Create a hostile faction in a modern fps

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

Ra's Al Ghul Style Environmental Terrorists destroy D.C. Dallas, NYC, Houston, Atlanta, and Detroit sending America into utter chaos as the remains of the army and government try to restore order and defeat the perpetrators of such a vile act.

HannesPascal:
Okay so the modern Call of Battlefield games generally have you situated in the middle east killing arabs or somewhere else running around shooting brown skinned people or russians. And it's kind of bugging me (and a lot of people on the escapist). Thing is I can't really make up who you should shoot in these games it's not like anyone would accept that Denmark started to conquer the world and you have to stop them.

So my question to you is:
Can you make up some enemy in a modern fps that isn't brown skinned, russian or something else that would count as a minority in the western world.

Britain, fed up of the colonials shit, decides it's about time we collected those taxes you owe us. The rest of the world, just being plain bored and annoyed with America thinking it can police the world decide that they wouldn't mind seeing America being knocked down a peg or two and enter the fray.

Dogstile:

So basically, if a professional reviewer doesn't say it, people weren't saying it?

No. People listen to critics. They get a lot more views and consideration than a thread someone anonymously started on escapist forums, especially when the thread continues with people telling the Op how they are wrong.

I've given you proof, its not hard to find more, all you have to do is google the reveal trailers and trail back through the comments, people were all over this. Refusing to look at the proof that is there does not make you right, you're better than that. Actually look up what you're arguing.

The comments section?!?!!? And I have to look through it to actively find the ones of people objecting.

Where is the actual case where they admitted it WAS A GOOD GAME but refused to get it JUST BECAUSE IT BELITTLED AMERICA.

It was crap, they made fun of it, that proves nothing of your claim that you can't have a game of America being invaded.

Modern warfare

The reason Modern warfare didn't tank is because the game that got everyone into it was extremely good for its time. I would be talking about COD4. The story was believable (terrorists want to get ahold of nukes) and not overdone at the time. Then people stayed for the multiplayer.

Then people started getting it purely for the multiplayer. Yet again, not an issue i've only just made up. Professionally paid reviewers have said that the story is fine, while long time fans who actually get into the game (that would apparently be you and half life) disagree because the story is crap and the multi is good.

Hell, I can count the number of people I know who have completed COD MW3's multiplayer on one hand if I include myself. I'd need 10 hands to count the number of people I know that own the game.

Except enough people played the single-player that it's the main advertising point for the sequel. If Activision are good at nothing htye are good at marketing, they knew people actually played the single-player even if they stayed for the multiplayer.

And if they did, why does this excuse work for Modern Warfare 2, yet not also for Homefront?

*Sigh* half life wankery, again...

They never fight eachother in the first half life because unless i'm missing a scene, they're never in the same room together.

In such close contact though, you go along a corridor. Fight some marines, then fight some black ops, then get captured by marines. No where along there do you see dead marines or black ops as if they had been fighting each other. If the game had any INTENTION of conflict between black ops and marines, they had ample opportunity to show it and didn't.

The AI is coded to fight alongside eachother but in opposing force they do indeed attack the military and the military is taken completely by surprise. They work alongside eachother until the black ops guys stab them in the back.

Go back and play the games again. Fuck, there's even a conversation between black ops soldiers talking about how they hate the marines because they always have to clean up their mess. There are radio transmissions of the soldiers being completely surprised by black ops attacking them.

Coded to fight along side each other tells us EVERYTHING of the developers intentions.

"clean up their mess"

That doesn't mean they are antagonists of Marines. It means taking up the task they failed at.

Again, the only times black ops attack Marines (even alluded to in Radio) are the ones in Opposing Force where we only see from perspective from the group of Marines who are not following orders of killing Black Mesa personnel. Hence, they are a rogue element that black ops might fight.

The bottom line is American forces ARE the antagonists in Half Life. You CANNOT escape this fact.

You're wrong. I'm leaving it at that because obviously, the notion that homefront tanked because it was a shooter that featured korea taking on america and almost winning is clearly without thought, despite evidence to the contrary.

The fact that Homefront was utter crap is irrelevant... how?!?!

Homefront was a failure because the gameplay was crap... not because of any sort of political boycott. Which doesn't make sense considering the success of Modern Warfare 2 that had almost the same damn premise of America being invaded by a foreign power.

Treblaine:

They literally spend 1000 times as much for something that is less effective. I must point out, loading a troop compartment with 25mm explosive shells, means anything that penetrates the thin aluminium armour won't just create one or two casualties that may live, and the vehicle may be repaired... it'll burn and explode killing almost everyone inside and totally destroying the vehicle.

Oh, hi there. I would just like to point out that every Bradley crewman that I have ever talked to has said that they like the thing as is and say that it as is, including the guy that had his arm blow off when the thing exploded. Of course, not much you can do when you are hit by an RPG or a tank unless you are another tank. The Bradley is an excellent IFV and handles all of its roles well. Yes, I watched the video. No, I dont think it is accurate, because the data I have seen, as well as the first hand accounts, says it handles scouting, troop transport, and straight fighting fine.

Of course, the Bradley is getting old. Obsolete. We already have something to replace it. We call this something the Stryker, which does EVEN MORE ROLES than the Bradley. At the time of writing, there are Troop transport, Mortar, Anti-tank, Light Tank/Artillery, Medivac, and even a fricking TRACKED variant!. Oh yes, did I mention ALL of those varients can carry troops.

Lovely Mixture:
A terrorist organization united by one non-religious ideology filled with members of every ethnicity.

