Support NeoGAF

[JayEH]

Really good post.

The whole idea reminds me of Boyle's bit -

"Not only will America go into your country and kill all your people, but what’s worse, I think, is they’ll come back twenty years later and make a movie about how killing your people made their soldiers feel sad. Oh boo hoo hoo. Americans making a movie about what Vietnam did to the soldiers is like a serial killer telling you what stopping suddenly for hitchhikers did to his clutch.”

this is a really dumb quote.

 

[Joseph Merrick]

a series of iraq war games could be ok. call the series war crimes, and maybe you can play as either side of the conflict, civilians or terrorist american forces. war crimes: six days in fallujah has a nice ring to it. playing as civilian would probably be a fantastic survival horror experience. not sure atomic games would be the studio to do these though, as they are funded by the cia.

 

[Neuromancer]

It strikes me as unfair that some subjects are fair game for all other forms of media except video games.

At this point any game depicting the iraq war (invasion) is gonna have a hard time

that war is one of the biggest shit-shows in history, pretty much set back the whole region to caos, we've barely see the consequences yet

its beyond me why would anyone would like to glorify it

That's not what this game was going to do.

 

[Etnos]

That's not what this game was going to do.

Marines struggling at the harsh battle of Fallujah? of course it was...

 

[Markitron]

I think it would have been released without too many problems now, too hard to say whether it would have been good or not though. Either way we did get Spec-Ops, which might not have been made if this game bombed.

 

[Fury451]

It would entirely depend upon what depth and what kind of presentation it brought to the table.

 

[More_Badass]

Marines struggling at the harsh battle of Fallujah? of course it was...

They weren't struggling in harsh battles?

 

[Neuromancer]

Marines struggling at the harsh battle of Fallujah? of course it was...

It's possible to depict a real world conflict without glorifying it, and we haven't played this game, so how can you say for sure?

 

[Fury451]

Marines struggling at the harsh battle of Fallujah? of course it was...

This is based on an assumption that every war video game glorifies it by default, and that is certainly not the case. We don't know one way or the other what this would have done with the concept.

Once upon a time, even CoD had an anti war undertone.

 

[Etnos]

One of the best ways to actually send an anti-war undertone in media, is by not making everything about war. You can always focus on the human consequences of war.

What about making a Syrian refugee sim, you have to walk your way up to whatever country doesn't throw pepper gas at you?

Of course it is always easier to sell a video game with an "anti-war undertone" if it contains tactical shooting, with heroic and conscious soldiers that despite war, but somehow they... still there shooting at things.

Call me crazy, but the second approach sound very hypocritical to me.

 

[Tapejara]

I think it would still have difficulty finding a publisher, but there are more avenues for devs to take so it might be able to find investors. I don't know if I could see most of the big publishers taking it on, perhaps 2K or someone smaller like Nordic.

In terms of public reception, I think it's all up to how the game is presented. Spec Ops: The Line was well received because of how it tackled its subject matter - though it certainly helped that it wasn't based on a real life conflict. No matter how well intentioned the developers may be, if Six Days in Fallujah came out and was nothing more than a military shooter with some controversial scenes and moral choice moments thrown in that barely add depth, it wouldn't be well received.

 

[More_Badass]

One of the best ways to actually send an anti-war undertone is media is not making everything about war, you can always focus on the human consequences of war.

What about making a Syrian refugee sim, you have to walk your way up to whatever country doesn't throw pepper gas at you?

Of course it is always easier to sell a video game with an "anti-war undertone" if it contains tactical shooting, with heroic and conscious soldiers that despite war, but somehow they... still there shooting at things.

Call me crazy, but the second approach sound very hypocritical to me.

Have you seen the game This War of Mine?

Not exactly that same scenario, but it's a step in that direction (a game focusing on civilians rather soldiers)

There's also The Sun Also Rises, a narrative adventure game

 

[Etnos]

Have you seen the game This War of Mine?

Not exactly that same scenario, but it's a step in that direction (a game focusing on civilians rather soldiers)

There's also The Sun Also Rises, a narrative adventure game

This War of Mine is pretty great, I'm really bad at it thought

Will check that other game, thanks

 

[More_Badass]

This War of Mine is pretty great, I'm really bad at it thought

Will check that other game, thanks

The latter game is still in development, but it's another game that's going for a more thoughtful approach for an experience about war

 

[JPLMD]

No, it's still a one-sided perspective of an invading force that has historically destabilized and inflicted harm and tragey upon the country. I am sure that this game would not be up tothe task of doing justice to the complexities of the civilians and the 'insurgents' of the area, especially if the game was going to be done in cooperation with the US army. You bet your ass that it'll be modified and corrected if this would be the case (which such games usually are).

These type of games also mostly suffer from only providing the perspective of the soldiers and not looking into the systematic and structural reasons for the war. Why are we there? What were the reasons? How is this necessary? Who is responsible for making the political decisions that led to this tragedy and are they even justified? It removes the focus of the justification of war and sets it on the soldiers instead. It's a form of New Patriotism that is similar to the Support Our Troops rhetoric that muddies up the conversation and shuts down any critical perspectives of the war effort.

Even worse, knowing what we know now in terms of the damage the US and its coalition forces have wrought upon the countries, I think this would be even more of a spit in the face of the memories of lost ones and the hurt and harm the US and Europeans armies brought. And that's not taking into account the long-term consequences that people in the region still to this day suffer from thanks to the insanity and mass hysteria of the US and its coalition forces after 9/11.

Well said. If anything this game would pretty much be just like every other WWII/Vietnam/Modern Warfare type game, basically a giant propaganda piece made out so that the US = good, everyone else = bad. It's sad there aren't more games that actually try to do more than to stroke the ego of Americans.

