It's Reality or Nothing for Six Days in Fallujah

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

It's Reality or Nothing for Six Days in Fallujah

image

Atomic Games President Peter Tamte is still hopeful that Six Days in Fallujah will one day be made, but says he won't "fictionalize" the game in order to make it more palatable to publishers.

Most of you probably know the story of Six Days in Fallujah by now. Atomic Games set out to make a "documentary wargame" based on the November 2004 battle in the Iraqi city of Fallujah, a third-person shooter that featured input from over a dozen U.S. Marines involved in the battle and documentary-style interviews spread throughout the game. Naturally, the outrage over making a game out of a major battle in a war that's still smoldering came fast and furious, bringing the project to a screeching halt. Atomic Games has since moved on to other things, but Tamte said he nonetheless remains hopeful for Six Days.

Rumors surfaced earlier this year that the game was almost complete, when Atomic lost its publishing deal, but Tamte told VG247 that only a few levels are actually done and that the studio needs funding in order to finish it. But he also made it clear that he would not "intentionally fictionalize" the game in order to make that happen.

"Six Days takes place during the most relevant event of an entire generation," he said. "Some people suggested, 'Why not just make it Six Days in Bullcrapistan?' We could have done that, but that would have taken away one of the reasons why we made the game, which was to recreate the specific stories of some people who are our heroes - I can't do that in Bullcrapistan because it loses its context."

He also had some choice words for publishers who he claims "want to keep doing what we're doing" despite slipping videogame sales. Some of that decline can be blamed on the economy, he said, but some of it is also results from the industry's refusal to do anything new. "Consumers are starting to say, 'Hey, what you're selling - I'm not buying'," he continued. "I have conversations with senior people at publishers all across the world, and they're telling me that videogames are trivial, and we're going to keep making trivial games. Someone needs to slap them on the side of the head and say, 'Hey, guys, sales are going down. Something is wrong'."

Tamte's idea is to "experiment with new categories of games," which is what he had in mind for Six Days. But he added that the usual argument in favor of the game - that videogames deserve to be taken more seriously as a medium and can treat controversial subject matter with at least as much depth and respect as conventional forms of entertainment - isn't relevant to the problem of actually getting it made. "It has to be made into a purely commercial argument, ignoring all the arguments about the importance of the medium, and the things that we can do for consumers that can't be done via passive forms of entertainment - because most of the publishers are interested in the economic argument," he said.

Atomic is currently working on the multiplayer FPS Breach, which is slated for release next year on the PC, Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3.

Permalink

Great. More right-wing free speech censorship.

Simply because it is controversial does not give anyone the right to change it.

Good man, don't cave into the crap. I hope someone takes it on soon, it looked really cool.

Nice to see them sticking to their guns....

random idea, probably wouldn't work, but would it be possible for people to preorder the game, that money going to fuel development, which in turn leads to the game being ready to ship and such.

just a thought.

Ah, scenic Bullcrapistan. Home of the world famous Shit Creek.

But seriously I hope they can get a publisher for that game. It deserves to be made.

I hope this game gets published the way Atomic Games originally intended, I'd buy it simply to support them, and then if it's a good game, I'll feel like I've won twice. And if all the publishers out there are massive dicks, they could always put it on the internet just to spite all the assholes who are so into censoring real events that soldiers WANTED to share with people.

Mackheath:
Great. More right-wing free speech censorship.

Simply because it is controversial does not give anyone the right to change it.

Censorship doesn't belong only to the right-wing.

I salute you, Mr. Tamte, stick to your guns. I'm worn out from FPS and I'd still buy this game exactly because of the lack of bullshit. I'm hoping that if it comes out it'll be like a video game version of Generation Kill.

cobrausn:

Mackheath:
Great. More right-wing free speech censorship.

Simply because it is controversial does not give anyone the right to change it.

Censorship doesn't belong only to the right-wing.

I think he's calling it 'right-wing' because of the 'dishonouring the troops' complaint that's been common about it. Left-wing censorship is just a silly though.

Well, props to him for not caving.

Unlike some other people *cough* MOH *cough*

While I think it is bullshit(opolis) to that they got screwed over like that I can't help feeling that is Six Days does end up finished and put out there is probably going to be an immediate reaction that makes things worse and gives Ah-nuld credence.

Blind Sight:
I think he's calling it 'right-wing' because of the 'dishonouring the troops' complaint that's been common about it. Left-wing censorship is just a silly though.

Judging from the wording of the post, I think he's calling it 'right-wing' because he's a leftist and likes to think only the 'other' side does any censorship, which is just blatantly wrong (Leland Yee?). Just a guess though, I don't actually know. That's why my response was short.

