic plants and fauna is not achieved regularly. This because, in the end, plants and fauna are living things, and replicating living things is obviously the hardest to do in a video game.


I'd add the love for linear level design to that list. Never does the corridor game design clash more than in a forest setting. It becomes even worse as graphics advance.

A realistic vietnam game would probably go as well as a realistic WWI game. Mostly boring with unfair pot shots and lots of respawning.
 
I think it's the issue in creating convincing jungle environments with modern fidelity, as opposed to city/open landscape environments which seem straightforward in comparison.
 
I think you can set a game in the Vietnam war but I don't think it would be easy to make a game about the Vietnam war. It's complicated because I think it comes down to whether you think games have to be fun.
 
Yes definitly!

I think unless we see a huge paradigm shift that finally uses the new graphical capabilities and actually translates that potential into gameplay, unlike the current application that merely puts more make up on the corpse of PS1 3D game design and makes prettier and prettier corridors, we also won't see an adequate approximation of themes like the Vietnam war or maybe even WWI.

Both could work, if you take a different angle, like for example a drama, playing as a field medic etc, but both would need the realization that not every war is able to be portrayed as the acts of burly brave men fighting in clear defined positions. Making a realistic Vietnam game would become utter and utter chaos. And it would require a complete re-thinking of the traditional hero complex portrayed in war themed video games.
Shooting farmers from a helicopter or setting whole villages ablaze with Napalm is about as heroic as fire bombing Dresden.
 
Men_of_Valor_Coverart.jpg


Men of Valor on Xbox was one I thought would be good.

2015 devs that did Medal of Honour Allied Assault but the better bunch left to form Infinity Ward before then I think.
Wasn't a good game.
 
7554-2011-11-02-11-23-08-49.jpg


There's this game released in 2011 made by Emobi Games, a Vietnamese studio. You play on the Vietnamese side and it cover a part of the Indochina war, from Hanoi 1946 to Dien Bien Phu 54. Might not be the best game ever but the fact that a studio here in Vietnam is able to deliver a big game like this is already a nice achievement.

Trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEbPhRUXGPw

42268-You-had-my-curiosity-but-now-y-MK6z.gif


Where can I get this game ?

Also is it in english or at least with subtitles ?
 
It's a far more "political" war than WW2 was and, as a consequence of that, It's not as romanticized.


Speaking of which, we already have a god-tier game that needs to be remade:

Battlefield_Vietnam_Coverart.png

This. To both points. Between this and Generals Zero Hour, I almost liked EA back then.
 
America lost big time. Surely not the numbers game but moral was completely broken. Soldiers didn't want to fight anymore and a lot of officers were killed on purpose by friendly fire because the soldiers didn't want to fight anymore. You can't win a war without soldiers willing to fight.

You misunderstand. I'm not saying America didn't lose. I'm saying that this is not the reason we don't see Vietnam games (and that, in fact, a "lost" war can be romanticized as much if not more than a "won" war), but rather, that they were not the clear cut "good" guys.
 
The COD franchise has been one step away from screaming " AMERICA, FUCK YEAH!" through the screen for a while now.

Anyway, the US didn't win that war, nor were they knights in shining armor. You can't easily romanticize a loss when you're not the good guys. It wasn't like WW2 where they could ignore Russia's major involvement and just claim they saved the world singlehandedly from an obvious, evil threat. Most would rather forget the war altogether, let alone actually make a game about it.

Even if they did, it would become something more along the line of "Spec Ops" and not "Call of 'MURICA vs filthy foreigners" if they were to keep it realistic and that's not what most frat boys would go for. Also, creating the right jungle setting would have been really fucking hard, so most would rather just stick to easier, more conventional settings.

This was easy to see in COD Black Ops, they went out of there way to show Vietcongs murdering civilians, which you magically just run into before they did it.
I think as other people have said, its hard to do in a tasteful way.
 
America was humiliated, that's why.
I'm sorry but I really don't understand this logic. German and Japanese gamers play WW2 shooters even though their countries lost that war. Should they shun those games as well? As for American gamers, I'm 39 years old, I was born in 1974, I think I'm on the older side of gamers now and Vietnam was already a memory when I was growing up. The idea that younger generations of gamers would shun a game set in that era due to "hurt national pride" seems very odd to me. Yeah, it was a terrible, pointless war but that doesn't mean you have to revel in the atrocities or pretend they didn't happen in order to make a game set during that period. Men of Valor handled it reasonably well, I thought, the soldiers in that game clearly weren't happy to be there and just wanted to make it back home alive.
 
...people having been asking for this for quite a while...and it would make for a unique take on something old.

We can just call it OpFor during the online multiplayer. Nobody will be offended.

The best thing about playing a game as a member of the wermacht would be that you'd get to see for one of the first times in gaming history heck, maybe even western media history that the wermacht and the axis soldiers were not all monsters who brutally killed for fun. The vast majority of them much like any allied soldier were scared young men ripped from their homes and forced to fight.

Now playing as a member of the SS would be a different story since they were all quite literally maniacs who had little to no respect for other human life.

