Red Cross wants war themed video games to abide by Geneva Conventions.

[BF2_Trooper 0]

:confused:

http://kotaku.com/war-crimes/

[Flash Thunder 10]

LOL no.

[Dead3yez 0]

Geneva Convention was already a joke. This just takes things to a whole new level.

[Daniel 0]

It's sad when well respected and incredibly important institutions say bat shit insane things like this.

[PELHAM 10]

Hope it's not retrospective - I killed lots of civilians testing some game addons so I guess it's off to the Hague for me! :o Luckily no one saw it - I was in SP.

Have they given up trying to get it implemented in real life? Much of the world ignores it routinely.

I guess once they get this law passed it will stop all those rogue armies rampaging across central Africa from commiting war crimes? If they have to play GC FPS on their PC's they will no doubt stop what they are doing lol. Bat shit is right!

Edited December 3, 2011 by PELHAM

[rangerpl 13]

Gee, I didn't know my activities on ArmA counted as actual warfare... if so, where do I claim my Purple Heart?

[Daniel 0]

Shit, I didn't think of it that way. Where's my tea and medals?!

[ryguy 10]

Fucking idiots! They set up a medical vodnik with doctors, something not even possible in the game unless you explicitly set it up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-060xh9DaFA

Skip to 0:46

Also, that was a scripted fire in the end. Jesus christ, these people are idiots. I'm just glad it's the red cross rather than the government debating this sh**. What's next, our books and movie plots are going to have to follow the geneva convention?

Edited December 3, 2011 by ryguy

[Flash Thunder 10]

Gee, I didn't know my activities on ArmA counted as actual warfare... if so, where do I claim my Purple Heart?

screw the purple heart where's my Medal of Honor, Ive saved so many people from Nuclear Threat and I want to collect disability checks and social security I have no limbs left. :(

[maturin 12]

At least the ArmA clip features a modded tank, so we know someone's a fan. :p

[dysta 10]

Wait a second, I thought the military simulation game were promoting to gamers about how bad the realistic warfare is. It also help simulating several situations why the people get shot and why they have to take such action which causing severe causalities.

That's just the opposite, the game is helping people to know how bad the war is, now how awesome it is.

[sparks50 0]

Its just standard gaming BS from people who do not understand video games. The ambulance scene is borderline hilarious, which addon did that tank come from?

Please understand that the Red Cross is a worldwide organization, that does a lot of different things. Were not all crazy.

[metalcraze 290]

What I understood from this video is that ArmA2 doesn't have frag points

[Wolfrug 0]

Hey, that ambulance + people around it looked neutral! It should probably have said "-500 points, a "CEASE FIRE" message, and if you keep it up your friends will kill you" kind of thing instead. :-P

That said, there's no harm in DISCUSSING these things, as long as games are respected for what they are - an art form.

Regards,

Wolfrug

[Innomadic 10]

I am continually impressed by the medias ability to show something thats possible in a game and make it look like the whole point of the game.

[purepassion 22]

worst argumentation ever :D

Well at least worth a good laugh

[dm 9]

Is all I can say on the matter...

Rather than ragging on video games AGAIN, why not do something that actually matters.

Oh right, thats because video games are an easy target :/

[Tonci87 163]

SERIOUSLY DON´T THEY HAVE MORE IMPORTANT THINGS GOING ON?

Like saving some children in Africa?

Its time to make an Arma Video showcasing Gameplay as a Medic and stating that ARMA encourages people to take care of other Humans.

[Beagle 684]

The red cross has a point here. Beeing a reservist and former soldier I indeed also often hate the way this game is played by the majority online in a style on a daily bases that would at least directly lead to a warcrime investigation.

the offficial campaigns always did a better job but I always feel the game is a bit to free with the rules in a real deployment.

And no, not all armies handle things that go wrong in the laissez-faire way the US Forces do...Some really stick to the geneve convention, have banned landmines and cluster bombs and do not engange suspected enemies outside of the operation area given by a UN resolution.

