(AUTHOR'S NOTE AND CHARITY LINKS) I've realised that my comments at 10:52 could be taken along the same lines as the "Why are there black people in my medieval history" crowd, which wasn't what I was aiming for. My main issue with this game is that it ignores the racialised history and causes of WW2 and the Holocaust, and I feel that the customized player avatars contribute to that erasure, by cynically using identity politics for mass appeal whilst also minimizing those same identity politics that caused such atrocities in the first place. I have no issue with "unrealistic representation" when it helps people feel seen in media, but I dislike when the significance of race across history is lost in that process. CHARITIES TO DONATE TO: Save the Children in Iraq: www.savethechildren.org/us/where-we-work/iraq Aid to Iraq Refugees: donate.unhcr.org/int/en/iraq-emergency Vietnam Friendship Village: www.vietnamfriendship.org/wordpress/get-involved/support Agent Orange Record: agentorangerecord.com/donate/
@diogonunes1608
2 ай бұрын
Thank you for this video.
@Fampini
7 күн бұрын
One thing you overlooked was that you described the German army as "The Nazis" at the start of your segment on cod ww2 which is an inaccurate way to frame it. It's not that one dimensional. The SS divisions would be, but it's not correct to imply basically anyone in the wehrmacht were party members. A significant portion were people conscripted, or regular army members without those political views. You can read diaries from stalingrad which highlights the relative normality of many caught up there (not that it means they were "good guys") - similarly to what you were saying in your world war 1 segment about the german side, they weren't all faceless nazis. None of the above refutes the good points you make though.
@corintibbetts-harlow8021
6 күн бұрын
@@Fampini The German army during WW2 might not have individually been card carrying NSDAP members to the man, but I don't think it's inaccurate to call them 'the Nazis' as they were in fact part of the fighting force of the entity known as 'Nazi Germany' (the German state between 1933 and 1945). It's a pretty standard naming convention in the context of WW2, both contemporaneously and up to the present day and I don't think it implies that literally ever soldier was a Nazi party member (which itself isn't even a particularly ironclad guarantee of someone's individual politics given the social advantages of party membership in Germany at the time). Not at all to say this is what you were implying, but I am generally wary of efforts to differentiate the SS and the Wehrmacht in terms of culpability for Nazi crimes because it's a common tactic of people espousing the 'clean Wehrmacht myth', the suggestion that all/the vast majority of German atrocities were committed by the SS alone and not the Wehrmacht, which is completely false.
@korylester9769
6 күн бұрын
@@Fampinifactually speaking, the German army was the Nazis. They represented the interests of and acted on behalf of the Nazi party. That some held reservations is true, not strong enough to defect but it’s absolutely true. It’s also absolutely true many rank and file soldiers did support their government and weren’t simply caught up or innocent bystanders. This desire to separate the Nazi government from the German army isn’t really done for any other group. The Japanese soldiers by and large aren’t considered separate from the whims of the Imperialist government. Describing Germany in WW2 as the Nazis isn’t inaccurate. Its your opinion that they should be separate, it’s not what really happened
@acceptablecasualty5319
6 күн бұрын
"Manufacturing Consent" is not a smart way to say "convince you of", it refers to when a Problem is created solely to promote it's solution.
@finboror
8 ай бұрын
Dice could've fixed your complaints of Battlefield 1's opening scene so easily: when the player dies as a frenchman, he respawns as a german and so on. Would've made the scene way more impactful
@staidenofanarchy
2 ай бұрын
There should have been a campaign where you played as a German
@DeathMonkeys
25 күн бұрын
@@staidenofanarchy Yes but the layman can’t differentiate between the Nazis and Imperial Germans. Though the “Last Tiger” campaign of V happened.
@phoenixvance6642
7 күн бұрын
Even sniper elite gives some humanifying blurbs of targets you scope out scattered among the evil/comedic/embarassing ones. Not saying the game isn't as propogandistic as the others.. but it's something, I guess
@QuassGamer
6 күн бұрын
There showed a crying German soldier and several shell-shocked German soldiers, in Steel Storms. If this is not an attempt to show that the Germans are not just NPC mobs, then I don't even know.
@PauLtus_B
6 күн бұрын
I immediately had the same thought. Instead the Germans are effectively orcs.
@rdrrr
2 жыл бұрын
Not only does Khaled al-Assad bear a strong physical resemblance to Saddam Hussein, he's named for the ruling family of Syria. He's an Arab-flavoured "Adolf Mussolini".
@ejdejesus8441
10 минут бұрын
It's eve worse because if you look at the map the US is invading Saudi Arabia.
@skywantsanacc
7 күн бұрын
I remember when I first played Call of Duty WW2 and how I felt about it's ending. Going through the concentration camp, taking photos, I was so confident that I knew exactly how it was going to end: the protagonists would find where they were dumping all the bodies, all of them disfigured from being burned, and with very few words the protagonists would realize that Zussman was somewhere in the pile. The protagonists would finally understand that Zussman was just one of millions that were murdered, and that they couldn't save any of them. I was dismayed when I watched the actual ending unfold, and my brain checked out for the entire end credits. What a waste of potential.
@planetmaker3472
7 күн бұрын
But you do gotta remember that some poor modelers, texterers, and devs would have to have spent time making that and implementing it into the environment, wich is why i give that a pass. Game dev mental health is already bad enough.
@Gravity_studioss
6 күн бұрын
You managed to write a better ending in a Singular KZitem comment than an entire AAA studio
@Casian291
6 күн бұрын
@@planetmaker3472 if you can't handle a ww2 game then don't make one.
@diamond_tango
2 күн бұрын
@Casian291 Or they can just not show that, and still make a ww2 game.
@Casian291
2 күн бұрын
@@diamond_tango ohh yeah make a ww2 game but remove crucial parts of ww2, makes sense
@vinicius99157
2 жыл бұрын
16:57 I think it should be pointed out that the original sentence was "We are all Jews here", while in the game its "We're americans. Period". So its not only using a real story in a bland action scene to make a hero out of this character, it also changes the identity that that character values and is willing to defend. It kind of paints the event as in germans attacking americans. For a lack of a better term, it "whitewashes" the event
@datamale
2 жыл бұрын
Absolutely correct, I think I outlined that in a response to another comment. This is further reinforced by the first line uttered by your friend when you stumble across them: "These were our guys". It's less of an attack on an ethnic group, but an attack on "our guys" instead. I wouldn't be surprised if the only reason this game set its ending in Berga is to further highlight the victimization of American troops over other groups.
@beauhenry105
Күн бұрын
The point is Americans want to project fascist hatred onto Nazis because of their insecurity about their own fascist state. Activision Blizzard was probably pushed by the NSA, CIA, or some other federal agency to rewrite the script. The original story is one of camaraderie unification, and protection of the oppressed. But that doesn’t fit with modern American politics. Those are ‘liberal’ values now. So it appeals better with the audience (American conservative Nazis) to claim nationalist ideals rather than communal ideals. And what do you know, it works. Fuck Nazis, fuck fascists
@codylego
7 күн бұрын
The nuke scene is actually one of the more politically correct scenes in all of CoD. Showing that if Saddam actually had nukes it would have been an even worse idea to invade.
@MinkStolle
2 күн бұрын
that is the weirdest use of "politically correct" that I have ever seen. Do you mean "politically accurate?"
@macizogalaico
Күн бұрын
unfortunately right wing bastards have fried our brains now, but there was a time where "politically correct" could mean many different things, and "politically accurate" was one of them @@MinkStolle
@codylego
Күн бұрын
@@MinkStolle no because by politically correct I mean inoffensive
@bannedmann4469
Күн бұрын
@@MinkStolleYeah, that was weird.
@rockmycd1319
Күн бұрын
No, it’s symbolism for the utter disaster that came out of the invasion of Iraq.
Funnily enough al assad's Arabic speech somehow had a few lines that are clearly anti imperialist (لنحرر اخوتنا من الإحتلال الأجنبي) "to liberate our brethren from foreign occupation/reliance" and (كما اتحدث انهم يتفسدون جيوشنا بما سنحارب لاستقلال شعبنا؟) " As i speak they approach our armies how will we fight for our people's independence ?" Which makes sense since his country is litterally being invaded.Don't get me started on the fact that al Asad and all Iraqis are speaking modern standard arabic(which is only mainly used for paperwork,news and professional documents and not speakers in day to day life not even politicians use it during war time for they still use each country's respective dialect (which are radically different). I always found that odd/funny as an arab myself
@duplicity6559
7 күн бұрын
I'm not really surprised they would miss a detail like that, with all the other shit they get wrong
@Alfonse-dm6ht
6 күн бұрын
I Think The Arabic Nation In Modern Warfare Is Not Iraq Persay Its The Collective of Nations From Saudi Arabia Iran And Afaghanistan And The Other Arabic Muslim Nations Why So The First Invasion Happend Atound Saudi Arabia Like Missions Like War Pig And Raid On That TV Station And The Mission Shock And Awe Happens At An Area Around Iran And In MW2 In The Team Player The Rebels Are Bieng Rooted Out In The Area Inside Modern Day Afghanistan I Think Its Not The Nation Of Iraq In Tge Game But A Collective Federation Of Nations Of Muslim And Arabs
@sarminder4357
6 күн бұрын
100% they hire a translator/consulting company from LA/California or whatever is closest to them and just hire some local actors who speak arabic to voice it and call it a day. They do that with more languages that are not as "common" in the English speaking market.
@AbdelilehManai-t9i
6 күн бұрын
ولد بلادي 🇹🇳
@dr.vikyll7466
13 сағат бұрын
They made the country "generic middle eastern" so I'm not duprised they used MSA.
@kestrel1917
3 күн бұрын
I lost it at the 360 no scope to save Zussman lmfao
@cf9368
3 күн бұрын
Playing Call of Duty: Modern Warfare as a teenager with pacifist sympathies, what especially struck me as ghoulish with that scene you describe is the way it portrays the US as uniquely good and their opponent as uniquely evil because the latter detonates a nuclear bomb in a civilian populated area... Something the US is the only country to have ever done in a military context. It adds another layer of quasi revisionism here.
