Why no Axis FPS games

But still, it was guerilla warfare. The first major war the US has seen that wasn't tradtional, one army vs another army. It was us vs. random attacks from rebels and civillians.

I do think it would be neat to play a game like that, suprise attacks and all, but I think it would be harder to make, harder to base it on facts. How much do we know about what really happened, what their plans were, how they attacked us. How much do we really know about it, and is it enough to make a good SP game? Thats all I'm trying to point out.

gustav said:

But still, it was guerilla warfare. The first major war the US has seen that wasn't tradtional, one army vs another army. It was us vs. random attacks from rebels and civillians.

I do think it would be neat to play a game like that, suprise attacks and all, but I think it would be harder to make, harder to base it on facts. How much do we know about what really happened, what their plans were, how they attacked us. How much do we really know about it, and is it enough to make a good SP game? Thats all I'm trying to point out.

Click to expand...

If they can make movies about it, they can make good games about it. Not hard at all. What is holding good Nam games back is decent foliage. There is no good realistic foliage, that would make a name game amazing.

They could use the cry engine. Best foliage i've seen yet. Although I have to agree. A large part of the viet-cong's strength was in stealth. Remember that one scene from plattoon. They walk up to an abandoned bunker complex and don't realize it till they are five yards away.

9mmCensor said:

If they can make movies about it, they can make good games about it. Not hard at all. What is holding good Nam games back is decent foliage. There is no good realistic foliage, that would make a name game amazing.

Click to expand...

yeah, thats another good point. thats something you can use to support the making of a video game based on the life of a german soldier from the invasion of poland to the end of the war. If they can make movies about it, why not a video game. I mean, I'm not saying a game should be made in which you're part of a concentration camp. I'm not saying we should deny that part of history either, but we dont need something that gruesome and horrific. I just want to see what we see in common WWII games, but from the Axis side. I just want to play a game in which you play the soldier at the different battles throughout the war, and how they progress, even if that means losing. I think a game like that could be very fun, but until that happens, I'll be sad

Radical said:

Who wants to be on the side of Hitler? I'm not saying I disagree with you, but most consumers wouldn't want to "associate" themselves with Hitler by being on his side in a video game.

Click to expand...

Well for one, it's a game. Two, it is history regardless. Three, when I was younger I met quite a few germans who had fought in the German army and did not care much for Hitler at all...

Playing a game does not associate you with anything, if you think it does then you would most likely agree with all the people screaming about the GTA series.

I'd rather see a vietnam game were you play on the gooks side.

Click to expand...

That's the most intelligent post I've seen here in a while.

Xenocide said:

winners write the history, its plain and simple.

Click to expand...

Agreed. This is how it's been from the begining of time. If the Axis had won (heaven forbid) we would all be playing games as them. We would prolly all be in boot camp training to be the "perfect race" as well


I do disagree about the losing thing. I mean, yeah no body likes to lose, but that cant be the only reason why.

Do you know what was the great evil to all westerners before the Nazis gained power? The jewish people. And yes, this was everywhere, they were despised.
Everyone questioned the legimitacy of their business practises, it was very easy to blame the economic downfall of Germany on them and the Versailles treaty.

I would be interested in playing a realistic FPS with an axis side because of the highly technological warfare on their side compared to the hasty and light tactics of the Allies. They had a completely different way to wage war, so it would be something that most people would not know about WW2.

Xenocide said:

winners write the history, its plain and simple.

Click to expand...

Its not really that simple. American history books are written by americans. British history books are written by Britons, Japanese history books are written by Japanese, German history books are written by Germans, etc, etc. They tell history from their point of view. Now they don't go and say they won the war, but the books are usually biased towards their own country, to make their country look better, no matter country it is, its almost always that way. Just because we won the war, doesn't mean the history of the war is told from our point of view and ours ONLY. There are several sides of the story, and how it happened. I think more people should get to see what it was like from all points of view, instead of how it was from their country's point of view. Sure, its important to know how your country handled it, and who did what where, but its also important to know what happened from the other country's point of view. Thats the sad part about it. Many people learn history from only their country's side of the court, and don't see how things were like from other's sides. My main point is to break that tradition, maybe by starting with a video game, so that all can see what it was like for the other guy.

Xenocide said:

no

winners write the history, its plain and simple.

how patirotic would a game company look if they wrote an anti allied game?

Click to expand...