I love this country and I'm glad to be have been born and raised as an American. I just don't see the world in such a self-centered view like the majority of Americans.

 

[MightyHedgehog]

It strikes me as unfair that some subjects are fair game for all other forms of media except video games.

Has nothing to do with fairness since anyone who wants to can develop and release a game about any subject matter they want. Whether that's possible to do and still be a commercially viable or critically successful product, I think is the problem. If we went past playing 'person holding weapon', games, as a medium, could do conflict-minded themes well, but only if they don't have to be trapped in the skin of a mainstream and core gamer's action-shooter. Personally, the lack of maturity behind and in front of screens leads to a lack of ability to successfully depict and make interactive a believable sense of humanity. For all the endless hype, marketing, and userbase fixation over bleeding edge graphics technology and the craftsmanship behind re-creating photorealistic, or at least, cinematic phenomena, people, things, and places, games generally fail to capture or really exhibit a plausible sense of humanity. It doesn't help that games are primarily concerned with adrenalized action, with little to no ability to interact with the world outside of pulling a trigger or running and jumping. You can't do interesting things that take human emotion beyond fight or flight when you're that limited. TWoM or other more civilian-centered games feel more believable, more capable of telling a story. This game never seemed to be anything but a questionable marketing product claiming to do something more meaningful.

 

[NewGamePlus]

http://www.shacknews.com/article/58155/six-days-in-fallujah-one

Immediately it was apparent that Six Days is not aiming for a very realistic take on modern warfare. I never did imagine that Atomic would create a plodding, Operation Flashpoint-esque shooter in the sacrifice of action-packed combat. But considering the extensive marketing on the point of realism, I certainly didn't expect to see soldiers running out into the middle of the street during a firefight, taking a half-dozen bullets in the chest, and then regenerating their health safely behind cover. Not in a planned demonstration for press, at least.

In fact, from what Konami showed us, Six Days is far closer to Gears of War than America's Army. It has the same Gears D-pad weapon selection, the same style of cover system, and the same action-oriented gameplay.

In another clip, the player broke off from his squad, crouched up behind two insurgents who were firing on US soldiers, and took them out from a few feet away like some kind of renegade commando. I may be ignorant of this particular battle, but I've certainly never heard of any Army ninjas breaking off from their squads and capping insurgents solo. Maybe something like that has happened once or twice; either way, the videogamey nature of the moment seemed entirely out of place.

Later on, a soldier fired a rifle-mounted M203 grenade launcher into a building--then fired it again, and again, in a rapid-fire Rambo tactic that you'd only ever see with a controller in your hand.

We didn't see any of the moral choices or "survival horror"-esque situations that the developers have mentioned. All I saw were scenes straight out of a Battlefield game. And unfortunately, the liberties taken in this early demo immediately called into question the rest of the game's merit, and turn the whole project into the sort of controversial mess that nobody enjoys.

The game was never a realistic depiction of anything.

 

[GamerJM]

i'd be really surprised if the developers contacted and worked with a group of people the US government has classified as terrorists

Maybe that's part of why it was canceled? I don't really know anything about this game so that could be completely outside of the realm of possibility but I'm just throwing things out there.

Though otherwise I agree with Lime, if they were consulting the US Army I doubt the game would give us a perspective that isn't incredibly biased.

 

[Cuv8]

A bit out of topic, but I saw a game on Oculus website the other day that made me think of this one. It's about September 11th and focuses on people who were inside.

 

[redhood56]

Hm I don't know, maybe they could have released it digitally on steam if it were today. Since steam doesn't require a publisher they might have gone that route. I can't critize the game for what it is because we have barely seen anything of it. The rise of digitally popularity might have given it a chance to realease today though.

 

[More_Badass]

http://www.shacknews.com/article/58155/six-days-in-fallujah-one



The game was never a realistic depiction of anything.

Well, that's disappointing

 

[More_Badass]

A bit out of topic, but I saw a game on Oculus website the other day that made me think of this one. It's about September 11th and focuses on people who were inside.

Just searched on Google and that looks pretty interesting. The kind of experience that only VR can provide, putting you in the shoes of someone in a certain experience like no other medium.

 

[Northeastmonk]

I don't know if it was destined to be a hit. It just had a very current and thought provoking setting.

There are still veterans from the Vietnam war who suffer from PTSD and you have video games depicting that or worse.

Is time the okay mark? Probably, but that's still offensive in a way.

You have people pretending to be military veterans in video games all the time. Some games are good while the rest could just go into a pile of other crap. I personally think this would sink to the depths of the ocean and never come back up.

How many of you people played Postal 3? or even Hatred? People aren't even talking about it.

The game has to be good for one. The controversy anymore sucks. They'd need to do a big hollywood size budget on a Triple A game or nothing.

Who knows, right? We might just be too use to it by now.

I'd personally see ArmA selling more with the Day Z mod before the stand alone model came out than this.

Call of Duty tries to offend people, but boy does that go by real fast. It's a bunch of BS if you ask me. They do their little scene and a handful of people remember it. We don't necessarily have another GTA on our hands.

 

[Accoun]

http://www.shacknews.com/article/58155/six-days-in-fallujah-one

The game was never a realistic depiction of anything.

To be fair, we don't know how representative of the whole game was that. It wouldn't be the first time a team was ordered to quickly assemble an action-oriented demo and ended up with something that didn't resemble the original game much. Like when THQ told the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. devs to "show the press XX minutes of pure action".

Of course that may have not be the case here, but there's a chance it was.

 

[Neuromancer]

Yeah I would be leery of judging an entire game based on one demo. Things can change a lot during development.