Wish granted. I am working on a sci-fi story where this exact group exist. Set in 2344, They are fighting to become free from the Earth Governments[1], but started a rebellion to do it. Many off-world colonies have represenation in thier parent governments but are left largely autonomus . This organization, calling itself "Colonial Liberation Army", is made up of 10 million mercs, soldiers, civilians, and others against Earth rule. However, it is not a case of Your Terrorist are our Freedom Fighters. Many in the colonies are either apathetic toward them or outright hate them. Everyone who agrees with them already joined thier forces. In fact, thier 10 million man army is still smaller than the main URS army/navy they are fighting, and barely a fraction of the 32 billion humans in the universe (in Sol, Earth, Mars, Venus, and space stations on Jupiter are colonized. There are also 3 colonized planets around Alpah Centauri. Yes, I made that up). They are seen as, at best, well intentioned extremist, and at worst no better than Al Quida from our century.

Of course, this is going to be a Grey vs. Grey morality fight, as both do things pretty badly. The rebels kill those against thier cause, and cause the already Wild West-type frontier to become even more lawless by killing cops and soldiers. They also raid cargo ships and take hostages and supplies, leaving little supplies for the villages. They carry out bombings with cargo vessels in a similar style to modern suicide bombers and this leaves military as well as civilian dead. Their leader, known only as "The Wolf" (who himself is a former American/URS citizen) And thier greatest blow comes when

However, they try to help out villages in an attempt to recruit more followers and provide help to areas under thier control, and again, many see thier cause as somewhat just, they are just taking it too far.

On the other side, the United Republic is the law, and keeps the convoys running. They gave alot of autonomy to the colonies and allow them to keep their own governments (with representation on Earth), and will allow most laws to pass as they wish. They make sure ships get through with supplys and export cargo to make sure that the colonies dont collapse from being cut off. However, the military inflicts large amounts of collateral damage and has strict rules for how to behave around military outpost due to fear of bombings. They have also sunk some civilian freighters that had nothing to do with the rebellion because they got too close and were shot by the warships. The biggest moment of this was

[1] Earth is still divided into many governments rather than 1 worldwide government. However, some nations have had thier names changed to reflect off-world colonies. For example, the main faction followed in the story is the United Republic of States, which is the "United States of America" if it had states outside of North America.

A technocratic secret society that believes genetic manipulation is not just the future of mankind but vital for our technological and cultural advancement. However they arent content with creating a perfect society so they seek to destroy all the "breeders" to "clense" mankind of bad genes like heart disease and even poor eyesight. Since this is a philosophy based faction any race/religion can apply

BOOM headshot65:

Treblaine:

They literally spend 1000 times as much for something that is less effective. I must point out, loading a troop compartment with 25mm explosive shells, means anything that penetrates the thin aluminium armour won't just create one or two casualties that may live, and the vehicle may be repaired... it'll burn and explode killing almost everyone inside and totally destroying the vehicle.

Oh, hi there. I would just like to point out that every Bradley crewman that I have ever talked to has said that they like the thing as is and say that it as is, including the guy that had his arm blow off when the thing exploded. Of course, not much you can do when you are hit by an RPG or a tank unless you are another tank. The Bradley is an excellent IFV and handles all of its roles well. Yes, I watched the video. No, I dont think it is accurate, because the data I have seen, as well as the first hand accounts, says it handles scouting, troop transport, and straight fighting fine.

Of course, the Bradley is getting old. Obsolete. We already have something to replace it. We call this something the Stryker, which does EVEN MORE ROLES than the Bradley. At the time of writing, there are Troop transport, Mortar, Anti-tank, Light Tank/Artillery, Medivac, and even a fricking TRACKED variant!. Oh yes, did I mention ALL of those varients can carry troops.

My main point was it was an utter overspend.

Well, you can find no shortage of accounts criticism the Bradely from people who actually use them.

There is a problem in Military forces around the world when they are told the equipment they are required to work with is the best and like good soldiers they dutifully take their medicine and don't rock the boat. Those actually involved in the design and procurement, who knew what an was actually needed for troop transport knew what a foul up it was. And really, what have they go to compare it to? They were told Army life would be hard, they just don't realise $14 and 17 years were spent making it harder.

And they aren't going to realise how dangerous it was packing the crew compartment with thousands of rounds of high explosive cannon rounds, they would be unlikely to live long enough to find out. They didn't figure this out in WWII when tankers experienced how easily their tanks caught fire when hit by german gun while German tanks seemed to more rarely burn even when hit. The popular impression was the blame the Gasoline fuel tanks, they didn't consider the ammunition.

See, the Privates and corporals on the ground don't know where or how to address their concerns.

No, I dont think it is accurate, because the data I have seen, as well as the first hand accounts, says it handles scouting, troop transport, and straight fighting fine.

But it IS accurate. It really does hold half the troops its supposed to. It was supposed to hold a Squad and CO, in the end it could barely fit a single fireteam which the way the units are designed they CANNOT work independently. Fire and maneuver is the fundamental way modern infantry formations work, they need one fireteam (half of a squad) laying down cover while the other moves to better position. Breaking that up you then have to start matching up fireteams correctly together into squads again while bullets and bombs are everywhere.

"Of course, the Bradley is getting old. Obsolete."

For a $14 billion dollar design, it's being written off awfully quick and it's not as if they are in an arms race with a rapidly outpacing enemy, the RPG-7 was introduced in the 1960s and is just as deadly today as in 1980's when Bradley was finally introduced. It was obsolete since it was introduced.

