UPDATED::
As my opinion erupts at GameSpot, I'll share what I had to say:
USKB- "@ANON1 Congrats, now I see who will be the first on GameSpot to reveal his life, if you know what I mean. You seem like a great man, a big dumbass. I'd shoot you in the face, while teabagging you. Close Enough, huh? About the Massacre on MW2, I think that it's odd that Infinity Ward would do this, but as GameSpot writer Tor Thorson had said, "Infinity Ward is known for taking major risks to surprise its audience." That is correct. When you really think about having the option of skipping through, WHO WILL Click 'NO?' Seriously, we all like to see violence, but when your 10 year old Call of Duty playing brother is about to watch, and re-enact the scene of a Terror Attack in Mumbai, India, where Senator (Hillary) Clinton took time to help them (even though I hate the Clintons), I find this a small bit of offensive. But, then again, Look at the Rating. You'll learn something from the ESRB."
ANON1- "@ USKB I am not a homosexual so I would not teabag you. Shooting you in the face would be enough. If you were a hostage in a video game, of course."
ANON2- "@USKB based on quote: @atopp399 Congrats, now I see who will be the first on GameSpot to reveal his life, if you know what I mean. You seem like a great man, a big dumbass. I'd shoot you in the face, while teabagging you. Close Enough, huh? Soooooooooo you're saying the violence in the VIDEO GAME is wrong, but in real life you would shoot someone in the face? Are you retarded? Seriously... that makes no goddamn sense to me, someone please explain."
USKB- "@ANON2 First off, please learn what sarcasm is, and when you do, give me a call. Second off, I have no problem with violence in video games, I gladly play Left 4 Dead, Halo, Call of Duty, and more, but I'm just saying... Okay, Let's just say hypothetically, and I'm being serious here, if some terrorists made a video game about 9/11, or any other large terrorist attack. Damn, I'd be angry as an American, as I hope ALL of you would be, and I'd think that this was offensive, clearly. And think what you'd be doing in that game...flying through two towers? Seeing if you could hijack a major airliner, then fly it into a tower? This my friend, is a disturbing scene. As much as I didn't want to get 9/11 involved in this, is seems to be my only case that really proves my point. Besides, although I really don't like the idea of killing hostages that were based in a real attack, it's a video game, I know. I also know that there are two choices, but some people won't know what's going to happen in the next scene, and honestly, everyone is going to click the "Proceed" or "Go" button to continue and watch (and do) the violence, we ALL know it. Just saying, it's probably not a great idea by Infinity Ward, but whatever. The game is rated "M" for "Mature" for a reason, and people under the age of 18 probably shouldn't be playing, even though I do, but this is the advisory that is in this game."
ANON3- "@USKB when terrorists make a video game about 9/11 lemme know. Furthermore I would find it humorous, the thought of terrorists thinking they are sticking it to Americans or anyone else for that matter by making some pos video game would make me laugh. Its freedom of expression, they would be expressing their stupidity for the world to see."
USKB- "@ANON3 Let ME Know when you can stop being a dumbass. If you were able to comprehend that, you poor damned human being who acts like a frickin' 10 year old, it meant that IF "the" terrorists made a video game of 9/11 then it would cause an uproar. I'm Pretty Damn Sure Indians (India, not Native American's, morons) Would Like to Say The Same Thing Saying "Lemme Know When the American's Make a Video Game Based on Our Attacks," but they can't. If you read my whole post, you'd understand. I'll give you the highlights that you left out: "Besides, although I really don't like the idea of killing hostages that were based in a real attack, it's a video game, I know. I also know that there are two choices, but some people won't know what's going to happen in the next scene, and honestly, everyone is going to click the "Proceed" or "Go" button to continue and watch (and do) the violence, we ALL know it. Just saying, it's probably not a great idea by Infinity Ward, but whatever. The game is rated "M" for "Mature" for a reason, and people under the age of 18 probably shouldn't be playing, even though I do, but this is the advisory that is in this game." Notice, I say that I honestly don't care for the violence, but I'm not downing Infinity Ward, and thinking of suing them, or something retarded like that. No, I'm just saying, I honestly just don't find the idea of killing hostages that is BASED ON A REAL ATTACK to be a great scene. I don't care if they show film of it or whatever, but If they want (I know I have F***ing choice) me to do it myself, I just find that a little odd, and pretty offensive to Indians, especially the family members and friends who were killed in the attack. Who knows, Infinity Ward's (and Activision's) look is based on what is really what everyone else, including myself thinks. That they want to show evil of terrorists, and what happened. But, just no point in doing it yourself. I honestly don't care anymore, my comment is that it's a little offensive, but I'm still going to play the scene and all that, I'm not a frickin' hippie who wants the best peace among us. Just saying."
