If you don't want your kids to see it, that's fine. It's your prerogative, and there are plenty of tools to help you out. Making laws against it, tough, requires something a little more substantial than just a concern parent's opinion.

Plus, as I've said before, no one is really serious about getting legislation out there. Everytime the issue has come up, it's always been some enterprising politician or "expert" trying to make a name for themselves as moral guardians.

In related news, EA's removing the playable Taliban from Medal of Honor because of the shitty parents of dead soldiers.

I'd like to say I just hate America, but stuff's like this elsewhere with certain things.

I read about that on Destructoid, and one of the commenters stated that it was the right thing to do because the Taliban could've sued for defamation.

wahahaha. If they could spin their case, I'm sure they'd have a valid argument.

I dunno. I'm really bummed about it, because it was looking cool, like something different that no one had really tried before. I was more surprised when people were attacking it and EA was backing it. I thought they had balls. But I guess that people are too emasculated nowadays and back down because someone somewhere might be offended by some thing.

Well, I do know dead soldiers, not that it counts much for me. Not really anybody in my family or anything, but enough to have an impact. If the game hits close to home, it should. War's fucked up. It's not like Modern Warfare 2: The Action Movie where every enemy is a faceless Eastern European. They had a chance to be a little more topical by having the Taliban in the game like that, and they just fucked it up.

I'm too pessimistic, I think. :(

I'm pissed that they backed down because it sends a message saying the industry will bend over if you yell at it long enough. I dunno if I agree with the content because I never touched that series, but I support the first amendment and creative freedom, and no one's forced to play it.

At least the publicity would have helped them be noticed. Call of Duty casts a shadow over that franchise now.

I understand why they did it. They are a business and they can't go pissing off consumers to the point of losing sales. If you were going to buy the game with the Taliban in it, you will still probably buy the game without it. By keeping them in they would be cutting out sales for all the kids whos parents give a crap about this kind of thing.

However what they should have done was announcethat the Taliban would no longer be in the game but would be replaced by a fictional terrorist group called the Nabilat.

*No relation

People's tender sensibilities? Violence?

Then why did they do it in the first place? You can't tell me that there is no one at the publisher or the dev who understood that there might be some people offended that they used "Taliban" in their game.

Parents can't even be bothered to check the warning label on a game to see if it has lots of violence. What are the chances that they'll know that some of the enemies in a multiplayer game are called "Taliban"?


What I hate about this whole scenario is that it's making me want to defend what was so clearly a publicity stunt on the part of EA. Just as "No Russian" garnered tons of publicity for MW2 and "Bad Babysitter" garnered tons of publicity for Dante's Inferno, calling their multiplayer skins "Taliban" has generated new interest in MoH.

I'm worried about the same thing that Phoenix mentioned: that this stupid stunt and the retraction that followed will embolden all the special interest groups out there with the message that if they whine hard enough and loud enough, they too can have their will imposed on the industry.

Thanks a lot, EA, you sacks of shit.



And yes, I know MW2 is Activision, not EA.

What happened to the days when games like Bionic Commando was chalk full of Nazi references....of course the American version did have all that removed...so I guess there was no good old days.

Ah, but they did leave in the ultra-obvious headshot. Along with the surprisingly graphic head explosion.

Very true and even at a young age I felt that black bird insignia on the red back drop looked a tad ominous.

Wolfenstein 3D had straight up Robo Hitler. So all the good ol' days were back in 1992 :lol

The difference here is that Nazis are and were a thing of the past. Where the Taliban are currently killing peoples kids.

Yeah but if you read some comics from the 40s then you'll see plenty of Nazis getting blown to pieces. AIIIIIII!!!

Correct. Captain America and Namor fought the war on land and the sea. If I'm remembering my history correctly, we sent in Wolverine to help out with some key operations.

So I have Silent Hill 1 and 2 on my computer. 1 wasn't made for the computer and it plays like shit, also the graphics are way old. Is it worth playing 1 or should I just move on to 2?

I received a copy of one for my computer a few years back, it was painful to play, I would move onto two.

I had to do a double take when you said "we sent in wolverine".

One its a good game and normally worth at least one play through. If it runs like shit though your probably better off skipping it. Two was way better anyway. Probably the best in the series.

:tear

Silent Hill 1 is the best game in the series. If you don't play it, you're mega-gay.

The computer emulated version runs like shit if you try to put the settings too high; it won't look any better anyway, so just keep the graphic quality down.

I agree it's the best. Especially since they put in things JUST TO SCARE YOU in random places. I also liked the harmless shadow/ghost things. That was a great atmospheric touch.

I don't remember what the kid things that followed you around were called but we called them chili chitlins.

lol.....its not spelled assburgers.......its spelled "aspergers".............thats the funniest shit ive seen someone spell wrong in a long time.........learn to check your spelling.....or not and keep the laughs coming :D

IM A SPAMBOT LOL