Bradley weights 30 tonnes, to transport barely fully equipped 6 troops separated from the rest of their squad. MRAP and Stryker which are half the weight and 40 years after the need was seen for it was finally introduced able to carry a full Squad and effectively evacuate stretchered casualties. 30 tonnes is a LOT, it's as much as a Sherman tank but way less armour and a far weaker gun.

Lovely Mixture:
A terrorist organization united by one non-religious ideology filled with members of every ethnicity.

Wish granted. I am working on a sci-fi story where this exact group exist. Set in 2344, They are fighting to become free from the Earth Governments. (Earth is still divided into many governments rather than 1 worldwide government. However, some nations have had thier names changed to reflect off-world colonies. For example, the main faction followed in the story is the United Republic of States, which is the "United States of America" if it had states outside of North America.) but started a rebellion to do it. Many off-world colonies have represenation in thier parent governments but are left largely autonomus . This organization, calling itself "Colonial Liberation Army", is made up of 10 million mercs, soldiers, civilians, and others against Earth rule.

You have heard of the series called "Killzone" right? Because what you've described sounds awfully familiar.

I mean you have the ISA in Killzone, then the URA in your script?

Sorry I think someone may have beaten you to it.

Treblaine:

image

Alright, I played it in german synchronisation. So that might have been the problem there. So to me, they weren't clearly American

Treblaine:

Cops are the main opponent to your freedom in the game not because they are corrupt, but because you committed crimes. There is nothing corrupt about cops chasing criminals that is this job! If you don't kill anyone, steal anything or destroy anything the cops will completely ignore you in the GTA games. The games will be very boring, as they are all about being a criminal and I'll tell you, the principal overriding antagonist of criminals IS law enforcement.

Frankly, I don't see how anyone can play ANY video game and ever HONESTLY claim they aren't ever fighting and killing Americans.

When I refer to corrupt cops, I mainly think of the cutscenes that show individual officers as corrupt. You get to see a few of those in GTA. I won't say that I've never gone on a near endless killing spree in GTA. But I didn't enjoy it because I killed american cops, I enjoyed it because it was senseless virtual mass murder. And senseless virtual mass murder is fun.

The point is, I don't want a game that lets me shoot Americans. I want a game where America takes on the role many other countries had the "honor" of playing. The role of the bad guy. I see a lot of potential in a story with this set-up. It would be something that interests me.

But that would be exceptional demonisation of America.

Look at how the Russians were depicted as the antagonists (notice the term I sued there, not "bad guy") in Modern Warfare 2, they weren't attacking america because they are evil, but because they think America is responsible for a terrible massacre at their airport. And it turns out they weren't entirely wrong, as General Shepard seems to have in some way been behind it and intended to provoke the war.

I don't really see how that would be exceptional demonisation, to be honest. It would still be a fictional setup created by writers. Like Homefront. I don't want a American-bashing game where you end up shooting rednecks with George W. Bush as a final boss. I want a game that's intelligently written with America/ns as the antagonist/s/bad guy/s.

Hell COD4 the opening they give a chance for the big bad guy to give a speech for why he hates America, going on about how his land was "prostituted" to America, it never says why Russia was deserving of any attack, only the antagonists stating why AMERICA was deserving of attack.

This doesn't seem to be about gameplay, this seem to be about indulging your prejudiced political views at the expense of others.

I see how you could come to that impression, my first post wasn't that well-worded to begin with. But as I wrote, I don't want a game that bashes Americans for the sake of bashing and killing Americans. I suspect America to not be set up as antagonists because of sales perspectives and I think it's a waste to do so. America is a economical and military superpower that greatly shapes and influences life on planet earth. There's just so much potential and stories lying there. So why not do a game that uses them as antagonists? And if it's too controversial a topic to do if it's set near the present; why not set it in a fictional future? Again, like in homefront.

Tom Milner:
what about a revolutionary clique of neo nazis starting a civil war in a non-german country, that would be interesting if nothing else.

Y'know... that sounds a lot like something...
I just... I just can't put my finger on it...

Anyway, have this completely unrelated picture from greece!
image
Isn't it lovely? :3

simple have you play as the other side, like for example as the viet kong against the US. or the taliban against the soviet union.

an imagined conflict between south korea and the north

another imagined conflict india vs pakistan

or as the brazillian BOPE that specializes in urban warfare against crime lords in the slum.

or the brazillian jungle infantry brigade, that has numerous conflicts against drug lords and their smuggling operations

former soviet republic against the russians, or chechnyan wars

finally african civil wars, like liberia to keep it in english

basically all you have to do is play as someone other than the US and you get away from the problem of having to kill "minorities" interpret that as you see fit... im not touching it

BOOM headshot65:

Lovely Mixture:
A terrorist organization united by one non-religious ideology filled with members of every ethnicity.

Wish granted. I am working on a sci-fi story where this exact group exist. Set in 2344, They are fighting to become free from the Earth Governments, but started a rebellion to do it. Many off-world colonies have represenation in thier parent governments but are left largely autonomus . This organization, calling itself "Colonial Liberation Army", is made up of 10 million mercs, soldiers, civilians, and others against Earth rule. However, it is not a case of Your Terrorist are our Freedom Fighters. Many in the colonies are either apathetic toward them or outright hate them. Everyone who agrees with them already joined thier forces. In fact, thier 10 million man army is still smaller than the main URS army/navy they are fighting, and barely a fraction of the 32 billion humans in the universe (in Sol, Earth, Mars, Venus, and space stations on Jupiter are colonized. There are also 3 colonized planets around Alpah Centauri. Yes, I made that up). They are seen as, at best, well intentioned extremist, and at worst no better than Al Quida from our century.