ANON3- "@USKB So I'm the dumbass when your the one who resorts to callilng people names and trying to degrade them? Your the one acting childish, not me. And your certain that the terrorist attack depicted is based off a real attack? You know this how? You could make that case with just about any terrorist attack in a movie, book, or video game. Its a storyline in a video game that has nothing to do with a real life attack, its there as part of the story. I also think its funny that the article here says "Now, footage has leaked that appears to show the game will indeed depict THE massacre" as though its the actual incident, and then say that its reminiscent of the killings in Mumbai. And as to your ridiculous scenario of terrorists making a video game about 9/11, I was saying IF it were to happen it would be silly to angry over it. There is nothing we could do about it, and secondly it would be of such a terrible quality and be a complete joke that no one should care. It would go to show just how ridiculous and stupid they are."
USKB- "@ANON3 Um, first off, yeah, I'm pretty sure I know it's based off of a REAL Attack. Activision, GameSpot and more have confirmed it. Honestly, did you even read this article (the newest one, not just the part you quoted), or just the comments? Or did you read at all? This is based off of a REAL Terrorist Attack, in Mumbai, India, which happened last year, 200+ People Died. Hillary Clinton was there during the attacks, one of the attacks had blown up about a story of the tower she was located in. Sure, this IS part of the Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 story, but please...This is all about the attacks, where are getting the idea that it wasn't? And yes, it would be "silly to get angry over it." Notice My sarcasm. Trust me, if a family member or a good friend, or you know what...how 'bout a great American, would be angry over my scenario, which damn well proved my point. We would make a deal over it, not a huge one, but It would piss off some Americans. Yeah, it would show how stupid they are, no doubting that, but like I said...It would piss me off and other Americans. Also, you can't shoot someone in the head in a book (at least not YOU doing it) or in a movie. That's not my point, it's that you are able to do it yourself that really drives me. I really don't want to go to far in depth in this, I just think what I think, and people should either respect my opinion, or like my opinion. And again, I still love this game."
UPDATE : 10/29/09 : 5:58PM EST
ANON3: "@USKB So you say your pretty sure you know its based off of a real attack yet you say its been confirmed that it has. If it was confirmed you wouldn't be pretty sure you would be absolutely sure, and where are these confirmations? And my point is that it is based off of terrorist attacks but you can't sit here and tell me its based off of a single specific attack. Like I said, its part of a storyline for a game, not about the Mumbai attacks. And of course you can't shoot someone in the head in a book or a movie, nor can you in a video game. YOU are not in control of a person nor are you in control of a gun. Your not shooting anybody, so your point as you put it is nonsense."
There is no further comment from USKB (me), due to GameSpot Contacting me about violation. Which I did twice. Sadly, the debate will NOT continue. Anyway, read below.
----
That's almost all, some comments were deleted by GameSpot. But, almost 98% of it is there. The Conversation continues, but ANON3 has gone to cry to his mom. Leave Comments on who YOU think won, and who had better arguments.
Link to Article: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6238205.html
-USKB, The Little Gecko in Your Pocket.
Game Details:
Halo: Reach
Halo: Reach Could Be A Brand New Halo Experience.
"Hey, I'm on your team, but I'm gonna watch you die. Oh, and don't worry, after you shoot the guy a few times, and you fall, I'll take the easy kill."So, we've checked out a few stuff on Halo: Reach, the "last" installment of the Halo series by Bungie, which is due out around Fall 2010, and buyers of Halo 3: ODST we're given Multiplayer Beta codes, which will become valid for use around Early 2010. But, one thing we looked at gives us some pretty helpful information.