@rockmycd1319
Күн бұрын
The nuke is a symbolic representation of the fallout from the Iraq War (no pun intended) and sets up the chauvinistic attitude of General Shepherd in the sequel. It’s not revisionist at all,
@adindrecaj
20 сағат бұрын
first and foremost, calling the plot of a fictional video game revisionism is insane, but whatever. i know youre a pacifist so ur working with limited resources, but put ur thinking cap on and try ur hardest to understand this. the nuking of Japan was far better choice that resulted in far less death than a mainland invasion, which would have killed millions easily. the Japanese werent willing to cooperate or surrender, even after Germany and Italy surrendered, even after all the crimes against humanity and war crimes the Japanese did in China and Southeast Asia. The population at that time very much were willing to fight and die for their god-emperor, not just the military, seeing as it took 2 nukes. they gave them time to surrender after the 1st nuke, and they didnt. also take into consideration that everyone was sick and tired of the war, it had been dragging on for years and everyone just wanted it to end already. furthermore, for years the U.S had pretty much uncontested power over the whole world since they were the only ones with nukes, but instead of going around and abusing that power, they actually helped Japan and Europe rebuild after the war. the only person engaging in revisionism is you.
@bbpoisonn
20 сағат бұрын
@@adindrecaj the Japanese we‘re literally about to surrender before the US dropped not one but TWO fucking Suns on civilian targets. Your comment is as ghoulish as it gets.
@rightinthedome9973
4 сағат бұрын
The bombs were we only dropped because we had them and wanted Russia to know and to see the rffect against a civilian population. Japan was going to surrender regardless to us so they didn't have to surrender to the Russians@@adindrecaj
@adindrecaj
3 сағат бұрын
@@rightinthedome9973 no ur literally just wrong, they werent going to surrender, they didnt even surrender after the first bomb. stop being ahistorical and do the fucking research.
@mrknubbsal
4 күн бұрын
3:10 I disagree that the germans are depicted as faceless badguys. There are several examples of humanization of german soldiers in the BF1 prologue e.g. being shell shocked or crying out of fear.
@rockmycd1319
Күн бұрын
Yeah it’s a really bad critique being done by cherry picking quotes. You can form the opposite narrative by doing the same thing.
@dingoatemychild1
20 сағат бұрын
Exactly what I was thinking there was details obviously they are the "bad guys" when they are your enemy but the first mission showed that they were human too like the crying soldier or the shell shocked soldier and then don't forget the entire point of the mission at the end where the German and herlem hellfighter hold fire on one another cuz what's the point it's like bro did you even finish the mission 🙄
@Posts_Comments
2 күн бұрын
Quick note. The use of game controllers in war to remotely pilot unmanned vehicles isn't because of it's association with video games, that's just an unintended bonus. They're used because they're compact, can be deployed in the field with extreme ease, can connect to any computer with USB and very simple drivers, cost practically nothing, and they have everything needed to control the movement and some other functions of any kind of unmanned vehicle. It's almost entirely a cost saving measure chosen over developing their own controls that'd likely be so much more expensive to make.
@Gh0styT04sty
5 ай бұрын
Personally, I view Spec Ops: The Line as a more accurate view of being a soldier in Iraq. Even if it takes place in Dubai, it doesn’t shy away from fucked up shit that the US actually did in Iraq. It shows the use of white phosphorus, needless death of civilians, oppression by an AMERICAN occupation of a country. All the things that MW and other games inspired by Iraq didn’t.
@hurricane7727
4 ай бұрын
That's why I like the Arab Soldier Mod that's in a Modded Cod 4 Campaign. It feel like we are playing as the Good Guys
@Mechanized85
7 күн бұрын
@@hurricane7727 COD 4 Arab mod, yeah, I play that too and probably more than anyone did, I feel nothing and no emotion which is the same as playing vanilla/base/original version, I just think No one is a good person except all wankers in this cursed world.
@mmfood3004
6 күн бұрын
@@Mechanized85 🤣
@tunners
6 күн бұрын
personally i think This War of Mine is the best example of an 'anti-war' video game
@Gamesoftsre
5 күн бұрын
The west never really civilised out of the dark ages.
@GTAVictor9128
8 ай бұрын
The stuff discussed in this video is how I felt playing CoD, particularly the Modern Warfare series, from the beginning. Even as a young teen, I could clearly sense that they were "USA good, every other opposing state bad" pro-US propaganda. Yet I played them anyway because those were the games all the cool kids at school played, albeit the campaign and multiplayer experience was enjoyable. So thank you for expressing what I've felt from the beginning.
@rockmycd1319
Күн бұрын
You think MW2 was doing that when the arguably villain is a caricature of American chauvinism?
@LordOfTheJizz
15 сағат бұрын
Then you realize that the main characters aren’t even american amd that the bad guy in MW2 IS american
@tyronedavis3534
2 сағат бұрын
Yeah that's not always the case, but in the MW reboot, they made a US war crime into a Russian one.
@departmentofpoetry1416
7 күн бұрын
The dissonance between ‘war is hell’ and ‘war is glorious’ has always been an integral part of military propaganda. Going through the spiritual hell of war is what makes the heroes glorious and ending war (with more war) essential.
@AccoSpoot
5 күн бұрын
All Quiet on the Western Front is a great treatment of this, as these optimistic propagandised boys are very quickly traumatised by war. And oh look, it's a WWI fiction set in Germany!
@alphaenterprise2232
4 күн бұрын
Thing is there's no way for a game to depict war accurately, because it would be boring and after playing it you would be devastated and diagnosed with severe PTSD.
@princetchalla2441
3 күн бұрын
Wrong. Spec ops the line, mgs3/mgsv, and COD WAW all do an excellent job showing the brutality of war and remind you that there are victims on all sides of a conflict. COD WAW probably does the best job of being a brutal and accurate war game in my opinion, but spec ops does the best at showing how a warzone affects the mental state of soldiers and how PTSD can ruin some people if they even make it out alive.
@VainSick
3 күн бұрын
@@princetchalla2441yeah but as a player I am still enjoying the diss associated killing of faceless and nameless pixels, Video games can have anti war themes and tones but, it’s not a real experience or depiction of war, that’s why I treat games as either a sport(multiplayer) or a action movie(character driven fictional narratives to entertain me). Trying to make Video-games into the premiere or any art for that matter, anti-war propaganda is a joke to me, I don’t need art to tell me war is bad or war is hell, And I don’t know why others do. It should be pretty self evident.
@bannedmann4469
Күн бұрын
Yeah, this guy doesn’t get it.
@beebo7071
2 жыл бұрын
I always knew call of duty was always a power trip fantasy with some serious implications caused by the need to make a fun game out of the atrocities of war, but Jesus I never realized how disrespectful and the amount of willful negligence and rewriting of history. Like when the pinned a famous American war crime on the Russians in modern warfare.
@datamale
2 жыл бұрын
I think the most shocking part of the Highway of Death parallel is how lazy it is above anything else. Like they couldn't even be bothered to make an alternate name for it, it's such a middle finger to people who know the actual history.
@connorbranscombe6819
7 күн бұрын
@@datamale The actual history of it being a legitimate military airstrike on a armed military convoy? It was lazy asf to use the same name, shoulda just based it off one of the numerous real Russian warcrimes.
@clinicallyarsonistic
6 күн бұрын
@connorbranscombe6819 Sure you could say it was a legitimate target but it was also needlessly cruel. Striking soldiers pulling out of the country you're defending is pretty iffy to say the least. It was clear that command wanted to strike Saddam for any reason they could grasp.
@connorbranscombe6819
6 күн бұрын
@@clinicallyarsonistic Why is bombing an armed, combative, actively retreating enemy force cruel? To be clear, they should have just let them retreat and set up new defensive position right? Do you have the same opinion during WW2? Was it rude of us to attack the Nazis as they retreated across France and back to Germany?
@ibenbreuner3862
6 күн бұрын
@@connorbranscombe6819 attacking a beaten and retreating enemy is fucked up. like if i won a sword fight and then stabbed my opponent in the back when they limped off to lick their wounds.
@zaclovesschool2273
4 күн бұрын
On the black ops 1 topic, I think the one sideness isnt as extreme as it seems. The entire game is full of "dont trust your own government" themes. Reznov is just used as an example. We are on the side of americans in the game obviously, but we are given a look into the russian perspective of the germans and US as well. It comes around full circle so that complaint is a little shallow. Especially considering how you're literally being interrogated by your own CIA in the game for the entire campaign. It's alright to not touch on every aspect of the history with a story. The story of Black Ops isnt about operation paperclip from the americans, its about vietnam, brainwashing, secretive russian cooperation with the germans (same as paperclip but theres no need to go into that when its well known and shown here, and implied by reznov). Sure it's a story full of historical nods, with some fictional elements, but primarily its a character focused story. It's about the guys in the situations and their perspectives.
@armeniangenocide5778
3 күн бұрын
"The entire game is full of "dont trust your own government" themes."" But you literally saved the world by trusting your government, it says don't trust THEIR government.
@trainenthusiast5199
3 күн бұрын
@@armeniangenocide5778 You can't really trust the government, no, but you only have those you trust. That was a recurring theme in Black Ops. "Who do you trust?"
@simonriley4131
2 күн бұрын
Just look at the final frame of the first Black Ops game and try to tell us again how it's a game that tells you to distrust the US government
@audreyharris7643
2 күн бұрын
@@simonriley4131 wasn't the last frame about jfk being assinated?
@USSAnimeNCC-
2 күн бұрын
CIA agents who are supposed to be you friends
@v.k.rt.m.6030
Жыл бұрын
0:10 tbf Verdun doesn't have that aspect Battlefield WW1 has, the "good vs. evil" aspect. You don't see them act like they're saving the world but fighting a war of Empires. It's all there in Verdun, Izonzo, and Tannenberg, you're just another Soldier in the conflict fighting a war of two powers. No "feel good" aspect of the conflict. No narrowing down good vs. evil plot Just pain, war, and destruction. A war where one destroys the other. They are proud of their country sure, but it's just that. Nationalism and patriotism for their soil. They're willing to sacrifice themselves for their country, to hell with saving people in the crossfire. To hell with it being a good vs evil story.