Of course, this is going to be a Grey vs. Grey morality fight, as both do things pretty badly. The rebels kill those against thier cause, and cause the already Wild West-type frontier to become even more lawless by killing cops and soldiers. They also raid cargo ships and take hostages and supplies, leaving little supplies for the villages. They carry out bombings with cargo vessels in a similar style to modern suicide bombers and this leaves military as well as civilian dead. Their leader, known only as "The Wolf" (who himself is a former American/URS citizen) And thier greatest blow comes when

However, they try to help out villages in an attempt to recruit more followers and provide help to areas under thier control, and again, many see thier cause as somewhat just, they are just taking it too far.

On the other side, the United Republic is the law, and keeps the convoys running. They gave alot of autonomy to the colonies and allow them to keep their own governments (with representation on Earth), and will allow most laws to pass as they wish. They make sure ships get through with supplys and export cargo to make sure that the colonies dont collapse from being cut off. However, the military inflicts large amounts of collateral damage and has strict rules for how to behave around military outpost due to fear of bombings. They have also sunk some civilian freighters that had nothing to do with the rebellion because they got too close and were shot by the warships. The biggest moment of this was

Oh god that is dark and great. I was skeptical when you said "no better than Al Qaeda" but goddamn. Keep it up.

Treblaine:

Lovely Mixture:
A terrorist organization united by one non-religious ideology filled with members of every ethnicity.

Wish granted. I am working on a sci-fi story where this exact group exist. Set in 2344, They are fighting to become free from the Earth Governments. (Earth is still divided into many governments rather than 1 worldwide government. However, some nations have had thier names changed to reflect off-world colonies. For example, the main faction followed in the story is the United Republic of States, which is the "United States of America" if it had states outside of North America.) but started a rebellion to do it. Many off-world colonies have represenation in thier parent governments but are left largely autonomus . This organization, calling itself "Colonial Liberation Army", is made up of 10 million mercs, soldiers, civilians, and others against Earth rule.

You have heard of the series called "Killzone" right? Because what you've described sounds awfully familiar.

I mean you have the ISA in Killzone, then the URA in your script?

Sorry I think someone may have beaten you to it.

You're being sarcastic right? I don't need to tell you what's wrong with your statement do I?

US modern civil war - I'm surprised no one has tried to make it yet, I guess it would be hard to make the factions seem realistic while sticking you on one side. They could always make like two 4 hour campaigns where you get to pick your side.

Doomsday cult - trying to bring about the apocalypse. There's a lot of pretty unsecure nuclear silos in the US and Europe that they could attack. You could also have them attack germ warfare research labs.

sibrenfetter:

It is not so much the brown skin as it is the fact that in pretty much all modern shooters we play as the American hero saving the world by going to these arab/russian/african countries. What I find especially grating sometimes is how this is portrayed. CoD MW3 has a good example.

CoD MW protagonists:
- John Price - British
- Paul Jackson - American, dies after failing in his task to catch Al-Asad.
- Soap MacTavish - British, main protagonist who fixes America's fuckup.

CoD MW 2 protagonists:

- James Ramirez - American prevents Russians from blowing up a burger king and then later the White House. During a war with a nation categorically weaker than the US(Which had just been through a civil war) and was now somehow was invading it because that's how awful the US is in Call of Duty MW.
- Joseph Allen - American, killed a bunch of civilians or stood by while it happened, was then immediately caught and implicated in a massacre, starting a war.
- Soap MacTavish - British, cleans up America's fuckup.
- Gary Sanderson - British, cleans up America's fuckup.

oh and the villain in this game literally is an American general.

CoD MW 3 protagonists:

- Marcus Burns - British, fails to stop terror attack.
- Derek Westbrook - Saves Russian president, which again is only necessary because America fucked up.
- Andrei Harkov - fails to protect Russian President.
- Soap MacTavish - fails to stop the Zakhaev
- John Price - British, cleans up America's fuckup.
- Yuri - Russian, cleans up America's fuckup.

The entire series is the US colossally screwing everything up and then someone else(usually the British) try to fix things behind the scenes. The Americans are pretty much never the heroes. At best they are the national embodiment of inspector Clouseau bumbling around with good intentions, at worst they are evil assholes engineering wars and outright betraying their allies. If you actually think about it, Call of Duty MW is one of the most anti US games around.

Lovely Mixture:

Treb:

Wish granted. I am working on a sci-fi story where this exact group exist. Set in 2344, They are fighting to become free from the Earth Governments. (Earth is still divided into many governments rather than 1 worldwide government. However, some nations have had thier names changed to reflect off-world colonies. For example, the main faction followed in the story is the United Republic of States, which is the "United States of America" if it had states outside of North America.) but started a rebellion to do it. Many off-world colonies have represenation in thier parent governments but are left largely autonomus . This organization, calling itself "Colonial Liberation Army", is made up of 10 million mercs, soldiers, civilians, and others against Earth rule.

You have heard of the series called "Killzone" right? Because what you've described sounds awfully familiar.

I mean you have the ISA in Killzone, then the URA in your script?

Sorry I think someone may have beaten you to it.

You're being sarcastic right? I don't need to tell you what's wrong with your statement do I?

