Game's story has prominent anti war message

>game's story has prominent anti war message
>gameplay consists of making war and violence seem fucking awesome

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=-SrbcIGi8HI
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Perhaps that's the point?

Spec Ops did an interesting deconstruction of modern military shooters but if you look at some Call of Duty games especially the new one it's full of messages about how war is horrible yet the entire game is based around making shooting people really fun.

Why didn't you just stop?

Because it was my turn to welcome people to Dubai.

You're a fucking retard

It's such a bland, boring ass shooting gallery that had zero decisions to make, and a plot you could see coming from the first 2 minutes into the fuckin game

Anybody who talks about this shovelware shit like it had a message - wear a fucking condom

>game takes place during an apocalypse/end of the world scenario
>merchants still charge you for shit

Truffaut was right, then?

I dont think this guy understands the topic of the thread...

The problem with Spec Ops is I never felt any reason to see the enemies in the game as anything more than just pixelated blips to shoot for points. Especially with the fucking turret mission, where it felt more like Galaga than any kind of tactical ultra operator simulator.

I don't know if that was the point either, but it kind of undermined the "dude stop killing people" message. They never seemed like people.

sorry for what?

Nonlethal runs are cancer.
They shouldn't be allowed.

I don't think the point was so much as to shame the player for enjoying shooters, but rather to deconstruct the stories you see in the typical shooters that came out around that time when every game had to be gritty modern shooters.

This was never more prominent (and problematic) than it was in GTA IV.

youtube.com/watch?v=-SrbcIGi8HI

>that had zero decisions to make
Why would you be making decisions in a linear shooter whose narrative is a character study of Martin Walker, and not a study of you the player?
When Walker sees the Mustard Gas launcher, his friends say "we don't have to use this, we can make a choice right now", Walker replies with "no we can't" and then uses the gas.
At that moment the game told you straight up: this is a linear game.

Stop trying to read too deep and just enjoy the game.

Oh shit

It's kind of bizarre how people push the blame on themselves and then get mad at the developers for shaming them. Is it some sort of weird reverse projection? Do they secretly actually feel bad for killing unnamed fictional characters?

>People need guns, food, medicine, or whatever
>sell it or trade it to
>???
>profit
People want money and/or other shit

Not sure I understand the logic of this one. Is a merchant supposed to just give you thinks for free? An exchange of goods, or currency and goods to form a mutualistic relationship benefits everyone, not just one person in the exchange.

>They never seemed like people.
They look like monsters to you?

Self inserting is the cancer killing fiction.

*except in video games where immersion depends on self-insertion
Phew a close one, saved you there user.

>immersion depend on self-insertion
So like PnP games where you get to create the whole of your character? Or games that let you go in depth in making back stories and character motivations?
I get that, those are made around non established character, but it only works there. In other works it doesn't work as the character is it's own thing with it's own traits, not an avatar of your will like the PCs in a PnP game. People tend to insert into those they they are not supposed to, than get upset that the character did things they themselves would not and feel as if the dev was trying to make them feel bad instead of seeing it as the logical conclusion to the characters being and it's pretty stupid.