@its_uh_bella
8 күн бұрын
Because wars are inherently immoral. There will always be this disconnect in media that makes war out to be associated with positive morality. That's just not how the world works. Wars are not fought for moral reasons.
@codylego
7 күн бұрын
The important part is that only the allies get humanised. The British prepare for tea, the Americans talk to each other, the Italian wonders about his mum, etc. While the Central powers intros all talk solely about strategic objectives and warfare.
@rockmycd1319
Күн бұрын
@@codylegoThat’s not even true. Even in the example given in, say, the Meuse-Argonne Operation both the Americans and Germans are displayed as overconfident, with an element of apprehension from one of them. They both underestimate each other but for different reasons. It makes even less sense with the Italian campaign example considering both soldiers are expressing the exact same sentiment. They’re both very patriotic, with the Italian wishing to avenge the humiliation faced at Caporetto. You even have a British officer being racist towards Turks in an arrogant fashion with Al-Faw Fortress before expressing great respect for them in Suez. I’d say the operations monologues are a fantastic way of contextualizing the map being played
@codylego
Күн бұрын
@@rockmycd1319 the British soldier being racist is more character than the ottoman soldier saying oil will fought over for centuries to come. I agree that the intros don’t particularly favour the nations/empires which comprise the allies but they do humanise them far more than they do the central powers
@rockmycd1319
Күн бұрын
@@codylego What? How is being conscious about the future of the Middle East in terms of resources less character than stereotypically arrogant racist British officer? both sides are humanized and it’s done well, especially with Verdun.
@theMoporter
2 жыл бұрын
This is so complex and reaching, you can really write entire theses on individual games, let alone the entire industry. Portrayals of war in games before Modern Warfare, the relationships to other war media like movies, even just the specific impact of Spec Ops: The Line - a game so influential that white phosphorus instantly became synonymous with "war crimes in video games" - are all well worth looking into if this video grabbed your attention as a viewer. I've got a few video essays to start you off: Jacob Geller's analysis "Does Call Of Duty Believe in Anything?" and Innuendo Studios' "Blood Is Compulsory: How We Talk About Advanced Warfare" are other medium-length essays about particular games. For short, more game design-focused perspectives, Extra Credits' "Call of Juarez: The Cartel", "Spec Ops: The Line" parts 1 & 2, and "The Division" - though not their 6 Days in Fallujah video, which was made long before the game was actually developed and is generally bad. "Rationalizing Brutality: The Cultural Legacy of the Headshot", also by Geller, and "Anti-War War Games" by Super Bunnyhop are starting points for the wider context, also on the shorter side. This is a very...homogenous list, just the first that come to mind, I'll come back and add to it. If anyone else wants to drop recs I'll add them to the list.
@dieclick3659
Күн бұрын
I really like the extra credits video, i miss those types of videos they used to make, some really good exploration on topics that are still relevant today were discussed MANY years ago by them
@sturmtruppen-qt1wf
20 сағат бұрын
I HEAVILY disagree with your take on BF1. You cherrypicked a couple of instances of the Central Powers being patriotic and painted those as being all over the game. Whereas the same can be found in Allied power cutscenes. The British talk about fighting tooth and nail to the death in the Amiens cut scene. The British Oil of Empires announcer displays instances of racism against the opposing Ottoman Forces and how the coming battle will be a breeze. You are hypocritical in this respect by generalizing the central powers faction by discussing a few instances of them being "blood thirsty". You even brush over the instances of humanity in the very operations you discussed. Here's a list of humanized Central Power soldier instances below Conquer Hell operation, German cut scene. The speaker discusses how desensitized he and his comrades have become to war, and how they barely remember the outside world. If you lose the operation as the Germans, the announcer discusses how they must remember the fallen to prevent such a war from happening again. Kaiserschlact operation cutscenes. The announcer discusses how he feels pity for the British getting shelled, in the Amiens cut scene he discusses sending food home to his starving family. Brusilov offensive operation. The Austrians discuss how awful the Eastern Front is and how they fear for the Austro Hungarian army collapsing. Gallipoli operation cut scene. The Turk speaker discuss their childhood and how he detests this memory being tarnished by the British presence. Beyond the Marne Operation. The German speaker in the cut scenes is actual the same speaker as the person in the Devils Anvil operation cutscenes. In those, he was bloodthirsty and wanted to bleed France white. In the Marne operation, he is broken and terrified of dying at this point in the war. He discusses not caring if Germany wins the war, only that he sees his family again. Furthermore in the campaign the random conversations you can hear between Central Powers soldiers makes them feel almost like real people with thoughts and experiences, rather than being cardboard cutout people to kill. In MP, the intense battle reaction voicelines paint a picture of the Central Power soldiers as being real and vulnerable people who are terrified by war. Same as the Entente soldiers. They cry for their mothers, and go insane from the shell and gunfire. Could have DICE done a better job by having a dedicated Central Powers campaign? Of course, it would've gone a long ways. But to overgeneralize the entirety of the game by discussing a few cherrypicked instances is incredibly disingenuous and not professional when discussing BF1's approach and respect to WW1 history.
@ralsei66
Сағат бұрын
i agree 100%. Dice could have done a lot better with central powers (their own singleplayer, campaign, more languages spoken in the austro-hungarian army, perspective switching to german troops in the intro) but saying that germans are portrayed as an bloodthirsty horde while the entente is portrayed as heroic is just completely wrong, especially with the dlc operations being accounted for.
@cookies23z
8 күн бұрын
ty any austin for showing me this channel, name + topic combo of this video gives me good vibes for me enjoying it I will be back after I finish austins video
@RNG-esus
7 күн бұрын
Did you come back? It's worth it!
@therevolutionwillhavebanjos
6 күн бұрын
hes why im here too !
@zoepertom
8 күн бұрын
Here cause of Any Austin, great video
@jacobkoeppe4091
7 күн бұрын
Same!
@yourmaid4982
5 күн бұрын
now I know why it got recommended to me even though I didn't yet watch Any's CoD video
@taylorpennington8126
22 сағат бұрын
Sheep behavior
@zoepertom
16 сағат бұрын
@@taylorpennington8126 yes total sheep behaviour when you watch a video someone recommends
@ishmael6397
4 күн бұрын
I wish you had given more credit to SOME of the Call of Duty games because the way they were framed here is that there is no attempt to vilify the United States or allies. The grander point you made about the COD games being hypocritical is difficult to disagree with, because it is likely true that the publishers / developers are under some kind of contractual obligations that are responsible for repeated tropes in their stories (a.k.a keeping the Russians as "the bad guys" or keeping the U.S-based fighting forces always looking strong), but in some of the stories there are major plotlines that aren't afraid to call out the United States as a producer of evil people, or people who do vicious things, almost as if they are tip-toeing what they can do against what they can't. There are examples in installments both old and new as well: In MW2 (2009), one of the major antagonists is literally a power-hungry U.S general who gets around regulations with the usage of a U.S-based PMC, and betrays foreign allies to further his cause. In Black Ops 1, you play as a U.S government operative who is captured and tortured repeatedly by your own employer because of the suspicion that you were compromised and possibly have information on the enemy, with that same employer, the CIA, being depicted as complicit, ignorant, or sloppy in protecting the POTUS by allowing who you play as to play a role in his assassination. In Black Ops 2, your fellow U.S government operative compromises a highly important mission to capture a Nicaraguan drug-lord by blowing up an innocent sibling to him due to a past history with that operator and the kingpin. In MW2019, the British Special Forces partake in a brutal torture scene where they kidnap a target's family and leverage their lives for info and a U.S general is quick to label rebel forces that aid in the fight against the Russians as "terrorists." In Black Ops Cold War, the CIA is explained to have employed nukes all over Europe to detonate by Eisenhower as a "just-in-case" countermeasure to a USSR invasion, on top of manipulating the protagonist (you) into working for the CIA via brainwashing and torture tactics learned from the infamous Project MK Ultra. Yes, the COD games are morally flawed by what appears to be some contract or demand to keep the U.S military up to a certain standard, but it is disingenuous to not mention their attempts to do this under the aforementioned barrier. Treyarch games do it the most as well.
@solokom
4 күн бұрын
I am German and I never felt like "we" were painted as the baddies in BF1. But then again, Germany has been the bad guy in so many products of modern culture, that I just might have got deaf to it. 😅
@Argacyan
2 күн бұрын
I was going to reply that I got those vibes (Germany as villainized) from Bf1 continuing a tradition of very loudly lacking the ability to have a campaign playing as a German, Austro-Hungarian or even Ottoman soldier especially in a position where it already mentions stuff like the Bedouins who themselves are a casualty of historical revisionism in formerly Entente countries and the media they produce - because I never touched the multiplayer. Once the video got to mention things such as multiplayer mission monologues it kinda feels unambiguous that there was some intentional framing by those monologues getting written by one person & then approved to be implemented into the game by a second person.
@ano_nym
Күн бұрын
You are probably just masochistic enough to like it.
@rockmycd1319
Күн бұрын
That’s probably because it didn’t. The central powers should have gotten their own campaign but the operations cutscenes do an excellent job at humanizing both sides
@solokom
Күн бұрын
@@rockmycd1319 I actually agree.
@analien5251
5 ай бұрын
The funniest thing is that in bf5 the Germans who were the actual bad guys are humanized way more and even have an entire war story
@TheoRoose1776
2 күн бұрын
@analien5251 You're no different from the BF1 writer that sees the Germans as faceless hordes. Was every Wehrmacht soldier poetically waxing on about the glory of the Reich and the trimuph of fascism? Of course not. They were human too. WW2 wasn't a war between clearly bad people and clearly good people.