You aren't BOOM headshot65.

Anyway, I think that is deserving of explanation, surely you can see the similarities between this and Killzone. Have you played any of the Killzone games?

the ISA=USA allusions are as clear as URA and USA. The separate group of people mistreated on a far of planet rebelling...

Here's a setup I've been pondering; out of absolutely nowhere, about one third of the human population world-wide--from civilians to military units in every country--suddenly and inexplicably turn on the other two thirds and launch a highly coordinated and systematic surprise attack.

Mycroft Holmes:
US modern civil war - I'm surprised no one has tried to make it yet, I guess it would be hard to make the factions seem realistic while sticking you on one side. They could always make like two 4 hour campaigns where you get to pick your side.

I was thinking that you'd play as a civilian, trapped in an urban warzone and trying to survive (and maybe find his or her family). The player would be allowed to do whatever they wanted in order to due so, so they could either remain neutral and try to lay low, become a bandit, enlist in a faction(or be caught by a press gang) etc. Since combat would be very difficult, the latter options would be somewhat problematic.

Treblaine:

You aren't BOOM headshot65.

That's right,I'm not.

Treblaine:

Anyway, I think that is deserving of explanation, surely you can see the similarities between this and Killzone. Have you played any of the Killzone games?

the ISA=USA allusions are as clear as URA and USA. The separate group of people mistreated on a far of planet rebelling...

The amount of acronyms and abbreviations ending in A is amazingly large, Alliance, Association, America, etc.

The "separate group of people mistreated on a far of planet rebelling" has been used many times before Killzone. In Gundam, Red Faction, Banner/Crest of the Stars, Bodacious Space Pirates, Terra e, Zone of the Enders, etc. That's because it's a parallel of what happened in colonies in real-life during the age of imperialism.

Anonymous.

Easy peezy and real world relevant. White boys in Guy Fawke's masks machinegunning and bombing non-whites, women, furries, and pretty much everything else that 4chan wishes death upon.

I'd love a game where you play as some sort of poorly equipped resistance fighter against a far numerically and technologically superior foe. Only game I know of that did this was Operation Flashpoint Resistance, but you don't really have to play like a truely cautious rebel of some sort having to sneak, steal and ambush your way to victory most of the time.

Since any non former Soviet Bloc country is probably out of the question in the good ol' moral guardians eyes, lets say you fight as some militiaman or insurgent against some kinda mega corp with a moderately sized PMC army equipped with the latest and greatest gear. They're hired out by some country or other which doesn't want to do the dirty work itself to carry out deniable operations, which have just now put them at odds with your country, and you've had enough of them burning and stealing your shit. Time to muster a force of rag tag misfits equipped with whatever rusty old guns and pick up trucks you can find and take back your homeland one step at a time.
Having to essentially play as David against Goliath in a vaguely modern warfare-ish scenario in a tough-as-nails, HUD-less, recoilless-less shooter would be awesome if done right. Being a sort of personal, ongoing campaign, there could be a fair deal of potential for character development too, something which most modern shooters are slammed for lacking.

EDIT: Also, you can get to play as the PMC's. So on one end you're part of a raggedy ass rebellion, on the other you're strained to the breaking point trying to stamp it out. Both campaigns would be interesting, distinct and difficult in their own way. As a rebel you'll pick off and trick the superior enemy where and whenever you can, whilst as the PMC you can just streamroll your way to the objective, only you have to be super careful your force doesn't gradually get decimated by the sneaky rebels before you get there.

Mycroft Holmes:
US modern civil war - I'm surprised no one has tried to make it yet, I guess it would be hard to make the factions seem realistic while sticking you on one side. They could always make like two 4 hour campaigns where you get to pick your side.

That would be fucking brilliant done properly, but can you imagine the complete shitstorm it'd generate? There'd be so many asshats reckoning that it encourages players to instigate their own civil war and shit like that, along with the backlash of it being a game about killing Americans, perhaps, in the eyes of some made even worse by the protagonist also being American.
Hence why this game has never, and unfortunately likely will never be made.

Treblaine:

You have heard of the series called "Killzone" right? Because what you've described sounds awfully familiar.

I mean you have the ISA in Killzone, then the URA in your script?

Sorry I think someone may have beaten you to it.

Have I heard of Killzone? Yes. Have I played it and thus know the lore behind it? No. I have only heard the name, and I dont know any of the weapons, backstory, or factions present in it.

Treblaine:

the ISA=USA allusions are as clear as URA and USA.

First off, it is the "United Republic of States" (URS), not URA like you have it.

Second, it is not a "USA allusion." In the case of my story, the URS IS the USA. The only reason the name has been changed is because they have colonies off-world (both space stations orbiting Earth, and on other planets), and thus its kind of hard to call yourself the "United States of America" when hundreds of millions of your citizens dont even LIVE in North America. Hence "United Republic of States." They are all united under a single government, that government is a Republic (or Represenative Democracy. Take your pick), and all the members are independant states under the government (although, the colonies have more in common with Territories like Guam and Peurto Rico than states like New York, Texas, California, etc.)

The separate group of people mistreated on a far of planet rebelling...

Except they arent being mistreated as badly as you may think. Yes, there are problems with the military causing collateral damage, but many of the civilians blame the CLA[1] rather than the military. Many are happy with the setup as is and it is seen as an extremist minority that wants to gain full independance. In fact, my reasoning for this comes from the real life American Revolution. It has been found out that at the time, it was basically 30% wanted independace, 30% were British loyalist, and 40% didnt give a shit either way. Thats basically how it is in my story, but with the percentages changed up (namely, 15% independance, 40% Earth loyalist, 45% dont give a shit. These change as the war goes on though.) Of course, in keeping with another theme I am going to have in there (the media screws up the war effort), The News keeps overblowing how bad it really is there and focuses on every little civilian death even if it was unavoidable.