Its funny you said that...Try to google "French Military Victories"


You'll get, Do you mean- "French Military Defeats"


LOL

Vietcong isn't a bad Vietnam game.

Oh man, those who seem to think all Germans were evil jew haters during WWII need to read a few different history books. There was a lot of dissent among the ranks, but Hitler was pretty paranoid and you were gotten rid of if you were suspected. Their country was in the toliet, people were starving, any money they had was worth nothing...Hitler was definately evil, but he was also an efficient brutal dictator that did in fact pull Germany out of the toliet. And by the time people got wind of what was really going on, there was a pretty good system in place to get rid of dissenters. As was said, speaking out was a good way to end up dead...or maybe even get your family killed as well. You just shut up and kept your head down.

And steps were made to shield many of Germany's people from the realities of what was going on.

Lumping them all together is just narrow minded. They were fighting for their country...whether they agreed with it or not. I doubt they were sure of the outcome if they simply gave up and let the allies overtake them...perhaps they would be thrown into an even worse depression? We never hear about the valient and noble moments by them during the war. When the Germans were forced to retreat from Paris...Hitler ordered the general there to raze the city. The general defied Hitler's orders, seeing it as a vicious and pointless act.

And our country is guilty of its own share of atrocities, so its not like we even have the moral high ground here.

Of course, I have little positive to say about the Japanese during WWII...so perhaps I should shut up.

The whole idea of playing games to me is to be able to do stuff outside of reality without paying consequences. I'm not the type of person who plays sports games on the Pc or Console unless it offers something diffrent than actualy reality. Pigskin is a medievil Football game that to me is fun cause it allows you to fight, use objects for interfearance without penalties. Playing regular Football in reality is fun to me but, I just can't watch it on TV as well as other sports or even porn cause to me its just borring to watch. I would much rather perform the action or play the actual game in reality than watch it as long as its legal.

On the other hand I have no problem problem playing a game that allows you to commit any illegal act since after all its not reality and you aren't actually doing the crime but, playing a fantasy role where you can do as you please without any consequences. Look at the movie Groundhog day with Bull Murray. In that movie he figures out that he is living the same day over and over without ever having to worry about consequences. That will get extreamly repetative after awhile but, just the fact that you can do anything you so desire without real consequences is soo much more fun to me than playing a game that does things only by the law.

I see no morality diffrence in playing the role as a postal maniac killing innocent civilians in GTA: San Andreas that so happens to incorporate many diffrent ethnic groups such as Italian, German, Asian, Indian etc etc etc.... even Jewish compared to playing the role as a Nazi mainly killing Jews and all who stand in their way.

To me I have no problem with this cause I don't take videogames seriously. I play them mainly for my personal entertainment. You may want to ask me why I have any desire to kill people in a videogame at all regardless of their ethnic background. The answer is because it's Not real and it's what entertains me! Is it any wonder why the GTA series are soo successful? You have the option to go by the path of how the programers want you to play inorder to beat the game or you can do as you please as mentioned above. The game I'm sure would offer alot more to it in terms of how you can kil someone but, we are limited only by todays hardware and since the game is made on PS2 hardware then that basicly tells you just how far your able to go with it.

http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=276855&highlight=violence+videogames

Go there to read many replies from users on this forum about their thoughts on Violence in Videogames.

Bensa said:

My family went into exile from Finland when the soviets attacked and we lost a large bit of our territory, yet I feel no resentment towards them. I often enjoy playing the soviet side the most in wargames such as Call of Duty.

People need to stop crying over something that happened over 60 years ago and did not affect you personally. I see it as odd that it is very often the American public that takes great insult in honouring the soldiers of opposing armies, when they themselves were the ones who were hardly touched by the war.

Click to expand...

Hell yes. We need more Russian missions. They're the best.

The number of missions in games that prominently feature US troops is disproportionate to the amount of time they were actually in the war, and how large of a role they played. No doubt, the US single handedly defeated the Japanese, but it was the Russians who actually defeated the Germans. The US just moved things along a bit faster. If it weren't for the Russians drawing away so many German soldiers from the Eastern front, D-Day wouldn't have been remotely possible.