Just because the US commits warcrimes on a daily base since it feels no need to stick to geneve convention in a "war" against terrorists, does not mean its all right and thats why the red cross has a very good point here...showing this in games does make it worse simpy, because the sense for what is right or wrong is just spoiled futher and further and further...and don't forget, most soldiers are in the typical "shooter " age 18-30.

Edited December 3, 2011 by Beagle

[nodunit 397]

I don't think something like this would hold any water when it comes to games really, it's something entirerly different, and since we're using mainstream titles (to a point)..example with bf2-3.

A tank rolls into a small town, a real combatant would either try to engage the tank from a high place or simply avoid altogether on account of DEATH. However ingame since they can simply respawn the opposing side would attempt to place C4 on the tank and blow it up. The tank has two options, engage with main gun (authorization required) or use the machine gun. Naturally the player is going to go for the splash kill and why not? If they use the machine gun there is a change the opponent could rush the tank and C4 it as the driver franticly gets stuck in the close quarters.

Rather curious to what brings this stuff on, it seems back in the 90's nobody had any problems with this stuff, if this is the cost of realistic graphics then I'd rather go back to something more simple, where people weren't always ragging on games being evil or somehow overly violent as compared to the old first persons like wolfenstien 3D, doom or brothers in arms.

Really games aren't the problem, they are made to be fun in all sorts of ways as they should be, if any actual violence comes from this then it's due to a poorly lead youth, the type that see morality as being something that makes them feel good rather than what is right and what is wrong.

Edited December 3, 2011 by NodUnit

[Innomadic 10]

Run away from a tank? Pah,

/offtopic

[nodunit 397]

Well when you can disable a tanks firing and sighting mechanisms (minus the top guns) with a single chaff grenade then who needs to fear em, especially when you can take several shots from something like a 50 cal and instantly heal from it.

Also if I were medical personel attempting to heal a wound of an opposing force ingame, I'm pretty sure they'd rather try to shoot me and simply respawn.

Edited December 3, 2011 by NodUnit

[Tonci87 163]

I was always curious t what would happen it you throw a hand grenade into a Tanks main gun when a he grenade is loaded. Would the HE grenade ignite from the explosion of the hand grenade?

[Beagle 684]

I don't think something like this would hold any water when it comes to games really, it's something entirerly different, and since we're using mainstream titles (to a point)..example with bf2-3.

A tank rolls into a small town, a real combatant would either try to engage the tank from a high place or simply avoid altogether on account of DEATH. However ingame since they can simply respawn the opposing side would attempt to place C4 on the tank and blow it up. The tank has two options, engage with main gun (authorization required) or use the machine gun. Naturally the player is going to go for the splash kill and why not? If they use the machine gun there is a change the opponent could rush the tank and C4 it as the driver franticly gets stuck in the close quarters.

Rather curious to what brings this stuff on, it seems back in the 90's nobody had any problems with this stuff, if this is the cost of realistic graphics then I'd rather go back to something more simple, where people weren't always ragging on games being evil or somehow overly violent as compared to the old first persons like wolfenstien 3D, doom or brothers in arms.

Really games aren't the problem, they are made to be fun in all sorts of ways as they should be, if any actual violence comes from this then it's due to a poorly lead youth, the type that see morality as being something that makes them feel good rather than what is right and what is wrong.

Back in the 90's there was much less constant war in the world, at least wars we did notice nowadays we see a warmongering unseen since in the 17th century like as if someone fears there would not be contant war somewhere. You know, we were always at war with Eurasia, don't commit a thought crime and think anything else, don't even ask. Edited December 3, 2011 by Beagle

[Dwarden 1125]

and i always though that ARMA had next to Americas Army at least some rules set ingame against friendly fire (meaning campaign and specific mission wise)

ofcourse modded wise that's impossible to cover (except preventing any friendly damage being allowed)

sometimes regulation demands are absurd ...