Lovely Mixture:

Oh god that is dark and great. I was skeptical when you said "no better than Al Qaeda" but goddamn. Keep it up.

If you would like to know more about what I have though up as of now (and realize, this is still in the planning phase and subject to major changes), PM me. Because I already have ALOT though up.

[1] Just in case you forgot, "Colonial Liberation Army." They are the "terrorist" group.

After listening to all of these examples I have come to one conclusion: stay the heck away from political gimmicks.

Don't try to rip something from the headlines only to then try to "give it a twist".

No, none of this "why not play as the Viet Kong or the Taliban" this is nonsense, this is just trying to be different for the sake of being different. How is this going to make for different gameplay? Are you actually making a unique and worthy game antagonist, or is this just some shit for the cutscenes? Like "oooh, I'm being so edgy doing what I shouldn't do".

What would make an interesting "entity" to have as an antagonist from a gameplay perspective?

Many years ago someone could have suggested zombies, that would be very interesting change as with zombies you have huge numbers of weak melee enemies, coming in wave after wave. But I've got to admit, even with the glory of the gore (guilt free as they are mindless cannibals after all) it does get a bit monotonous, and anything that can be done with zombies has pretty much been done. After all, one thing Left 4 Dead has shown is that it's easier to take a very simple AI engine and multiply it 1000 times rather than make a single intelligent AI.

One clear trend is for games to either go towards either massive numbers of weak and dumb enemies, or a few really tough but still very dumb enemies. And that can work in either co-op or singleplayer, just tweaking things a bit either way.

It seems any expectation of truly intelligent opponent will only be in multiplayer.

One thing I do think can work is not having so much as intelligent enemies as highly AGGRESSIVE ones.

And here is the thing, this spell cannon fodder. You need a long game to give enough variety and you need to be fighting very often, so the result is you need an opponent that one individual could conceivably kill hundreds if not thousands of in a short period of time.

This pretty much demands a fanatical faction, who are not going to be intelligent or not care about dying because they are going to face you with full confidence even though you just wiped out the previous 1000, it's like facing a guy with a 100:0 kill ratio and you have no respawns.

American military doesn't fit this profile. It's known for having a small ACTIVE army with fickle recruitment, no one can fail to see the problems in Vietnam of recruitment, conscription and retention. It's a small elite army which is extremely conservative of casualties, this makes them implausible as an video game enemy. America's military is large because it depends on massive reserves, it really struggles to function with many deployed at any one time, many people don't understand the significant of "reserves" many have the idea that a soldier as soon as being trained up is sent off to fight on the front and do so till they aren't needed. No, reserves are a vital function of how trained troops are managed.

In fact most modern military forces do not fit this profile. They have seen the benefit of having large well trained armies with large reserves and being conservative with deployment. It's the lesson learned from WWII, German military was extremely well trained but fighting without reserves they depleted their tactical edge utterly dissolved.

Any modern military, even if you could kill them in the scale of video games, they wouldn't allow it as they'd simply pull out their troops after a high casualty rate to preserve their core of trained personnel.

This leads me towards an irregular and poorly led enemy force, one who wouldn't know that one-individual was so good that they shouldn't even think of trying to fight them.

The splicers in Bioshock I thought were really original, taking the themes of narcotic-addicts and steroid-juicing body builders only with the elements of genetic modification.

But there are certain limits of how far genetic modification can go, after all, all the life on earth has had billions of years to evolve to where it is today and there a certain apparent limits on size, speed and so on.

...

I'd like to combine the elements of Deus Ex of body modification with cybernetics and robots with the Bioshock aspect of individuals in a population becoming "addicted" and using such things out of control. So an entire population of cyborgs and robots with human-brains installed inside them.

You could have such a variety of foes and also you could get tougher with more victories against them, looting their mechanical limbs for replacement and superior parts.

IBlackKiteI:

Mycroft Holmes:
US modern civil war - I'm surprised no one has tried to make it yet, I guess it would be hard to make the factions seem realistic while sticking you on one side. They could always make like two 4 hour campaigns where you get to pick your side.

That would be fucking brilliant done properly, but can you imagine the complete shitstorm it'd generate? There'd be so many asshats reckoning that it encourages players to instigate their own civil war and shit like that, along with the backlash of it being a game about killing Americans, perhaps, in the eyes of some made even worse by the protagonist also being American.
Hence why this game has never, and unfortunately likely will never be made.

Yeah, this pretty much confirms it, this isn't about making a good game, this is about controversy for the sake of controversy. Take your petty political point scoring elsewhere, and don't try to ruin games by trying to satisfy your political prejudices.

the backlash of it being a game about killing Americans

Absolutely ZERO BACKLASH to killing American Marines in the extremely popular and well known Half Life.

This idea that it is politically controversial to kill Americans as antagonists in video games IS COMPLETELY FABRICATED. It has no basis in fact and is KNOWINGLY in direct contradiction with the facts. Deception.

HannesPascal:
Okay so the modern Call of Battlefield games generally have you situated in the middle east killing arabs or somewhere else running around shooting brown skinned people or russians. And it's kind of bugging me (and a lot of people on the escapist). Thing is I can't really make up who you should shoot in these games it's not like anyone would accept that Denmark started to conquer the world and you have to stop them.

