Jump to content

-ZiiP- Jester

Member
  • Content Count

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Community Reputation

10 Good

About -ZiiP- Jester

  • Rank
    Rookie

core_pfieldgroups_3

  • Interests
    Gaming
  • Occupation
    Managing Director

Contact Methods

  • Biography
    Director of ZiiP Ltd - Incorporating the ZiiP Gaming Community & ZiiP Gamestore
  1. The thing is, I wasn't replying with a "solution" - I was merely adding to the debate on the basis that if a game decides to include non-combatants in it, then scenarios could be drawn up to reflect their role within a warzone and from that, the Red Cross could lay down accurate experiences. If non-combatants offer no part of the gameplay - then don't include them. Granted - not the initial topic of the video directly, but in the same realms for discussion. The effect on civilians in warzones isn't just whether they get shot or not. On another similar note - I remember playing an early PR build on BF2 (if my memory serves me straight) based on Iraq where you could play a civilian.. you could throw rocks at the UK forces but couldn't be shot at or the other team would receive a points penalty. Civilians could then be human shields for actual "rebel" soldiers.. Really really clever... I wonder if that was ever expanded upon?
  2. If you read what I wrote, you'd see that I wasn't focusing on the whether or not this was a pro-or-against ARMA thing. You'll notice from my low post count that I'm not ARMA fan-boy so couldn't give 2 hoots to be honest with you. My point was that the Red Cross could, if they feel so strongly about the issue, work with developers (note: any developers) to make a more realistic model of an active warzone with the problems that arise beyond that of just 2 sides shooting each other. Anyhow - Just stating an idea and opinion on a conversation. Wasn't expecting to get slammed for it.. Yet you talk about a community looking immature?
  3. Personally - I've not explored all aspects of ARMA, so forgive my possible ignorance - but the Red Cross seems to be missing the point. Wars are rarely as simple of side A verses side B who just stand around waiting for them to attack - There are usually aspects of attacks on civilians, ethnic cleansing, genocide, refugees and aid distribution etc... so rather than criticizing games on mass and putting ARMA in the same boat as MW3 - maybe they should use their experience in the real world to influence game developers. They could include missions and scenarios that have a more realistic approach to the guarding of aid transportation or defending a corridor of refugees. There could be the added challenge of dealing with the logistics of what that could entail. The Red Cross could use decent games like ARMA to educate and show a wider picture.
  4. Squad name:- [ZiiP] Gaming Community Timezone/location : GMT Gamemode preference (eg coop or pvp): Both Contact email: jester[at]ziip.co.uk Website address: ziip.co.uk Short description: UK Gaming Community based around a UK Videogame Store. We play for fun as a community in a variety of games and intend to create a competitive team soon. Language: ENG
×