@USSAnimeNCC-
2 күн бұрын
True and i think at least one guy was an ss officer who are the worst or the worst
@rockmycd1319
Күн бұрын
@@TheoRoose1776It actually was a war between bad and good lol. Just because the average German was a victim of it doesn’t change that
@ManiacMayhem7256
2 сағат бұрын
Liberals will try to humanize the fascist Wehrmacht and Imperial Japanese Army but think the central powers were the SS 🙄
@theMoporter
2 жыл бұрын
Even when an American was unimpeachably heroic, it has to be "reimagined" to purposefully downplay that the mass genocide of Jews was about antisemitism. European Jews were only labelled "white" when an Axis power attacked them. Open antisemitism was not taboo until Hitler became an enemy. That's why the true story of non-Jews, raised in an antisemitic country, claiming themselves to be Jews to protect their comrades turned into a gentile soldier heroically refusing to acknowledge that Jewishness exists. He does not put his own privilege into question, he doesn't have to lie, and he will not face antisemitism. This shit is insidious.
@datamale
2 жыл бұрын
Something I should have clarified a bit better in the game is that Zussman actually IS Jewish, but I don't think that excuses this game's poor portrayal of Edmonds' heroism. Instead of a gentile man standing up for his friends simply because it's the right thing to do, Zussman instead has to separate himself from his Jewishness by reiterating his american identity in its place, as though to say that THAT'S what's more impactful to his identity in that moment. The Jewish character is instead left to fend for himself and prove his own identity and worthiness of survival, rather than anyone coming to his aid in that moment. It's the same reason the line "These were our guys", when you first discover the aftermath of the camp, bothers me so much. It's not the horrors of the holocaust that shock the characters, but the fact that these atrocities were committed on Americans.
@theMoporter
2 жыл бұрын
@@datamale Wow, that definitely makes the scene even more...oof... There's a lot to unpack there and I am not at all qualified to get into it, but man, this might take the cake for being exceedingly politically- and socially-loaded purely because it was unthinkingly attempting to be as "apolitical" as possible.
@ToxicBastard
4 күн бұрын
You can't say the G word, that's OUR word. Cracka.
@staidenofanarchy
2 ай бұрын
I would argue that the original Modern Warfare does more than you give it credit for in subverting the typical jingoistic pro-military video game (that it ironically mostly predated). If you take a look about it, the executed president "Al-Fulani" is implied to be the head of a oil-rich US puppet state, the marines invade with little intel and fail in their objective to capture him, and get thirty thousand soldiers plus an unknown amount of civilians killed by a nuclear bomb, they come off as imperialist bullies who shoot first and think later. The SAS (who you didnt touch on) also are portrayed as callous and indifferent to murdering innocent cargo ship crew members and leveling an entire village by way of requesting an AC130. It's not perfect as you pointed out, but it's quite different from the rest of the games, and even they have their moments (such as General Shepherd allowing tens of thousands of his countrymen to be murdered for the sake of 'inspiring patriotism')
@hurricane7727
2 ай бұрын
Also I think Thousands of Arabian Soldiers are Killed in the Nuke as well
@hurricane7727
2 ай бұрын
Battlefield 3 Usmc Feels Smarter and Stronger than Cod 4 Usmc. They Invaded and Took Down Iran with less than 1k Soldiers
@CryptidBuddy
6 күн бұрын
I hate how mw3 ended the story. “Alright we’re suddenly friends, let’s take down Makarov now, yeah now he’s bad” it was so abrupt but the game seems pretty unfinished.
@Alfonse-dm6ht
6 күн бұрын
@@CryptidBuddy The Creative Team Got Banished After The Success Of MW2
@vliedtke
6 күн бұрын
I do find that Call of Duty prefers to depict a fight against individual "bad actors" within the soviet union than a fight against the soviet union as a whole. Similarly, the series doesnt shy away from depicting bad actors in the US too. Theres the whole sheperd thing and the recent Cold War does have a negative depiction of MKultra. Similarly, Battlefield 5 does portray the german side in quite an honest way, so there are counter examples. I think the problem is, these games just have nothing to say overall. On one hand, you have the games need to be a spectacle to sell to the masses, the need for a dramatic story line, the writers and artists intention to "say something" while also not wanting to say anything "controversial" or "unpopular". Really, these games are just so confusing and meaningless that you can basically read anything into them.
@bannedmann4469
Күн бұрын
This mostly feels nit picky. Lots of games use the glory of war and the horror. They typically use one to lure you in to show the other. These things aren’t in as much conflict as you think.
@raemmio2761
Күн бұрын
You can’t glorify war then try to show the horror. That’s not how the brain works or how people react to things. It’s why it’s very hard to make an anti-war film and the reason why so many of them like “all quiet on the western front” get turned into something else. Glorifying war then try to show why it’s bad more turns into just justification of why the horrors. “Must” happen. It’s jingoistic. It’s why news that spreads misinformation than later “fixes it” doesn’t work. Because people already cling to first wave of news to much to have changed anything of the opinions on the subject. Or even if if does finally changes a persons mind the first wave of news has already left a mark on how people analyze the media. The U.S. media structure perfect resembles this.
@calvinpell1738
Күн бұрын
He’s using these games as case studies to talk about things that are very common in the FPS genre as a whole, of course this isn’t unique to COD. Pretty much all games about war made by large US companies that have are on the US government’s radar are gonna be pro-US, often to an extent that they are propagandizing.
@lucagerulat307
2 күн бұрын
The German narration is not a glorifing but rather disgusted by industrialiesed warfare like gas etc. Its easy to miss when you're not a German speaker but it's obvious he is horrified and not anything else. Also the kaiserschlacht narration include lines about food shortages in Germany during the end of the war.
@cerovec123
2 күн бұрын
i went back and listened to the voicelines from those cutscenes and i feel like they try to humanize both sides. I really dont get how he could missinterperet it like this.
@rockmycd1319
Күн бұрын
@@cerovec123I mean the lines are literally cherry picked. In the first example he picks the only American who’s a bit apprehensive about the war and ignores the other overconfident ones
@zofka9894
10 ай бұрын
Wow, this is such a good video! I love that when you talk about anything, you provide concrete, visual examples - it's super helpful and I can't imagine how much time it must have taken you to collect all of the footage... Also, love the additional refernces and sources, like the Blackadder Goes Forth, controversy surrounding CoD WW2 and how many stories were changed into an action-forward propaganda and many more. The editing and the script are top-tier, there is enough comedic relief from time to time to keep me watching, while it doesn't take away from the topic at hand and the seriousness of it. AND you posted an author's note clarifying the only point in the video that I was a bit unsure about, charity links and a doc with sources??? God, you are really good at what you do 👏Massive respect!
@lewiegan216
Күн бұрын
I really get the impression that he’s taking too much of the character as a one to one comparison of real world leaders. Rather that the characters are more of a inspired by real world leaders and events
@scrittle
4 сағат бұрын
When people play this game for themselves they are going in with the selling point that the game is based on true events. When small details are omitted in favour of glorifying America's involvement in a European war, it becomes propaganda. World at War did it best by making each multi-national protagonist the leading troop in each respective frontline, CoD:WW2 does not do this. When the player goes to Bergen to rescue their friend, Activision didn't do enough history to learn Bergen was liberated by the British forces; not the Americans. It's true Americans liberated more camps than the British, however Bergen in particular is where that one American PoW story originated, and Activision twisted history in its favour so it can serve an empowering American fantasy. Imagine if an American success story had their nationality swapped out for British/French/Indian/Chinese and the original story butchered for cheap action schlock.
@lewiegan216
4 сағат бұрын
@@scrittle I don’t disagree I was referring to his inference that Al Assad is in place of Saddam which automatically means that the story is championing the 03 invasion of Iraq. Aside from the obvious inspired design of the character there are no other examples that is suppose to show an alternate timeline with a nuke going off. I just don’t think his claim about MW is correct and felt like a writer confirming implicit bias, rather than drawing conclusions from the facts and events of the narrative itself.
@scrittle
3 сағат бұрын
@@lewiegan216 Honestly the character designs of Saddam Hussein and location is a little weird. But I do agree it's the least offensive event in the video.
@Argacyan
2 күн бұрын
I think it also bears mentioning on the topic of Operation Paperclip that none of the nazis who joined the west after WW2 had any ideological qualms about it - the nazis were against communists, who were among the first groups of people to be put into concentration camps during the holocaust, while their (the nazis) ideas about the world were pretty normal in places like the US at the time including hatred of jews. For many of them the Cold War period was merely a continuation of their already ongoing war "against communism".
@TCODESERTSTORM
5 ай бұрын
About Operation Paperclip and Osoaviakhim: The scientists in Paperclip was basically integrated in the society, treated mostly like war heroes because the need that US had in terms of competing with USSR. Hello, Wernher von Braun! In operation Osoaviakhim, most of them were constantly watched by the NKVD/KGB. Many of them were returned to previously occupied Germany after Stalin death. Some went to labor camps (Gulags) and many others were taken to special cities to work exclusively to the governmental projects, without much freedom to go anywhere. The ideological behind Nazi was shared by Henry Ford, who was carefully put in a portrait on Hitler's room. So ideological bias matters in that case. Most of the western world in WW2 era was expecting that the Nazi army would end the communist USSR, waging war against them. But when the Germans started to tread Europeans like the entire Western world treated the whole Africa, indigenous people and black people around the world... THEN it started to be an issue.
@cesaralonso3463
2 ай бұрын
It's been two months since your comment but do you know where I can find info on this topic?
@ugencz8364
4 күн бұрын
Well, every important scientist in the USSR was usually locked in a special research city/institue and/or was closely watched.
@rockmycd1319
Күн бұрын
So how does the Soviets being allies with Germany from 1939-1941 fit into the last paragraph?