Well you have managed to bug YOURSELF by totally imagining a situation that doesn't actually exist.

Call of duty 1 = Americans, Brits and Russians vs Germans
Call of Duty 2 = Americans, Brits and Russians vs Germans
Call of Duty 3 = Americans Brits and Polish vs Germans
Call of Duty 4 = Americans and Brits vs Russians and Arabs
CoD World at War = Americans vs Japanese, Russians Vs Germans
Modern Warfare 2 = Americans and Brits vs Russians and Arabs, then Brits Vs Americans
Black Ops = Americans vs Russians, Vietnamese, Also Russians vs Russians in Gulag uprising.

in the multiplayer, half the time you are put on the team where you are killing the British or Americans.

So my question to you is:
Can you make up some enemy in a modern fps that isn't brown skinned, russian or something else that would count as a minority in the western world.

imageimageimage

Bioshock 1, 2 and Infinite
Crysis 2
Spec Ops The Line
Deus Ex Human Revolution
RAGE
Fallout 3 + New Vegas
Killzone 2 + 3 (Helgast being very white and very British)

You can't possibly have not heard of any of these games, or have you heard of them and just assumed they all have "brown skinned, russian or something else that would count as a minority" as the antagonists?!!?!?

I've looked through the action games that I've got and it's the exception to have a game with non-white antagonists.

Treblaine:

Bioshock 1, 2 and Infinite
Crysis 2
Spec Ops The Line
Deus Ex Human Revolution
RAGE
Fallout 3 + New Vegas
Killzone 2 + 3 (Helgast being very white and very British)

You can't possibly have not heard of any of these games, or have you heard of them and just assumed they all have "brown skinned, russian or something else that would count as a minority" as the antagonists?!!?!?

I've looked through the action games that I've got and it's the exception to have a game with non-white antagonists.

When I said modern fps I meant an fps set in modern times like COD4 and such (I should have clarified that).

HannesPascal:

Treblaine:

Bioshock 1, 2 and Infinite
Crysis 2
Spec Ops The Line
Deus Ex Human Revolution
RAGE
Fallout 3 + New Vegas
Killzone 2 + 3 (Helgast being very white and very British)

You can't possibly have not heard of any of these games, or have you heard of them and just assumed they all have "brown skinned, russian or something else that would count as a minority" as the antagonists?!!?!?

I've looked through the action games that I've got and it's the exception to have a game with non-white antagonists.

When I said modern fps I meant an fps set in modern times like COD4 and such (I should have clarified that).

I can only think of two major fps franchises that have what you are talking about. The big component of these modern fps your talking about is they have a basis in the real world they have to be theoreticals or possible futures you can't have it be a "Welp, lets just have a Civil War." because that wouldn't be believable most people in the western world "get" each other and because of it there is less violent conflict if it was a hundred years ago then maybe not so much but now we seem to kind have worked it out therefore the only believable enemy would be one that we are currently in conflict with its simple as that I don't think you really thought this thing through since your only considering Call of Duty,Battlefield and Medal of Honor as our "modern fps" when they are really just "modern military fps" key word being modern.

also the Condemned series Modern setting and a fps.

Space russians, just because that moment in Vanquish is just like ".......whut?"

HannesPascal:

Treblaine:

Bioshock 1, 2 and Infinite
Crysis 2
Spec Ops The Line
Deus Ex Human Revolution
RAGE
Fallout 3 + New Vegas
Killzone 2 + 3 (Helgast being very white and very British)

You can't possibly have not heard of any of these games, or have you heard of them and just assumed they all have "brown skinned, russian or something else that would count as a minority" as the antagonists?!!?!?

I've looked through the action games that I've got and it's the exception to have a game with non-white antagonists.

When I said modern fps I meant an fps set in modern times like COD4 and such (I should have clarified that).

That's a bit like saying "I want a realistic 1940's era War game where I'm not fighting the Germans or Japanese"

Okay, I've got the game "like COD4 but fighting non-brown, non-russians"

image

You can't feign ignorance any more considering the final act is British forces fighting Americans.

And in the VERY LIST YOU REJECTED:

Crysis 2 = modern setting
Spec Ops The Line = Modern setting

Treblaine:
Yeah, this pretty much confirms it, this isn't about making a good game, this is about controversy for the sake of controversy. Take your petty political point scoring elsewhere, and don't try to ruin games by trying to satisfy your political prejudices.

the backlash of it being a game about killing Americans

Absolutely ZERO BACKLASH to killing American Marines in the extremely popular and well known Half Life.

This idea that it is politically controversial to kill Americans as antagonists in video games IS COMPLETELY FABRICATED. It has no basis in fact and is KNOWINGLY in direct contradiction with the facts. Deception.

I thought it pretty obvious that these aren't my 'political prejudices' I'm expressing, I'd welcome such a game. I'm thinking of how the media would react and why the anticipation of that would prevent anyone creating something like this.
Considering that the media tends to greatly overexaggerate and distort the truth of a lot of controversal content in games, how do you think a modern game based on some sort of armed American uprising would likely fare?
Sure, I might wanna play it and you might want to play it, but the media watchdogs could read all kinds of stupid crap into it, and most devs wouldn't risk that.

Even if it did actually cause little backlash not many devs would, at this point, risk such a project in the first place.

