Why use nationalities in a video game?

[BeerHunter 0]

I'm wondering why it's necessary to use actual nationalities at all in the game.(is US vs China , US vs Russia etc. etc.)

Lord only knows that the great military powers (US , Britain , France , China etc.) are more than willing to part with the hardware to almost anyone who can come up with the cash.

The developers could then use 2 bands of mercenaries (that could be from any nation) supplied and equipped by their employers , to set scenarios.

This would do away with any political/national feelings in game as well as give either side the opportunity to utilize whatever hardware the developers inserted into the game without having to "chose a side".

[vilas 477]

cause people like some realism :P

thats why OFP had such succes - US vs USSR, war that never happened

thats why games like Red Faction will never have such popularity like games which has some identification to real world

for me one of worst thing in Arma is this banana-country not realistic fantasy

i don't like games in which i cannot call real world issues

[7 0]

I'm wondering why it's necessary to use actual nationalities at all in the game.(is US vs China , US vs Russia etc. etc.)

Lord only knows that the great military powers (US , Britain , France , China etc.) are more than willing to part with the hardware to almost anyone who can come up with the cash.

The developers could then use 2 bands of mercenaries (that could be from any nation) supplied and equipped by their employers , to set scenarios.

This would do away with any political/national feelings in game as well as give either side the opportunity to utilize whatever hardware the developers inserted into the game without having to "chose a side".

perhaps youre taking the game too seriously.

[ilovebeer 0]

First thing, love your name beer. Second i enjoy the super powers going to war for the realism, however if superpowers do ever go to war it will most likley be nuclear, but i still enjoy it USSR vs US.

[NoRailgunner 0]

1. OFP, ArmA and ArmA2 are more "military games".  

2. Not much "political/national feelings" around because most players like to play with different Mods/Addons based on realworld military.

3. Dont play DungeonKeeper - Lord is watching you!

[celery 8]

Why use nationalities in a video game?

Why not?

[wamingo 1]

Why not?

... He said why not in the original post.

Because it can fuel nationalistic feelings. Imagine if instead of US and Russia BIS chose Israel and Iran instead. Or Bosnians and Serbs.

Oh yeah, I remember now, this is what we need, a flag burning mod!

But seriously. I'm sure BIS will do things tastefully so you'll need to be real touchy to be offended.

Besides, me thinks russians enjoy always being portrayed as the bad guys, right?

[max power 21]

I don't see it as an ethical issue at all. What is ethical about it?

[Pulverizer 1]

Simple: Fictional countries are usually totally lame and stupid.

There's just no way some writer could come up with two so uniquely crazy countries like Russia vs USA. Stranger than fiction, yet so realistic and everyone already knows their history.

[Guest Ti0n3r]

Wtf?

[PitViper 0]

The combatants in Arma 2 are fictional. They just happen to resemble the situation with Russia/Georgia/Ossetia.

[max power 21]

Are Tom Clancy novels unethical?

[CameronMcDonald 146]

...thats why games like Red Faction will never have such popularity like games which has some identification to real world...

Don't y'all be knocking Red Faction now, that was one hell of a game... pity the sequel was such a pig circus.

[Wolfrug 0]

Are Tom Clancy novels unethical?

Mostly just BAD.

On that topic : I'm looking more forward to the irregular Chernarus rebels and the Chernarus troops than I am to the US or RF ones. But, lucky as we are, we're going to get ALL KINDS, aren't we? So let's all just smile

Regards,

Wolfrug

[Second 0]

I have yet to see fictional armies which would work in game which happens in todays world. Maybe participants which wield great variety of equipment from various "sides", has imersive story and backgrounds so that player can easily adapt to them... Maybe.

Sadly US is logical choice of another participant (the winning one/the good guys) as it bring huge customer base from America. I don't know about Russian's, hardly ever Russians are shown as complete bad. Forexample in OFP Cuba was rebel, and Kreml wished to punish him. Yeah, that probably doesn't remove the fact that almost whole world (=Non-Russian forums) are shouting how naughty Russians are and how they got their nose bleeding in this game as well from good guys.

Tom Clancy's books indeed are mostly just bad. Older he get worse books he writes  

[paragraphic l 2]

Great explanation by Second, in both OFP and ArmA the 'bad guys' wasn't Russia... it where either Communists (which somehow is etical to be calling bad guys) or ex-/pro- Russians in ArmA II it will also be some Russian orientated fanboys not the 'real' Russian Army.

[Heatseeker 0]

Well, did anyone like the SLA or the RACS? I know i didnt... but the fictional FIA/resistance in OPF were alright.

I think <s>realistic</s> authentic units make the game more interesting and thats why nationalities matter, people like units, vehicles, etc recreated with a high level of authenticity (as you can tell by the addon/mod scene).

I dont believe its a matter of having the US vs Russia but a matter of having the US and Russia in the game.

With Arma 1 i think most of this comunity didnt like to see the SLA replace the Russian military, or to play as a member of the SLA/RACS military.

[sparks50 0]

I don't like fictional armies. Its a immersion thing.

[Wolfrug 0]

Sadly BIS missed out a bit on the SLA boys when making ArmA, since right now they don't look very exciting. Making them a -proper- communist banana-republic army (more rag-tag, non-white-caucasian-russian faces, more fleshed out story etc.) would have been great. Right now though they do function generally, but they are a bit boring to look at, admittedly.

The RACS are much more fun (reason we've got a nice Project RACS going strong in the Addons forums, I think!, and through the campaign they're given much more personality as well; the face-choices also make them stand out much more against the mostly white US troops. Their uniforms fit with the story AND their surroundings, and even if we could have once again had some more exciting troops (say, the Royal Commandos could have had more going for them than just that weird-looking backpack and G36's), I think they worked out just fine.

What I've seen of the non-Russian OPFOR in ArmA II, I think we're in for a real treat.

Regards,

Wolfrug

[mr.g-c 6]

Well, for Arma2 the Factions sounding as great as they were in OFP.

USA vs. Russia vs. Resistance A vs. Resistance B (vs. Animals).

I can think about of dozens of great campaigns with those available Factions, like certain community-members did for OFP1.

[POTS 0]

I love USA and Russia on the same field! There weapons and technology are so diverse that it brings good fights. I also love ak-10X generation ak's with kobra sights on them. MY GOD THEY ARE PRETTY!

[Undeceived 392]

I didn't like SLA and RACS... They had no signification for me.

I could not take the SLA as an "dangerous and strong" enemy because I never heard about it earlier.

This is different with Russia...

Like sparks50 said:

Quote[/b] ]"I don't like fictional armies. Its a immersion thing."

[Viiiper 0]

I didn't like SLA and RACS... They had no signification for me.

I could not take the SLA as an "dangerous and strong" enemy because I never heard about it earlier.

This is different with Russia...

Like sparks50 said:

Quote[/b] ]"I don't like fictional armies. Its a immersion thing."

Agreed, same here.

[Heatseeker 0]

I guess its like comparing Sahrani and Chernarus, Chernarus is looking far more interesting, because its based and inspired on real world landscape .

[mr.g-c 6]

I guess its like comparing Sahrani and Chernarus, Chernarus is looking far more interesting, because its based and inspired on real world landscape .

Right, but for the sake of correctness i believe to remember that also Sahrani was partially based on real world landscape - at least thats what my gray brain cells remember from ages ago, i could be wrong though....