@isaacpresley717
Күн бұрын
Like rockmycd, I’m a bit confused about your concluding paragraph. The Germans were treading the majority of Western Europe *before* even preparing for an invasion on the Soviet territories. And, of course, there was the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, which was a secret alliance that made any pre-westward expansion to the east a non-issue, meaning that the Goths were riding west and earning the ire of the rest of the Western European powers before even being considered something akin to the champions of the western world, as your comment seems to suggest. Likewise, the Lend-Lease act made it certain that the Nazi army was not considered an ideological ally to the west, as supplying your bitter enemy against your ideological champion is best compared to sawing off your leg to win a race. And do note the times in which things occurred. Nazi Germany invaded Poland, an ally of the western powers, in 1939, two whole years before the invasion of the Soviet Union took place. Likewise, the expansion of political power into Czechoslovakia, Austria, and the Rhineland, acts that flew directly in the face of the docility the western powers wished to incur into Germany after the Great War, already soured many opinions of the Nazis before the invasion of Poland. None of these things make Germany look much like a champion of western ideology, so much as instead making the Nazis seem like a rabid wildcard that is likely to bite either side. Besides, appeasement was an attempt, however futile it was, to keep the peace of post-war Europe. Few, if any, nations in Europe directly involved in the conflict had fully recovered, and many nations had a public still too weary of war since the 1910s, meaning that appeasement was the easiest choice when it came to methods in dealing with such a wildcard. War was the Ultima Ratio once again, and few politician worth their salt back then would jump at the chance to kickstart the end to their careers.
@pinytenis420
3 ай бұрын
highway of death in mw2019 being blamed on Russians quite literally an American war crime
@datamale
3 ай бұрын
Have you considered, though, the rhetorical power of: "Nuh uh"
@pinytenis420
3 ай бұрын
@@datamale ah shit
@nikoozden7091
4 күн бұрын
A nasty event for sure, but not really a war crime
@pinytenis420
4 күн бұрын
@@nikoozden7091 by every measure of war crime… it’s a war crime blatant civilian killing on a none military zone
@TakedaIesyu
4 күн бұрын
Correct, the Russians would never open fire on a civilian convoy! _looks away from the Ukraine humanitarian corridors_
@onion1780
3 күн бұрын
I think its significant that the line was changed from "We are all jews here" to "We're Americans". One is solidarity and a refusal to engage with dehumanization, as well as a good bluff. The other signifies assimilation and nationalism. 'We aren't jewish, we're american' seems like a weird and bad change.
@ethantercier6057
5 күн бұрын
I swear if they actually portrayed the CIA accurately then half the developers would suddenly go missing
@kvproductions2581
7 күн бұрын
The worst part is that the central powers aren't even fully to blame for the start of the war, it's about 50/50, and still hotly debated, so them being painted as the bad guys is even worse
@haydencantthink
6 күн бұрын
It really wasn't 50/50. The Central Powers (Germany & Austria-Hungary) knew that invading Serbia would lead to a Great Power conflict, yet they proceeded with their declaration of war anyway. You can make a very strong case that the Central Powers were fully to blame for the start of the war.
@patnewbie2177
6 күн бұрын
@@haydencantthink Especially Austria-Hungary. Even Franz Ferdinand knew war with Serbia would be disastrous, because he said this while giving a toast in February 1913: "To peace! What would we get out of war with Serbia? We’d lose the lives of young men and would spend money better used elsewhere. And what would we gain, for heaven’s sake? A few plum trees, some pastures full of goat droppings, and a bunch of rebellious killers.” After his death, he couldn't keep his uncle in check anymore. Hell, WWI almost started several times and was going to happen _somehow_ by summer 1914. Just look at the Moroccan Crises, or the Bosnian Annexation Crisis, or the British-German naval arms race.
@kvproductions2581
6 күн бұрын
@@haydencantthink I won't get into a very complicated debate I'm not qualified for, but there's plenty of historians that argue that both sides were pretty much equally to blame. You just commenting "well actually no it was the central powers" and naming one of the many many factors the war played out as it did doesn't make it so. It's been a while but I think this was the video who explained it well. kzitem.info/news/bejne/lG2HrJZjhYSVbIY
@rockmycd1319
Күн бұрын
@@kvproductions2581And there are plenty who shift the blame to solely Germany. The ultimatum given to Serbia after Franz Ferdinand’s assassination was made to be rejected
@kvproductions2581
Күн бұрын
@@rockmycd1319 Naming a single factor in a complicated situation doesn't solve a question that has been divisive for more than a hundred years. Watch the video I linked.
@MoojinBoi
3 сағат бұрын
never let bro cook again, didnt even play half the games hes talking about let alone able to understand the reality of them
@nitothefunkybunch6938
2 күн бұрын
I think the operations intro for the US operation is fine. It's drawing a contrast. The US soldiers are green, inexperienced, while the Germans are hardened after 4 years. I'd also argue that the oil of empires operation depicts the Ottomans as the good side, defending their land against arrogant and imperialist british.
@necutikazem115
5 күн бұрын
The "dice making central powers evil" claim is untrue since there are plenty of humanoid german moments like on rupture operations a guy narrating seems like he's almost gonna cry ranting about tanks being like monsters and scary
@ano_nym
Күн бұрын
"humanoid german" Was the word you looked for "humanizing"? Because this makes it sound the opposite.
@Jester23456
5 сағат бұрын
@@ano_nymbro accidentally dehumanized the Germans while trying to humanize them lol
@necutikazem115
3 сағат бұрын
@@ano_nym yea you're right oopsie lol but still even in war stories they made the germans be on the same side of the flip coin as the allies so I don't see a point in this claim about germans being portrayed as bad
@necutikazem115
3 сағат бұрын
And also on amiens in the loading cutscene german soldier talks how his nephews would've been happier with food and that he'll try to send some home
@UnleashedDaemon
8 күн бұрын
I loved Battlefield 1, but one thing I really disliked was how the game presented the war as a clear-cut battle between good and evil. Every soldier, whether from the Central Powers or the Allies, was a human being. I wish the developers had been bold enough to include campaigns from the perspectives of Russian, Ottoman, Austrian, and German soldiers. Both sides demonstrated incredible acts of heroism and humanity, and both sides also committed war crimes and engaged in propaganda. While there may be an Aggressor (evil) and a Defender (good), the war itself (the actual people fighting) is rarely black and white. I especially appreciate games that move away from the simplistic notion of good vs. evil soldiers because, in reality, things are always more nuanced. For a real-world example, just look at the current Russo-Ukrainian war. The media often tries to portray Russians as emotionless, brutal, orc-like figures-pure evil. But that’s far from the truth. So, thank you for highlighting this point in your video. It's a great piece of work and an important analysis you're doing.
@patnewbie2177
6 күн бұрын
There were also sporadic outbreaks of peace (in WW1) - soldiers would stop their shellings and bullets just to eat. I remember a story of German soldiers allowing a Frenchman to eat rations with them. And you're exactly right about the Russo-Ukraine war. While there's no shortage of war crimes committed by the Russian forces, there are folks in Russia who want this war as much as you or I do. Sadly there's nothing they can do about that, because, to steal a quote from a WW1 ambassador: The modern Russia is less an empire, or a kingdom, or a state, than the personal property of Vladimir Putin.
@sturmtruppen-qt1wf
20 сағат бұрын
That's total BS that BF1 painted WW1 as a good vs evil affair. The operation cut scenes, voice lines, announcers, etc all paint the Central Power soldiers as ordinary soldiers scared out of their wits and desensitized to war.
@HFordMCAZ
13 сағат бұрын
Go tell that to the Ukrainians who have lost their loved ones in Bucha, had their children abducted to be brainwashed, their family members tortured in mass camps, that the Russians are far from brutal orc-like figures and pure evil.
@SomeGamerDoesGaming
3 ай бұрын
I feel like if you're going to say the trailer was glamorizing war, at least use the trailer for the single player campaign aka the actual story they're trying to tell and not the multiplayer trailer. Obviously the multiplayer is supposed to try and seem fun and bombastic because they're trying to get people hyped for multiplayer.
@datamale
3 ай бұрын
The trailer I used was the initial reveal trailer, and does feature some moments from the campaign. I hardly think it's unfair to cite this trailer, considering this is the FIRST impression DICE decided to give us of the game.
@LadyRaeona
7 күн бұрын
COD changing from historic 'we are all Jews here', to 'we're Americans. Period,' seems... distasteful.
@ogkilla7859
7 күн бұрын
This video is CRIMINALLY under rated. Odd
@Ashraf-Hrira
7 күн бұрын
your videos is so underrated as an Arab I always noticed this blatant anti Arab propaganda in most call of duties set in modern times in the 2019 call of duty they literally named the bad guys Arabs القتلة Al Qatala literally translate to the killers and I was like BRUH they can't be for real
@chamagurka
3 күн бұрын
Call of duty Modern Warfare is fundamentally anti-war. And it might be the only COD game that is. It's about the folly of super powers meddling in foreign politics that ultimately leads to disaster. Any glorification it makes to war is clearly satire. Example, the AC-130 mission gives you compliments if you are very economic in killing your opponents. The foresight that COD4 had is impressive, especially for it's time. It's an intelligent piece of anti-war art, which captured the sentiment at the time. Anyone that claims COD4 is pro war and the MIC and has in my eyes misunderstood it.
@spacecat115
2 күн бұрын
Call of Duty: World at War is also quite anti-war when you analyze it.
@chamagurka
Күн бұрын
@@spacecat115 How so? I mean yes it shows how horrible it can be, but as it is set in a non-fictional setting, and one being as clear cut as WW2 I don't see how it really makes any comment, other than that war is terrible. With that said I still love the aesthetic and mood of WaW and compared to other WW2 cod titles like COD 2 it is very sober and refreshing, but I don't really see any political commentary in it.
@lawrencemorris2261
8 сағат бұрын
It's funny because when he mentioned CoD's projection of America's chemical attacks on Vietnam to the Soviet Union, i didnt make the connection between Vietnam and the Cold war. I just thought it was a one off unrelated war and was wondering why he was mentioning it a first. That's the level of propaganda that can penetrate ppl.
@Indoor_Carrot
4 күн бұрын
In COD WW2, did anybody else laugh at how ridiculous the scene where Zussman is captured? The Germans go to great lengths to capture him as you try and chase them, any other NPC would have just been shot and the firefight continues. But for some reason they need to take this guy alive as if he's a 4-star general or something.