IBlackKiteI:

Treblaine:
Yeah, this pretty much confirms it, this isn't about making a good game, this is about controversy for the sake of controversy. Take your petty political point scoring elsewhere, and don't try to ruin games by trying to satisfy your political prejudices.

the backlash of it being a game about killing Americans

Absolutely ZERO BACKLASH to killing American Marines in the extremely popular and well known Half Life.

This idea that it is politically controversial to kill Americans as antagonists in video games IS COMPLETELY FABRICATED. It has no basis in fact and is KNOWINGLY in direct contradiction with the facts. Deception.

I thought it pretty obvious that these aren't my 'political prejudices' I'm expressing, I'd welcome such a game. I'm thinking of how the media would react and why the anticipation of that would prevent anyone creating something like this.
Considering that the media tends to greatly overexaggerate and distort the truth of a lot of controversal content in games, how do you think a modern game based on some sort of armed American uprising would likely fare?
Sure, I might wanna play it and you might want to play it, but the media watchdogs could read all kinds of stupid crap into it, and most devs wouldn't risk that.

Even if it did actually cause little backlash not many devs would, at this point, risk such a project in the first place.

Who gives CRAP what the media thinks, games aren't made for their amusement and to give them shitty tabloid news stories.

It's made for gamers.

Considering that the media tends to greatly overexaggerate and distort the truth...

Evidently it has rubbed of on certain forum posters...

I'd do what I'm doing in my book-
A group of people who aren't evil, in any sense, but following a lie. A lie that peace must be achieved through war. They do nothing too morally devastating, atleast not by choice, yet they are placed in 4 inch thick armor (Sorry, I forgot "Modern") and have every instance of them dehumanized, leaving the oppossing forces in a trans that they are destroying "Bad guys". easily labeled as "Evil baby eaters", without having a face to go along with it, until they see that humans do exist under their armor, and instantly ruin the well-being of said opposing soldiers.

Fighting an enemy who owns most of the world, has supperior technology, land and power hungry leaders with no emplaced restrictions, and yet their greatest weapon is the fact that they are human, underneith all of the things that "protect" them.

A corporation of Swedish architects jealous of the German innovations in structural design so they attempt to take over the biggest German architecture firm via. assasinating the CEO in a buisness meeting, only for the German employees to pull out their own weapons given to them by their military contracts?

Treblaine:

You can't feign ignorance any more considering the final act is British forces fighting Americans.

And in the VERY LIST YOU REJECTED:

Crysis 2 = modern setting
Spec Ops The Line = Modern setting

Actually I don't play so many fps but according to a lot of people on this website killing brownish people is all you do in these games and I wanted those same people to make up a realistic scenario where you killed someone else.

Simonism451:
A coalition of Israeli and Iranian forces who assault the US east coast. Nobody would see that one coming.

This.... Genius...

It should be Alaska instead, now that would be unpredictable.

A group of people who think FPSs are stupid and rise up to destroy them. Nothing pisses off a gamer faster than people who don't like their particular flavor of game. At least the player would be motivated.

HannesPascal:

Treblaine:

You can't feign ignorance any more considering the final act is British forces fighting Americans.

And in the VERY LIST YOU REJECTED:

Crysis 2 = modern setting
Spec Ops The Line = Modern setting

Actually I don't play so many fps but according to a lot of people on this website killing brownish people is all you do in these games and I wanted those same people to make up a realistic scenario where you killed someone else.

image

But you are the one who actually said it, you were categorical that there was not a game of that where you kill anyone other than "brown people". I mean, what the hell dude? Why the hell are you making demands of things you know next to noting about? Some questions aren't just questions, they are accusations by implication.

Mycroft Holmes:

The entire series is the US colossally screwing everything up and then someone else(usually the British) try to fix things behind the scenes. The Americans are pretty much never the heroes. At best they are the national embodiment of inspector Clouseau bumbling around with good intentions, at worst they are evil assholes engineering wars and outright betraying their allies. If you actually think about it, Call of Duty MW is one of the most anti US games around.

You actually bring up some really good points. And while I maintain my points to some degree (for shooters in general) as an overall statement, you are definitely correct with the COD series.

I go to Matthew Reilly novels for a brilliant cast of possible video game villians. So lets see what we have got, ok um Rouge US/EU Military Factions, Rouge Revolutionaries trying to start a US Civil War, a Collective band of Mercenaries/bounty hunters sponsored by a first world nation, A CIA Created army of mercenaries/war criminals/terrorists that is used for an evil purpose, a first world country (US/France/UK/Australia.. ect) that sends an elite team to cover up or capture something your defending, The Government (hey you seen something you weren't supposed to see), Killer experimental apes armed with machine guns and of course the ole Neo-Nazi. Top it all off with some Mutated Walruses, Killer Whales, crocodiles and giant man eating cats and bingo you got yourself an awesome experience

Why not PMCs? i know its impossible as hell and Tom Clanci's HAWX already did it but it sure as hell feels better to kill money grubbing corporate servants than some dude from Russia who got kids to feed. Other wise we can take the ace combat route and make up our own planet where everyone is nice to each other but the evil leaders are the ones that force them to fight... The enemy also better have gigantic flying manta-rays that fire swarms of missiles just to make the narrative point--I just like gigantic flying manta-rays, screw trying to explain that.

Otherwise you can make an FPS where we play a form of terrorist with a "righteous cause" and we try to avoid civilian casualties as much as possible. There are allot of enemies for the common man, if painting them brown or saying that they are from a communist country is not fair game any more all you really have to do is find another way to make them different.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked