Do the Bis Team hate Russia?

[mattxr 9]

Im tired of the American theme, American this American that American lets fuck American, Its just sick game developers always! use American to get more sales.. becuase Americans will go "OOaahhh American Soliders in that game must buy it" no offence..

Its Just Sick Man! Why No NATO force?? Anyone ever read the book Red Storm Rising, Now thats a game waiting to happen...

[NoRailgunner 0]

BIS Team doesn't hate Russia and they don't hate any other countries. Can you "hate" an country? How this is done?

This is just a game

[CrazyDentist 0]

Anyone ever read the book Red Storm Rising, Now thats a game waiting to happen...

Couldn't agree more! Great book (one of Clancy's best...God knows how many times I've read it...), and it could make a great game.

Another book that could make a great game, is "The Bear and the Dragon" (also written by Clancy).

For those of you who hasn't read it...Americans and Russians fighting side by side against a Chinese invasion of Russia (a lot more complex, but it's the essence).

[SaBrE_UK 0]

My favourite storylines always seem to have a Cold War element to them. OFP was plot perfection.

The Hunt For Red October is a great film, too.

[tylerdurden 0]

Its Just Sick Man! Why No NATO force?? Anyone ever read the book Red Storm Rising, Now thats a game waiting to happen...

It's allready done by Microprose. Why don't you try that: Red Storm Rising

It was one of the best games ever. But someone should remake that.

[Flat!!! 0]

Now sure SLA in ArmA are sort of Russia (If your not anal) and they resemble the "Bad guys".

However you should be proud in this case. Russia is one of the most powerful countries and one of the only countries that could match USA. The reason why in this case the US are not the "Bad Guys" in the main campaign i think is because during WW2 they were considered Axis and communist. Since they were communist they can also base the story more politically and therefore more realistically. Also USA are more open to the "western world" and therefore they seem more "friendly". I don't think it is badly meant. Maybe we will see china in ArmA2 cause they also have a matching power to USA

[baddo 0]

Well USA and USSR were in the same side in WW2... they had a common enemy. But it was after the war had ended when UK/USA really understood what kind of problem they had with the USSR and with "communism".

[Dwarden 1124]

so to keep everyone happy we need game with

Chine vs India vs Russia vs NATO+MNA vs rest

covers most of world

[max power 21]

The soviet union was hardly communist, In communism there is no government, no classes, no currency. Communism is a utopian idea, which is pretty impossible due to human nature.

The soviet union was socialist not communist, both are different.

socialism

''Socialism refers to a broad array of doctrines or political movements that envisage a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to control by the community[1] for the purposes of increasing social and economic equality and cooperation. This control may be either direct—exercised through popular collectives such as workers' councils—or indirect—exercised on behalf of the people by the state. As an economic system, socialism is often characterized by state or community ownership of the means of production.''

Communism.

''Communism is an ideology that seeks to establish a classless, stateless social organization based on common ownership of the means of production. It is usually considered a branch of the broader socialist movement that draws on the various political and intellectual movements that trace their origins back to the work of Karl Marx. ''

cheers,

opf12345

It's more complicated than that. Communism is a political philosophy, and Communists subscribe to that philosophy. What you are saying is that Christians aren't Christians if they aren't Christ.

Lenin knew that it's not possible for a class of people to be its own ruler. Not only is that too cumbersome, but leaders will always emerge. He envisioned a vanguard party of nomenclatura: professional revolutionaries. The method of government that he envisaged was what they call democratic centralism. Under this system, the party would vote on matters, and after the vote the minority must obey the majority. The problem here is that the nomenclatura would inevitably be more powerful and therefore have a greater access to resources than the average citizen. This hints at a ruling class, which is what communism sought to abolish in a reaction to the terrifying capitalism of the industrial revolution. This means that their Communism wasn't total, or it wasn't a complete success. This doesn't mean it wasn't Communist state. On the same token, you can either describe the United States as a democracy or not whether you're evaluating it against the epitome of democracy or its predominant political philosophy. It certainly is not a complete democratic success.

[mattxr 9]

so to keep everyone happy we need game with

Chine vs India vs Russia vs NATO+MNA vs rest

covers most of world

Sounds Good to me

[MAA3057 0]

Well said, Plaintiff1.

[Zacho 0]

so to keep everyone happy we need game with

Chine vs India vs Russia vs NATO+MNA vs rest

covers most of world

no it be Chine+India+Russia Vs NATO+rest

Strategic Triangle

it be a good game

[the unknown 0]

Why not make it USA vs the rest of the world then it would be a big hit. Problem would be to model everyting cause it would take years to do it.

[Money 0]

Russians because they are a worthy foe! Their military has good structure.

Iraqis are have non of the above.

This game can really do with British forces... I'm not just saying that because I'm British, honest!

[RN Malboeuf 12]

USA against Russia is great!

[The Susser 0]

The ultimate war sim needs the biggest armies as opponents. No point having a under powered army against a western superpower. China or Russia are logical choices especially for balance.

[anoik 0]

Quote[/b] ]ArmA 2 is set in the near future, year 2009, in a fictional post soviet country called Chernarus. Players will be sent as members of a United States Marine Corps Force Recon squad to this country to prevent further civilian casualties and ensure ongoing stability there.

Change USA Marine Corps Force with british or aussies It's a "humanitarian mission", not the World War III

[The Susser 0]

Quote[/b] ]ArmA 2 is set in the near future, year 2009, in a fictional post soviet country called Chernarus. Players will be sent as members of a United States Marine Corps Force Recon squad to this country to prevent further civilian casualties and ensure ongoing stability there.

Change USA Marine Corps Force with british or aussies It's a "humanitarian mission", not the World War III

I have wondered why BIS use the US Army when most of the playerbase are from Europe. No offence Americans I'm sure it's to do with the US military contracts for VBS.

[Deathstruck 375]

Oh c'mon what about alliance of Russians and Americans ?

Russian-American alliance vs. ahem....China ?

[txalin 2]

this is a joke, isn't it?

Well, this is only a game :P, merry christmas and happy new year for everybody!!

[Deathstruck 375]

Ahem

What's so funny on it? I would like to see cooperation of these two natioons... Looks like you have only game experiences man....no offense...

[USSRsniper 0]

Strange, i never found myself hating BIS because they had russians in OFP... So what? its just a game, and we don't only paly against soviet union in OFP, don't forget Dmitriy Lukin in Red hamemr campagin.

If you don't like BIS having "evil" USSR, fine make campagin and play against "evil" US   Or just screw all sides, and play resistance vs. everyone else (while US and russia fighting who will control your land)  

And there is no russians in ArmA, unless you think russians have spanish names

[baddo 0]

Well yeah... if you look only at what kind of equipment an army has... the Finnish Defence Forces have lots of Soviet equipment. BMP-1, BMP-2, T-55 T-72, BTR, ZIL, UAZ, GAZ, MtLb, AK, PKM, Dragunov, helicopters, well the list goes on and on... if you look at that huge pile of Soviet equipment we have, you could think it's a Soviet/Russian army when it certainly is not...

We have made lots of equipment on our own too. Mortars, artillery guns, rifles, APC's, Nasu, trucks, come to mind now.

And purchased lots of stuff from Western countries. Weapons, AT launchers, Leopard tanks, American jet fighters, European transport helicopters (well if only the manufacturer would deliver them! )...

The point is, the equipment just doesn't tell what nationality a game is portraying, if it isn't explicitly pointed by the game developers to a certain nation. In ArmA it isn't. Soviet equipment is so wide-spread that many nationalities have it in significant amounts. It's then up to your imagination to choose the side of a game as you wish.

Also, I have no morality problems playing any side in games like OFP/ArmA. I can play as a Russian soldier and shoot at the FDF. Because it's a game. In reality I would not do that of course, being my patriotic self, but in a game it is richness to be able to play other sides too.

[txalin 2]

Ahem

What's so funny on it? I would like to see cooperation of these two natioons... Looks like you have only game experiences man....no offense...

i was talking about the first post on thread..... it's ridiculous, it's only a game, and on games there are always two sides, the good and the bad guys.... say that bis hates russian sound ridiculous to me

[mr burns 131]

Twisted question.

Other people would be more than glad if their homecountrys army including vehicles were almost completely portrayed in a game but you guys go mad and think the developers hate russia.

Hint@BIS: Make Bundeswehr the OpFor in ArmA2 and everyone will be happy