Fair play to him for having a backbone and sticking to his guns (no pun intended) and morals.

It'd be oh so easy for them to back down, take money and white wash out another generic fps modern shooter. I'm glad to see he wants to tell the tale of what happened, or not release a game.

Well done on refusing to cave in, Peter! I, for one, want to see this game finished and released. We need more original and boundry pushing games in this industry, and Six Days sounds like the game that'll do it. If I could, I'd fund the game myself right now.

Sadly, it'd probably fail at retail because it's not Call Of Duty. That's the cold, harsh reality we live in, folks!

Mackheath:
Great. More right-wing free speech censorship.

Simply because it is controversial does not give anyone the right to change it.

Its not right wing censorship, its because it wont sell. No matter what you do with a sensitive subject like Fallujah you are going annoy someone. If you don't picture civilian deaths you will be accused of glorifying American troops and if you do you will be accused making a Al Qaeda propaganda piece. However if you change the name that issue disappears and no one is pissed off, making a larger potential market.

Rainboq:
Nice to see them sticking to their guns....

random idea, probably wouldn't work, but would it be possible for people to preorder the game, that money going to fuel development, which in turn leads to the game being ready to ship and such.

just a thought.

I like this idea. They should work out how much they need to make the game. Then how many people need to buy it to reach that amount. Then people can pre-oreder and if they get the right amount, everyone then pays and they make the game...

Isn't this the same as the Extra Credits episode about Six Days in Palooza?

albino boo:

Mackheath:
Great. More right-wing free speech censorship.

Simply because it is controversial does not give anyone the right to change it.

Its not right wing censorship, its because it wont sell. No matter what you do with a sensitive subject like Fallujah you are going annoy someone. If you don't picture civilian deaths you will be accused of glorifying American troops and if you do you will be accused making a Al Qaeda propaganda piece. However if you change the name that issue disappears and no one is pissed off, making a larger potential market.

I doubt it won't sell, there could very well be a market for this kind of game, but no one will know if the game doesn't come out and people don't talk about it. The game is already a lightning rod for controversy. Controversy has time and time again shown to be a profitable venture in certain times (see the mess known as The Passion of the Christ).

Regardless of which, I, like Extra Credits, have an insane amount of respect for the boys and girls at Atomic and hope their game gets released one day. It might be wise to sell it as a cheap game ($20) to really attract people. Then they can use that money to fund other projects like Breach or their next big idea

I hope this gets to se ethe light of day. I'm tired of "play safe" games, and sales proves I'm not the only one.

props for making a game called Six days in Bullcrapistan.

I had little interest in this game until Conservatives tried to censor/muzzle the developers. I know if the game ever sees the light of day I'll be picking it up just to support Atomic Games (and which ever publisher stands up for what's right).

Good for you Atomic, keep standing strong.

Good on them for not compromising. If people people took a stand, we might not see so much in the way of controversy.

Marowit:
I had little interest in this game until Conservatives tried to censor/muzzle the developers. I know if the game ever sees the light of day I'll be picking it up just to support Atomic Games (and which ever publisher stands up for what's right).

Good for you Atomic, keep standing strong.

I think this would have been mostly ignored until they drummed it up. I didn't see much on it before the controversy. Then, people started acting like they'd canned some big name game. Maybe not AAA, Rockstar or similar title, but still.

Had there been no controversy, I'm pretty sure it would have been released to a lukewarm reception and forgotten.

Dude, EVERYONE would buy a game called "Six Days in Bullcrapistan". EVERYONE.

Does anybody else have the feeling that the game is going to suck anyways, regardless of hype? I don't mean mediocre, either...I have a bad feeling that this game will be absolutely abhorrent in the gameplay mechanics department. Like, bargain-bin-three-weeks-after-release bad.

Misho-:
Isn't this the same as the Extra Credits episode about Six Days in Palooza?

I really hope this is a joke...

If only more companies had guys in them like Atomic. Standing up for what they believe in and supporting the medium to a powerful extent.

I hope they do release this game, I'd buy it launch day, I honestly had never heard of Fallujah before this game, and since hearing about this I've struck up conversation about it and tried to start learning more about it. The same way a movie or book would catch my attention, this game has.

The game may be getting free press, but at least it isn't going to Atomic's heads, and they're sticking to what they said they'd do. It's small, but in VGs nowadays, that's big, especially when we have EA and Activision making sacrifices to appease their wallets and sales. Not saying Atomic is clean of that, but at least they're willing to stand by what they said they'd do

qbanknight:

I doubt it won't sell, there could very well be a market for this kind of game, but no one will know if the game doesn't come out and people don't talk about it. The game is already a lightning rod for controversy. Controversy has time and time again shown to be a profitable venture in certain times (see the mess known as The Passion of the Christ).