I'm not Russian, I'm part Dutch, part German, part English and part Irish, born and raised in the US, my grandfather was a paratrooper in the 101st WWII, so I don't mean to be overly critical of US involvement in WWII but people really do need to get their facts straight. The US did not turn the tide of the war. Not to discredit what our soldiers did in the war, but Germany would have lost the war regardless of our involvement. I think games that are supposed to be so historically accurate should really make an effort to be truly historically accurate, because they aren't.

yer i think that people need to look at the whole "its just a game" thing.
ive played bf1942 mostly on axis because they had better tanks, but it hasnt made me
american etc hateing.
that fact of the matter is that most soldiers were just that soldiers not nazis or "stubit raceist sterotype 32" anyway your not playing as a death camp planner your playing as a soldier
as for "whats the point germans lose" how fun would it be playing a game for months and changeing the direction of the whole war.
that type of game would be more fun to play because there are two outcomes, whereas in halflife 1 no matter how many times you died you would get to the end and win
btw i loved hl 1 i was just useing it as an example

Alacritan said:

Hell yes. We need more Russian missions. They're the best.

The number of missions in games that prominently feature US troops is disproportionate to the amount of time they were actually in the war, and how large of a role they played. No doubt, the US single handedly defeated the Japanese, but it was the Russians who actually defeated the Germans. The US just moved things along a bit faster. If it weren't for the Russians drawing away so many German soldiers from the Eastern front, D-Day wouldn't have been remotely possible.

I'm not Russian, I'm part Dutch, part German, part English and part Irish, born and raised in the US, my grandfather was a paratrooper in the 101st WWII, so I don't mean to be overly critical of US involvement in WWII but people really do need to get their facts straight. The US did not turn the tide of the war. Not to discredit what our soldiers did in the war, but Germany would have lost the war regardless of our involvement. I think games that are supposed to be so historically accurate should really make an effort to be truly historically accurate, because they aren't.

Click to expand...

Well, America did offer a lot of early help to Russia getting on their feet through lend/lease, etc. But yeah, the Russians pretty much were turning the tide on the war with Germany before we showed up. It was the Russians who were holding out against the well equipped Germans for years while we built up a war machine capable to retaking the mainland. Russia likely would have pushed the Germans back on their own, given enough time. They had the difficult task of building up an industrial infrastructure to combat the advanced german war machine, while they were under siege.

I find WWII history to be quite interesting. Its amazing how if you consider that if Hitler had made different decisions along the way that he very well might have been able to hold onto what he initially took. (Attacking Russia was a bad move, they would have been content to let Hitler go about his business...and its pretty much impossible grab and hold onto a land mass as vast as Russia while fighting on another front. Especially when you consider what Russia had that Germany lacked: A virtually endless supply of soldiers to throw at the enemy.

But it is annoying that from the American standpoint, its portrayed that we single handedly won the war. Even though the Russians contribution to the war was so great...we hardly ever hear about it. But that probably has much to do with the United States campaign against communism that followed the war...

I wouldnt say single handedly since UK's general Montgomery was in competition with Patton to see who would free the countries first.

OBLIVIONLORD said:

I wouldnt say single handedly since UK's general Montgomery was in competition with Patton to see who would free the countries first.

Click to expand...

Patton wasn't competing with Montgomery. Montgomery was way out of Pattons league. Ike had to put a leash on Patton, for political reasons, otherwise Patton would have smoked montgomery and likely taken Berlin.

9mmCensor said:

Patton would have smoked montgomery and likely taken Berlin.

Click to expand...

O yea, what other commander broke thru the enemies front lines, and kept on going wondering when they were going to get to the real battle .

Short answer time: It wouldn't sell very well.

The market is driven by demand. If you can prove there is a viable demand, then someone will try to satisfy it.

gustav said:

Why are there none (or very few) FPS games where you get to play as the axis in WWII? So what are you're opinions, why don't we have many, if any, FPS games where you get to be part of the axis powers, and if there are any, why aren't they popular?

Click to expand...

I'm sure there are a number of reasons why, but the biggest is probably the attempted extermination of the Jews by Hitler. That act alone has a pretty big stigma that most people don't want to be associated with it wether in a video game or real life. Just think of the fallout that a game company would recieve if they announced an axis only game.

I think they only get away with it now because you have to play as Allies in single player, or in multi it's Allies vs. Axis. And in multi the difference is just the character skins and weapon models, so it becomes an issue of my team against your team not I'm an Axis and your an Ally.

I play ET a lot, which is one of the few games that lets you be on either side, and the one thing I've noticed is that the player models on the Allies side are very US centric. I'm not sure about other games, but it seems to me that in these WWII games Allies=U.S.