@christianbottorff3644
Сағат бұрын
So glad to finally see a youtuber that knows the difference between soldiers and marines.
@lucasLSD
Күн бұрын
You can't have an anti war message while dealing with the US army, only games like metal gear and fallout can do it .
@gooddoggo3547
5 күн бұрын
6 Days in Fallujah campaign has you take control of real life individual marines and none of them were responsible for the use of White Phosphorus, and none of them that have spoke in the game's documentary sections have any accusations of killing civilians. If you want to see American troops commit war crimes in 6 days of Fallujah, then you're accusing those individual marines of purposely killing and targeting civilians or using chemical agents which none of them did in their deployments. What is a valid concern is that if the documentary footage they make will not mention certain occurrences purposely, or recontextualize them. The game hasn't been completed yet, and that is not a fair criticism yet. Especially given that they have already highlighted the true and opposing perspective that Americans didn't belong in Iraq. In which they let a marine freely express. 2nd of all the game is going to be a telling of the experiences of individual civilians and marines it features. Not a documentary about the politics of the invasion of Iraq. Context will be given when it is needed to contextualize the experiences of the individuals you play as and what they reference in interviews. So if what the individual references requires the mentioning there being no WMDs found then it will be mentioned (which it will given there is a marine who expressed his negative viewpoint on american invasion). If the civilians they interview have suffered from the use of white phosphorus it will be mentioned, or have a negative position on American invasion it will be mentioned. The game itself is a neutral perspective going in and in my opinion SHOULD be. What is the truth is that we didn't belong there, and plenty of marines have understood that and one as of now even was allowed to express that vocally ingame. If individual marines don't agree, they should be allowed to express that as well. As long as they don't show any bias against one particular viewpoint, and point out the discrepancies of them. We shouldn't have been in Iraq and because that is a fact, I highly doubt that statement won't have stronger arguments and fewer discrepancies. It is as important to mention both narratives and their arguements because both are integral to the conflict and how it has effected public opinion, the post invasion lives of civilians, and the marines shown. In my opinion what the thing I'm worried about, is that it won't allow the individuals interviewed freely express themselves, what they know or believe, as well as be encouraged to do so. The invasion narratives is what is still fought over to this day and is important to the history of the invasion and its lasting impact. Not exploring them and focusing on them both fairly and letting the facts speak for themselves is the wrong way to do it. Highlighting only one of them either it be pro invasion or no invasion is a failure to highlight a integral part of the entire situation now and then.
@ishmael6397
4 күн бұрын
I'm glad you weren't afraid to have some counter to certain points, because I did as well with the general depiction of ALL the COD games in a comment. I was going to comment something as well about "6 Days in Fallujah," but I seen you done a better job at it. I was going to say something simple, such as the mere fact of its existence does not imply a bias, as it is common knowledge that a lot of those who deployed disagreed with the policies behind their deployment, yet had to anyways, and THAT is what the game is hopefully trying to highlight.
@gooddoggo3547
4 күн бұрын
@@ishmael6397 I largely agree with his points about COD, but i do think the holocaust WW2 section is very hate fueled. It's more of a fault of poor writing, not maliciousness. You can tell the dev team genuinely wanted the player to be horrified and impacted by the in game depiction of a camp. Disappointing sure, but I don't see it as overwhelmingly offensive as he does. Can you really fault humans for wanting a good ending and then hate on those who write it. I don't really fault them, especially when it comes tragic historical events, as long as they don't change the result of those events or recontextualize them. I don't see a happy ending as it being done of maliciousness, more out of a involuntary desire to find some meaning to suffering when sometimes there is none. It is a valid criticism, he just assumed the worst intentions and exaggerates maliciousness.
@Broken-pt5sr
3 күн бұрын
"The invasion narratives is what is still fought over to this day" But it's not, we know now that whole justification was fabricated! There were no mobile laboratories... some proverbial flat earthers sill believe that they are still circling the desert, or escaped to Syria, but there was never any evidence. They are just plain wrong! The other part is, the interviewed locals are the ones who survived and agreed to speak to Americans. Dead men tell no tales. I also love the playing dumb. Imagine if someone made totally "non-political game" about ISIS fighter, that does nothing wrong, his squad just kills Western occupants and collaborationists, who fight for foreign power. Well, not all ISIS fighters did what they are famous for, this one was noble. Yeah, no. By divorcing the politics from a political controversy, you are making a political statement. But who knows, maybe we will be shown actual horrors. Maybe they at least show "the collateral damage"... but I seriously doubt it, I would bet money on it.
@moe3235
Күн бұрын
Iraqi raised in america ✋ I appreciate the topic& approach of this video
@GodofToast
3 ай бұрын
Brilliant work. Can’t believe this doesn’t have more views
@TROY2048
6 күн бұрын
Anti war game concept: you die before you can kill an enemy, respawn as a different soldier and die again
@Fami_Salami
5 күн бұрын
Hey, I played that! It's called Hell let loose :D
@polskabalaclava
Күн бұрын
aka least fun ww2 game
@JPCollector
2 күн бұрын
I never noticed the topic of discussion between the Allied and Central operation voice-overs in BF1. That's definitely a clear sign of making the Central powers out to be the moral enemies and a very subtle, manipulative one at that. I do think BF1 does an excellent job of humanizing every faction otherwise, and aside from the focus on only-Allied storylines in the campaign. Particularly, in the first campaign mission, when you're playing as the landship gunner, there's an extremely memorable gameplay moment where you happen upon a shell-shocked German soldier as you push the line. I remember this scene so clearly that it is basically the only thing I remember from any of the four campaigns at all, and it really inspires pity and empathy in the player as it's such a change-up from what you're told to do. The tank gun feels immersive, and it really sets the player in the mind that they must acquire and eliminate the German targets before they get the chance to shoot you or your army. You spend a minute doing this, then boom - you're confronted with the lumbering German holding his rifle like a walking stick and failing to take in anything happening around him. It's grim. I find the multiplayer death screams are also very extreme and a constant reminder of the human life being taken with every kill. They aren't stoic grunts - they're high-pitched, anguished wails and cries. I also personally find the first-person execution animations as a good reminder of the brutality and inhumanity of war, as they are incredibly brutal and in so many of them you are forced to look at the victim's face when you viciously club or stab them to death.
@amrabdelazeem9689
Күн бұрын
I just finished the video: How the hell did you make this video 2 years ago and yet your current sub count 3K? This video is great! Only thing I dislike about it is the fact I wanted to start a KZitem channel just to make a video on this topic with pretty much the same ideas and themes but that would be pretty much redundant now.
@spaghetti0356
2 күн бұрын
"Oh, he seems to be making some good points" Makes a good point 🙂
@ano_nym
Күн бұрын
His point about that was good. What are you on about?
@spaghetti0356
Күн бұрын
@@ano_nym oh sure
@Amanonhere
20 сағат бұрын
COD has weirdly gotten away from doing this in some of the recent titles. The last two I played, Cold War and MW2 were actually much more accurate and critical of the American policy. In Cold War for example, you play as a character that the CIA is torturing for information and the whole goal of the campaign is to prevent someone else from setting off the American bombs that were placed in European cities. The American supplied the bombs that detonate in the bad ending. In the “good ending” you literally get assassinated to tie up loose ends and cover up for the CIA. In MW2 the campaign revolves around the terror threat that’s happens because of CIA and private military contractors dealing weapons to overseas organizations. It also showcases the atrocities that could happen if the Mexican and American governments decided to label Mexican drug cartels as terrorist organizations and use the American military to fight them. Private military contractors operating without oversight is also a central issue in the campaign and the “bad villain reveal” is once again Shepherd, an American general. The most violent “bad guys” are American backed contractors committing war crimes in another country, not the Mexican cartel or the Iranian terrorists. Hell the American contractors literally overthrow the local Mexican federal authorities. The terror threat isn’t just that the Iranians gave the Mexican cartel weapons, the terror threat is that stupid America warmongering policy resulted in the weapons being available in the first place. Of course at the end of the day it’s a video game for an American audience so they never come outright and say that the Americans were the bad guys, but I genuinely think/hope that just as more and more Americans and westerners have become critical of violent interventionist foreign policy, the games have reflected some of that shifting public sentiment.
@shitposter2790
17 сағат бұрын
Youu may get this a lot due to this being your biggest video, but I am genuinely shocked at your subscriber count, this is fantastic.
@BicBoi1984
2 күн бұрын
Muh respect the wars!!! My nigga, it's a video game it's supposed to fun. It's not complicated.
@Flugeo
3 күн бұрын
I am amazed by how little views KZitem gave you despite the quality and probably high retention rate. Thank you for making this video. I was actually searching for something like this back in 2019 when I saw the depiction of Russians in MW2019 but found little to nothing. I really hope this vid skyrockets later on because many people (myself included up until 2019) are blind to how exactly americans push their revisionist agenda and narrative. Didn’t mention how in black ops 2 (2012) they had a woman president with short blond hair (Hillary Clinton) and a whole mission on an aircraft carrier “Obama”. The Hollywood and AAA videogames are american and nowadays more of the DEMOCRAT tools of blunt propaganda. And it’s astonishing how few people talk about it, so thank you
@chrisburns514
5 сағат бұрын
Oh wow, I totally forgot about the “7 Nation Army” fiasco lol. Can you imagine there was a point in time where that was DICE’s most controversial decision?
@henryfleischer404
5 күн бұрын
Yeah, the dissonance between making a fun FPS and having an anti-war message has changed my own plans for the FPS I'm working on- what was originally supposed to be an anti-war FPS now has to focus on more specific themes, assuming I don't cut the story altogether- I'm planning on having the player's goal be to prevent the usage of nuclear weapons in a war in the distant future.
@inabudescu2282
3 күн бұрын
Bf 1 was the first interaction i had with the world wars and it alone has sent me on the path that i am now, of understanding and critique of war, this piece of media that ive watched when i was little and impresionable has made me a goddamn historian in the making and now more then ever i apreciate its message, even if preachy or unhistorical.
@grave0x
Күн бұрын
The German perspective where they talk of revolution is honestly badass and feels like mega propaganda
@StrazaWinter
Күн бұрын
Ok but, more importantly... Is the game fun?
@SkyguyFilmsZooruvfilms
18 сағат бұрын
I think you forgot to mention that the gulags were shut down once Stalin died and Khrushchev took over in 56, well before 1963
@Amanonhere
20 сағат бұрын
COD has weirdly/thankfully gotten away from doing this in some of the recent titles. The last two I played, Cold War and MW2 were actually much more accurate and critical of the American policy. In Cold War for example, you play as a character that the CIA is torturing for information and the whole goal of the campaign is to prevent someone else from setting off the American bombs that were placed in European cities. In the “good ending” you literally get assassinated to tie up loose ends and cover up for the CIA. In MW2 the campaign revolves around the terror threat that’s happens because of CIA and private military contractors dealing weapons to overseas organizations. It also showcases the atrocities that could happen if the Mexican and American governments decided to label Mexican drug cartels as terrorist organizations and use the American military to fight them. Private military contractors operating without oversight is also a central issue in the campaign and the “bad villain reveal” is once again Shepherd, an American general. The most violent “bad guys” are American backed contractors committing war crimes in another country, not the Mexican cartel or the Iranian terrorists. Hell the American contractors literally overthrow the local Mexican federal authorities. The terror threat isn’t just that the Iranians gave the Mexican cartel weapons, the terror threat is that stupid America warmongering policy resulted in the weapons being available in the first place. Of course at the end of the day it’s a video game for an American audience so they never come outright and say that the Americans were the bad guys, but I genuinely think/hope that just as more and more Americans and westerners have become critical of violent interventionist foreign policy, the games have reflected some of that shifting public sentiment.
@Maclues
2 күн бұрын
Life can be hopeless and fun at the same time
@pepper5128
2 күн бұрын
Yes, the duality of man. A game can be honest about the horrors of war and be fun at the same time, they aren't mutually exclusive. It's all about highlighting that 'duality of man.'
@RiposteBK
8 күн бұрын
Damn... this video should not have been the way I learned about the Kunduz hospital airstrikes. Then again, maybe that's a perfect example of what you're saying in the video - I've played a lot of games with AC-130 sections, and always just thought of it as a fun time blasting bad guys. Then I read the wikipedia article on Kunduz. "Anonymous sources alleged that cockpit recordings showed the AC-130 crew questioned the strike's legality." I don't remember THAT dialogue in Call of Duty 4...
@hurricane7727
3 ай бұрын
Saddam Hussien is in Call of Duty Black Ops 6
@ELIZABETHMARLONE2005
3 ай бұрын
Lol I know it's crazy
@April-zr4bi
5 күн бұрын
when i saw they were making it take place during the kuwait war i sighed so damn hard oh my god
@itsumayo
3 күн бұрын
Only showing one side of the conflict in Battlefield 1 kinda ruined the whole anti-war message. It made one side look like heroes and the other look like a ceaseless unfeeling horde. In reality both sides were victims of war. Only covering one side also halves the potential it had. There could have been a sturmtruppen themed story during the Kaiserschacht to show how much strategy and conflict had shifted towards terror and brutality in only 4 years. Also it could serve as a contrast to Avanti Savoia where both were elite units, just on opposite sides of the conflict. An Austro-Hungarian story could have shown how its soldiers were so varied that language became an issue. It would give them both actual personality and cultural personality. A lot of stuff from this game was an actual learning experience for several people because not a lot of people care much about the first World War. So showing the other side would also teach them a whole lot that they never would have known. It would be able to show how every side had a reason for fighting instead of having the one side bad, one side good approach. The entire story honestly just felt like an argument where you only get to hear one side and its version of it while never getting the other side.
@ugencz8364
4 күн бұрын
I understand the criticism of the first two games, but Black Ops and Modern Warfare are basically interactive Holywood action movies. Black Ops isn't a real story about some CIA soldiers, it's a fabricated story influenced by some factual information. I understood your point, but I must say that the game doesn't care about Operation Paperclip or Agent Orange because it is not about that. It's a simple FPS with a story that has one single purpose - To entertain the player. I don't think anybody takes it as source of real information, but rather a dramatization of a what-if event. And once again, COD4 isn't about Iraq war or justifying the invasion. It's just inspired by the real life events, and once again, it uses that inspiration to dramatize it into a gaming story. Of course it is a nod to the real war, but that doesn't mean it can't be portrayed in its own style, especially when it needs to fit the lore. You need to analyze it with additional context from MW2 and 3.
@somedud1140
3 күн бұрын
It seems like you fail to understand that fictionalized stories have been used in propaganda since the dawn of time. Top Gun also wasn't about any specific war, but it was sponsored by US NAVY and was used drive recruitment numbers up. Every time you see non-CGI military hardware in Hollywood, it means it was sponsored with US military. In short, they provide equipment for free and in exchange you give them the right of the last cut. They can demand ANY changes. This is the military entertainment complex. The best kind of propaganda is the one that you don't notice.
@TheRadioSquare
3 күн бұрын
@@somedud1140 That's what lowbrow school of youtube media criticism would love you to believe. It's easier to tell a bunch of teenagers about invisible propaganda, rather than to highlight nuance, literacy, and critical thinking. Show them something like Generation Kill and they don't know what to think because it shows horrible and disgusting parts of war while also showing that nothing is as simple as "military bad."
@armeniangenocide5778
3 күн бұрын
@@TheRadioSquare "But whatabout muh generation kill" Whatabout it? It waters down the bad things "that happen" in the war with heavy military humor. Nathaniel Fick wrote about his inner struggles when the chain of command refused to evacuate the kids his platoon shot, to the point he was thinking about turning his rifle against his superiors. Can you remind us all, did this scene make the cut? Oh right, "military not bad", so lets water it down to the point it misses the original message. Nathaniel Fick also wrote about the time he thought he found one the fabled "mobile laboratories", spoiler, it turned out to be a mobile kitchen. That one also for some odd reason wasn't in the series. But why not, it did happen to the protagonist, it was the official reason why they were sent there. The book was published in 2005, when there was still hope that whole thing wasn't purely fabricated. Was the reality "too political" for the series? And after that you accuse someone else of media illiteracy and lack of critical thinking? There's huge difference between something YOU don't see and the "invisible" one.
@TheRadioSquare
3 күн бұрын
@@armeniangenocide5778 as expected, you have no media literacy. As soon as something is not black and white your brain needs to make things up. Pathetic.
@TheRadioSquare
3 күн бұрын
@@armeniangenocide5778 It's insane how you try to display "uhh no, I actually understand it really well" and your answer to that is "hey this soldier later on wrote about his subjective experience which wasn't reflected in the book made by another person and might by all accounts not be credible. But let's assume you actually weren't handicapped and it was all true, you'd still be distilling a series that shows the reality of the conflict as pro-military due to several scenes? Do even have a slight understanding of how intelectually dishonest that is? I don't think you do. People who interpret things this way are more into politics than history, you're an embarassment.
@empowers67
7 күн бұрын
Criminally underviewed video, amazingly well-written and thoughtful analysis. Instant sub!
@EineHauptmann
Күн бұрын
Company of Heroes 1 and its expansions, at least to me, do a fantastic job of portraying the horrors of war without being overly biased towards one side. The US campaign features cutscenes showing the Germans being more than mindless Nazi drones. They hate bad coffee, they experience shellshock and want bombardments to end, they end up as prisoners of war when the battle is over. The German Panzer Lehr and Chambois defense campaigns likewise show soldiers who have families, close brothers lost to the war, and compelling senses of duty in the face of insurmountable odds. Whereas other games clearly put the antagonism on the Axis, CoH humanizes both sides of the conflict without trying too hard or being pedantic. It gives you multiple campaigns where soldiers have a call they must answer, irrespective of the flags they call their own, which is why I respect it so highly as more than just an RTS game.
@Blind_Hawk
6 күн бұрын
BF1 was not following a trend, BF1 had "conflicting" messaging because on one hand you can have that without easy in a singleplayer environement telling a narrative and on the other hand you have a fun multiplayer. Meaning that the multiplayer part for almost all players is less immersive, they do not give a fuck about narrative and just see a fun shooter in a cool theme. This is not my point but I guess it explains that, if players would have give a fuck about this in multiplayer DICE would had have a sort of "backlash" or critique. But they didn't. Red Orchestra 2 managed to have a grim and melachonic tone in its MP battles in my opinion. So it is possible. I don't get the issue of Six Days in Fallujah, I mean the perspective of a Marine is way more interesting as having to make a political statement. In all honesty broken down to its core part, the perspective of the soldier is the most anti-war perspective you can have. You do not care about the politics behind it, it doesn't matter why you are there, you only want to return home alive. Making this whole operation meaningless. EDIT: I just realized that the video is older. So, yeah it is a co-op shooter, no narrative except. Try to escort vehicle and clear our the buildings.
@tropsmacneill
2 жыл бұрын
Really great piece. Well researched and fascinating. Great way to spend nearly an hour!
@collinmclaren6608
Күн бұрын
A counter argument I've had in my head for years is the morality of killing. A good example is star wars and stormtroopers. Original star wars; stormtroopers were nothing but disposable faceless canon fodder. An obstacle personified that our heroes had to conquer, i.e: kill. No one batted an eye because 'oh, they're just faceless grunts, who cares.' But now in modern times, we have to give a face to the bad guy. Stormtroopers are actually people! Just normal men and women on the opposing side. There's an actual person under that helmet. And then you think "Oh...they're real people, they had lives, and I've been killing them by the hundreds...oh." Unless you're a complete sociopath, any well adjusted person is going to have major PTSD grappling with these kinds of thoughts. You see it constantly with police and soldiers. They're the enemy, they might be morally representable people, but they're still human beings, and that will mess you up. ...But, y'know, video game need bad-guy to shoot. Movie hero need bad-guy to shoot. So murder away, protagonist!
@Chogss-zb1fe
3 ай бұрын
this should have more views.
@lobaandrade7172
5 күн бұрын
What’s funny is that Battlefield V, a WW2 game, humanizes germans more than the Germans in Battlefield 1
@aaronking2000
20 сағат бұрын
I agree with most of your video, except for the part about 6 Days in Fallujah. That game doesn't aim to tell the story of "both sides", it aims to tell the story of the Marines who fought there, regardless if it was right or wrong. Your average marine doesn't have the liberty to suddenly become a conscientious objector; they signed up to be there in the first place. So at the end of the day, they're in a city filled with people trying to kill them, so they gotta kill them first. I don't see that game as "propaganda" to further the American military industrial complex, unlike most call of duty games.
@DerEchteLinke
2 күн бұрын
Well, I agree to (most) your points... but if you know anything about prussian/german empire's history, you do realize... Oh god, they're really the baddies. Yes, even in WWI. Sure, the allies also did bad things, but to try and equalize those would simply be wrong.
@SamuraiMujuru
2 жыл бұрын
Fantastic vid. In a TTRPG podcast I listen to they've discussed there being a difference between "fun" and "enjoyable in gaming. A game can be very fun but when you're done you get nothing out of it, and another can be miserable to experience but that misery carries depth and importance. A good example in videogaming would be Hellblade. That game is an emotional and mental meat-grinder but it's so engaging that you stick with it and then get an amazing catharsis at the end. If Battlefield 1 had been solely a single player game they could have successfully nailed the "war is hell" angle (Enjoyable, but not necessarily fun) but as a multi-player game they have to focus on making it fun so people keep playing that it self-sabotages any poignancy it was going for. TL;DR, games can be excellent vehicles for poignant storytelling but it's almost impossible for a multi-player focused game to pull it off.
@jacobcelmer4928
2 күн бұрын
Okay dude, I get it your point and don’t get me wrong, I love games like spec ops the line, but it’s an entertainmen product, not a historical adaptation, most people don’t want to come home from work and play a game that makes them feel bad or like shit.
@calvinpell1738
Күн бұрын
Then those feel good games should deal with highly factionalized stories that don’t have anything to say about real world events. Otherwise, you end up reinforcing a lot of propagandistic (and usually bigoted) ideas in contemporary culture.
@scrittle
5 сағат бұрын
Activision claimed the game is historically accurate, your insight is irrelevant. If you don't want to learn history and want to play 'sweaty FPS lootcrate shooter', *go play Fortnite.*
@jamiearmstrong3487
2 сағат бұрын
On Al-Assad, he is a proponent of pan-Arabism who apparently, in connection with other militaries brought together multiple Arab-majority states, deposing, exiling or killing many regimes, influential figures and reasons. This is why he speaks in MS Arabic, which is a rather interesting detail. It should be noted, Gadhafi also has a deeper connection to Al-Assad, whilst Saddam provides the physical aspect. Some of this is from the original games, tie-in materials and details from the newer remakes.
@pancat1950
7 сағат бұрын
cod World at War did the best to show how horrifying war is
@M-Soares
2 жыл бұрын
Excellent video, really glad I subscribed to you after Thought Slime's shoutout. I haven't thought much about Modern Warfare's story much since I last played it over 10 years ago (oof, I'm getting old). I remembered the gist of it, random middle eastern country with bad dictator, we are the good guys and kill him, the russians start ww3 with a wmd. Now that you highlighted the parallels between it and the invasion of Iraq I'm kinda of appalled how I didn't see it before. Back then I assumed it was supposed to be similar to the invasion of Iraq (probably because I was pretty geopolitically illiterate back than and that was one of the few middle eastern countries I knew) but I didn't think much of it. The part that surprises me is that I never realized how fucked up it is that they made it so that "totally not Iraq" actually had WMDs in this reality, even though that was one of the parts of the game I remembered most clearly. I guess the fact they blame Russia and Makarov for it made me never think that deeply about it. The Military-entertainment complex is scary stuff.
@datamale
2 жыл бұрын
It's awful, right? When I put the pieces together during my research it blew me away how blatant it was, I thought I had to for sure be imagining things. But no, they really were that blatant about things (and still are apparently).
@Bebsiman
9 ай бұрын
DUDE FINALLY SOMEONE SAID IT when BF1 came out I was soo excited to try it, and when I booted it and started with the campaign I got goosebumps from how realistic and gloomy it felt, it was the first game I played that showcased the effect of wars on individuals. But all that hype died when I went to the campaign menu and saw that all the stories were about the allies. At that moment I knew that its just another good guys vs bad guys type of game. It's really sad since this game had the potential to explore the effect of war and humanize both sides instead of just one.
@Stupididiot67
8 ай бұрын
WW1 was a meaningless war that ended up achieving fuck all for anyone but some empires dissolving and killing a couple million people. Dont get why they basically portrayed it as WW2 but with silly hats. but like they never ever say or give any examples of why the germans or the austro-hungarians or the ottomans were bad, youd think they would atleast show them killing civilians or something but civilians just arent present in the game at all. its kinda just inferred well they were the ones the state killed 100 years ago so they must be bad right?
@albanesdesempregado7080
5 күн бұрын
To anyone wanting a genuine portration of a war's experience, including: confusion, fear, gritty mood and chaos, play Red Orchestra, especially the mod "Darkest Hour Europe 44' 45".
@Arnechk
3 күн бұрын
Blackadder having that last scene of going over the top was a result of all the previous seasons, getting really familiar with the characters and half of the fun was expecting the flow of conversation, the other half was actual written lines that were funny. You knew Blackadder will have an issue, Baldrick would present a stupid solution, then Blackadder would tell him that he's an idiot in a witty way. Just like your familiy or friends, you know their ways, you even say the same words sometimes. You never expect them to die, though. And it's permanent. This is something that no game really has, or else it would not be commercially viable. Imagine a 5 year long round of Among us, or something, where nobody really knows that there is supposed to be a bad guy, basically just a chatroom, until someday it all unravels. Now that would be a plot twist that isn't even a part of the plot. On average, gamers like the "This was cool, do it again!" repetition, like a toddler playing peek-a-boo and laughing histerycally everytime, so any real depth in a videogame is nigh impossible.
@justjoking5841
8 сағат бұрын
You must also consider the presenation caters to people who know next to nothing about WW1 or the era other than "Germany Bad". Dice must appeal to the primary consumer base: an appeal to a common / active player basis. People who only want to play FPS and not give a care about authenticity.
@FLY1NF1SH
16 сағат бұрын
Its actually fucking insane how they just put a goddamn keffiyeh on Al-Assad and 13 year old me was just like oh yeah thats the scarf that arabs wear right cool
@tonywords6713
Күн бұрын
World at War is still my favorite WW2 video game, it takes itself just seriously enough
@43sumfilmz1
5 күн бұрын
The commentary about the other games is one thing, but you are just intellectually dishonest based on your clear anti American bias for six days in Fallujah. For one, the story mode isn’t out yet but the loading screens are full of quotes by veterans they interviewed saying “we had no place in Iraq” “anyone who has been to the Middle East knows no American can solve their problems” and the rest are talking about how awful the war was for them, the game isn’t about pushing this anti western message you so desperately want it to push, it’s about how bad the reality for everyone caught in the middle of it was, both marines and civilians. In essence, this game was made from listening to the veterans and the people who were actually there, whose memories of Iraq were the terror of not knowing if a bomb or a shell would land on your house during a battle, if a civilian passing by had a gun in their clothes or a bomb strapped to their chest, if the car passing by you was a car bomb ready to blow up, if you would get shot in the face when you entered that next building, if you would be kidnapped/killed in the middle of the night while you were sleeping. It was not made from listening to political commentators such as yourself talking about how great or how evil the war in Iraq was. And I seriously hope you’re not equating the coalition forces in Fallujah to the terrorists (yes terrorists, it was Fallujah so it was specifically terrorists) who kidnapped people and filmed their beheadings.
@ballbearing6303
3 күн бұрын
But this is bothsideism fallacy. It didn't happen to the marines, the marines brought this horror upon the city! And now we know that whole justification was pure lie. We also know that the liars and warmongers got away with it, perhaps the most famous liar was Colin Powell, he died as a free and honored man. Another notable advocate of war was Schwarzenegger, somehow he isn't laughed off the stage when he plays pacifist now, once again bringing up sins of his father and ignoring his own.
@ja06ir10
3 күн бұрын
OMG, the US soldiers were scared that someone from the country they are occupying will attack them, those Iraqis just wont stop antagonizing our poor soldiers. 😢 He doesn't even want to be there, no he wasnt conscripted but he wanted a job an killing brown people pays well. That is how you sound to anyone that avoids american propaganda. If they wanted to focus on individual perspectives only the Iraqis is worth exploring. Also that quote is truly top comedy i just added a bit more. "Anyone that has gone to the middle east knows no american can solve their problems" -An american causing the problems in the middle east.
@hazmatt3250
12 сағат бұрын
If you want a game that gives a name to every soldier and age upon death, check out an indie WW2 game called Easy Red 2. No overarching narrative, you just pick your country and either attack or defend the objective. The entire game kinda plays like Operations from BF. Definitely recommend if you can get past the jank.
@dfabiano11
5 күн бұрын
Literally got an army ad on the video 😭
@justme14900
Күн бұрын
Not the video I expected to be offered by KZitem today, but I am so grateful that it was. Thanks for creating this video and for taking the time to present your argument this way- it made me think and consider some things I have felt but haven’t been able to articulate before
@lalitthapa101
9 ай бұрын
I just found a gem of a underrated channel 🤧✨
@ancogaming
3 күн бұрын
Dude, unless you are George W. Bush, you can simply say "focus" instead of "focalization", without surprising anyone.
@famtomerc
2 күн бұрын
5:10 Cherrypicking af. There's multiple German sides where its clearly humanizing them. I recall in the Amiens one, the German narrator talks about sending food he found back to his family and how hopeful he is that they'll be able to eat.
Пікірлер: 696