Regardless of which, I, like Extra Credits, have an insane amount of respect for the boys and girls at Atomic and hope their game gets released one day. It might be wise to sell it as a cheap game ($20) to really attract people. Then they can use that money to fund other projects like Breach or their next big idea

It will have small niche market but with a name change it will have larger market. If you are going to spend $x million on a game, making better return on the money is always a better option. You may think they are being high minded but they are there not, making more money means that they pay more taxes. More taxes means either the rate of increase of the budget deficit reduces or more fiscal stimulus. OK its in a small way but but that how an economy works, that kind preciousness isn't going to reduce the 12% unemployed. It depends what you think is important, not spending your life paying off crippling interest from past mistakes or a video game getting respect from extra credits.

albino boo:

qbanknight:

I doubt it won't sell, there could very well be a market for this kind of game, but no one will know if the game doesn't come out and people don't talk about it. The game is already a lightning rod for controversy. Controversy has time and time again shown to be a profitable venture in certain times (see the mess known as The Passion of the Christ).

Regardless of which, I, like Extra Credits, have an insane amount of respect for the boys and girls at Atomic and hope their game gets released one day. It might be wise to sell it as a cheap game ($20) to really attract people. Then they can use that money to fund other projects like Breach or their next big idea

It will have small niche market but with a name change it will have larger market. If you are going to spend $x million on a game, making better return on the money is always a better option. You may think they are being high minded but they arethere not, making more money means that they pay more taxes. More taxes means either the rate of increase of the budget deficit reduces or more fiscal stimulus. OK its in a small way but but that how an economy works, that kind preciousness isn't going to reduce the 12% unemployed. It depends what you think is important, not spending your life paying off crippling interest from past mistakes or a video game getting respect from extra credits.

How will a name change increase the market? Are the majority of gamers offended by the current name? Does the name make them not want to pick it up? I don't see how a name change would affect the game's sales if it was released tomorrow. The only thing that a name change would do is get a publisher to be more eager to pick it up and keep it out of the news. Hopefully a publisher will pick up the title and release

Zachary Amaranth:

Marowit:
I had little interest in this game until Conservatives tried to censor/muzzle the developers. I know if the game ever sees the light of day I'll be picking it up just to support Atomic Games (and which ever publisher stands up for what's right).

Good for you Atomic, keep standing strong.

I think this would have been mostly ignored until they drummed it up. I didn't see much on it before the controversy. Then, people started acting like they'd canned some big name game. Maybe not AAA, Rockstar or similar title, but still.

Had there been no controversy, I'm pretty sure it would have been released to a lukewarm reception and forgotten.

I completely agree with you there.

Rainboq:
Nice to see them sticking to their guns....

random idea, probably wouldn't work, but would it be possible for people to preorder the game, that money going to fuel development, which in turn leads to the game being ready to ship and such.

just a thought.

They'd need millions of preorders, and then they wouldn't sell much afterwards, dooming it to failure.

I'm really starting to believe that, for the Industry's sake, this game NEEDS to be made.

The mere idea that a video game could in any way be a documentary excites me to no end.

lacktheknack:

Rainboq:
Nice to see them sticking to their guns....

random idea, probably wouldn't work, but would it be possible for people to preorder the game, that money going to fuel development, which in turn leads to the game being ready to ship and such.

just a thought.

They'd need millions of preorders, and then they wouldn't sell much afterwards, dooming it to failure.

Also seems like an investment a lot of people wouldn't be willing to take.
What if the budget runs out due to unforseen circumstances? There'd be no game and a bunch of pissed off people.

Anyway, bravo to Atomic Games for not selling out. It's hard to find integrity these days. I might even pick up a copy of this game, eventhough I'm not a big fan of war games. Not 20th century plus ones anyway.

Good for them for sticking to what they believe in and not caving under the pressure. This is the kinda thing the industry needs, people who are willing to stand in the face of the idiot hordes and defy them. Now if only more from the industry could do the same, I'm looking at you EA.

why don't they ask the public to donate?
only 50 dollars per person would probably be enough. although it does mean we pay more, I belive it is a fair price to pay for the statement alone.
do they really need a publisher? with a good enough game it should get publicity by itself.
and publicity mean sales.
right?

Snake Plissken:

Misho-:
Isn't this the same as the Extra Credits episode about Six Days in Palooza?

I really hope this is a joke...

Why is that? Wasn't the subject matter in that video about standing up for our medium (games)? Or yeah if you want then its a joke or something I just don't get it why you would like it to be a joke.

Rock on, crazy bro. Not that EA bullshit of caving in under rightwing censorship.

Motherfuckers.

Keep the fire burning, Atomic!

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here