I like to believe RO1/2 are one of the best current examples of war games because it shows both sides as how they are using quotes as well as amazing audio design to show the sheer brutality and the sheer terror of war. The soldiers rather than screaming get some! all the time like in Call of Duty scream out of fear, not because they want to kill but because they're terrified of the situation around them.

The Japanese/American soldiers in Rising Storm even scream about how they don't want to die and they want to see their mothers again. That's how war should be portrayed in the media, as a vile, horrible, complete non solution to a problem.
 
How about an alternative history game where the warsaw pact and nato battle in the early 80's?

Id play a Vietnam game that let me play as the Vietcong.

Having been to Vietnam myself i respect them greatly, they are very nice people and so proud about beating America.
 
It's a war that a lot of Americans are ashamed of, which makes it slightly difficult to contextualize into a rah-rah-nationalistic-America-saving-the-world-by-kicking-ass kinda game.
 
Battlefield Vietnam was such a janky pos. But I loved it.

"Gets on scooter, puts Surfin' Bird on full blast, rides around in a broken down city dodging tank fire"

You know, I could never fully get into the game for some reason but the only thing I think I ever did was last Surfin' Bird and alert the enemy we were coming. The music would fade according to how far away you were. It was really awesome.
 
The patriotism is only implied and symbolic, but the point is that its not really satisfying knowing that you're fighting in a war in which your side will never win.

I liked Halo: Reach single player for that very reason. The post-credits ending was very memorable.
 
Now playing as a member of the SS would be a different story since they were all quite literally maniacs who had little to no respect for other human life.

People are people. The German people weren't any more crazy than any other soldier. Given enough time, nationalism, hate and propaganda, any country can be WWII Germany, and any soldier can be a nazi.
 
I like to believe RO1/2 are one of the best current examples of war games because it shows both sides as how they are using quotes as well as amazing audio design to show the sheer brutality and the sheer terror of war. The soldiers rather than screaming get some! all the time like in Call of Duty scream out of fear, not because they want to kill but because they're terrified of the situation around them.

The Japanese/American soldiers in Rising Storm even scream about how they don't want to die and they want to see their mothers again. That's how war should be portrayed in the media, as a vile, horrible, complete non solution to a problem.

I've never touched Red Orchestra but this sounds well not amazing but really authentic. Like with the Wehrmacht it's easy to brand them all as psychopaths (and there were certainly a lot of them) but it's easier to forget that most of them were just normal, terrified young men who had lives before conscription/recruitment, were sent out to die and had the misfortune of being born in Nazi controlled territories and subjected to the intense propaganda machine.
 
It's hard to make a shoot bang hero game out of Vietnam. There was nothing heroic about it.

It also makes it a much more interesting war, but these publishers and developers wouldn't have a clue.
 
Off topic, but can somebody explain to me the connections between Heart of Darkness and Apocalypse Now? I've read HoD, but aside from some names and obvious shout outs ("Exterminate the brutes!"), I didn't see much similarity.

It's been a while since I watched Apocalypse Now! and even longer since I read Heart of Darkness, but I think the main thematic similarity is the the deeper into the jungle (Vietnam and the Congo respectively) you go, the further removed you become from social mores and the closer you get to the "heart of darkness" buried beneath the veil of socially constructed morality in every human.

It's not a 1:1 adaptation, honestly I wish more films would take that approach when converting literature to film.
 
Probably the same reason we won't ever get to play Six Days in Falllujah. It was an unpopular war.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Days_in_Fallujah
I think that has more to do with being a pretty recent war. Same reason why EA removed Taliban from multiplayer in Medal Of Honor and called them Opposing Force instead. Both those cases caused controvercy.

There are quite a few games that are based on the Vietnam War, so it probably wont be much controvercy if someone make a game based on the Vietnam War today (depending on exactly what content the game has of course, but a "normal" FPS game probably wouldnt cause any controvercy).
 
I'm sorry but I really don't understand this logic. German and Japanese gamers play WW2 shooters even though their countries lost that war. Should they shun those games as well? As for American gamers, I'm 39 years old, I was born in 1974, I think I'm on the older side of gamers now and Vietnam was already a memory when I was growing up. The idea that younger generations of gamers would shun a game set in that era due to "hurt national pride" seems very odd to me. Yeah, it was a terrible, pointless war but that doesn't mean you have to revel in the atrocities or pretend they didn't happen in order to make a game set during that period. Men of Valor handled it reasonably well, I thought, the soldiers in that game clearly weren't happy to be there and just wanted to make it back home alive.

Except it's not about people that play them, but people who make them.
 
Vietnam created some great art, the best films about vietnam were very dark and heady though. The problem with video games is that they have to put you in a fps game and pop a gun in your hand, and anything else is alienating to the masses. The new Spec-Ops was on the right track, I hope one dev makes a great statement about that war in some way and is prepared to possibly lose !money in the process.
 
Except it's not about people that play them, but people who make them.
So is it your contention that the game devs or publishers themselves would shun the idea of a game set in that era due to their own "hurt national pride?" Because frankly I also find that hard to believe. The generation that fought in that war is now in their 60s or older, I may be quite mistaken but I don't believe there are very many people in that age bracket designing or approving FPS designs.
 
Top Bottom