According to Sarcastic Gamer, they've made some pretty great points on the one Advertsial graphic, the silhettes of characters, and the background of Reach. They have seen it, zoomed in, all that good shit, and showed what is really on it.
First off, the picture (click to zoom). We've got some characters. Starting from the Left, it looks like Arbiter, with a huge-ass machine gun. Then, to the right of him, we've got the supposed chick with a pistol, then we got Master Chief (supposed) with probably a Battle Rifle or Assault Rifle. I think it's an Assault Rifle, but with a little different look, which wouldn't surprise us. Then after Chief, we've got a guy with a sweet knife, which we think will be a version of beat down as well, but we'll get into that in a little bit. Then, last, obviously a sniper. Most of them, unless otherwise stated, are Spartans, suspected to be from the Halo novel, "The Fall of Reach."
But, why do they all have different weapons?
Our thought on that? Is that Halo will maybe have Weapon Class, as such as Call of Duty and Battlefield. Think about it, do you really think that Bungie will have us pick up a huge-ass machine gun? Doubt it. And, Beating Down people has been classic, but what if we had classes, and could add on the knife instead of beating down? One thing to note is that, if they DO the classes, I wouldn't be suprised if there were no Custom Made classes, even though we'd like them. But, hey, I still think they would have Custom Classes, because, like I said, there would be a huge-ass missing part of the game.
Other points made were that "Why is Halo: Reach having a Multiplayer Beta?" Well, we still think because it's the release of a new Halo game, that they'd do it anyway. Sure there was no Beta or Demo for Halo 3: ODST, but...that's maybe because Bungie had one year to make it, and they had no time for it. And besides, it would be giving away the campaign, since there is no multiplayer, really, besides Firefight, which would give away some of themes of the Campaign. Sarcastic Gamer also stated that "Reach will obviously have a new engine and a whole new style of multiplayer (Due to the Beta)." But, really, even Halo 3 had a Beta, and it turned out very similar to Halo 2.
So, final points?
We think that Bungie is seriously considering of Classes, but, what makes Halo fun, is trying to get the weapons, not just mow people down with your huge-ass machine gun, every god damn minute. Bungie has all these ideas in consideration, and I'm not doubting that statement. But, if classes come into the bubble, then Halo would be your "Red vs. Blue" feel. It would be individual, which is what Call of Duty has adapted, and many dislike. I'd rather play as a team, not just myself, and kill a teamate for the 'Oddball' or 'Flag.' Sure, it happens all the time, but not like CoD. Many of Halo's fans want to be a team, and many games do not keep the team feel anymore. It's just like, "Hey, I'm on your team, but I'm gonna watch you die. Oh, and don't worry, after you shoot the guy a few times, and you fall, I'll take the easy kill."
------------------------------
Still in the process of a mid-life crisis,
-USKB, The Little Gecko in Your Pocket.
Halo: Reach
Developer: Publisher: Release Date: Genre: ESRB: XBL: DLC: | Bungie Microsoft Game Studios (Fall) Late 2010 Sci-Fi First-Person Shooter Rating Pending Multiplayer Play, Co-op Expected N/A |  |
|---|
Halo: Reach Could Be A Brand New Halo Experience.
"Hey, I'm on your team, but I'm gonna watch you die. Oh, and don't worry, after you shoot the guy a few times, and you fall, I'll take the easy kill."So, we've checked out a few stuff on Halo: Reach, the "last" installment of the Halo series by Bungie, which is due out around Fall 2010, and buyers of Halo 3: ODST we're given Multiplayer Beta codes, which will become valid for use around Early 2010. But, one thing we looked at gives us some pretty helpful information.
According to Sarcastic Gamer, they've made some pretty great points on the one Advertsial graphic, the silhettes of characters, and the background of Reach. They have seen it, zoomed in, all that good shit, and showed what is really on it.
But, why do they all have different weapons?
Our thought on that? Is that Halo will maybe have Weapon Class, as such as Call of Duty and Battlefield. Think about it, do you really think that Bungie will have us pick up a huge-ass machine gun? Doubt it. And, Beating Down people has been classic, but what if we had classes, and could add on the knife instead of beating down? One thing to note is that, if they DO the classes, I wouldn't be suprised if there were no Custom Made classes, even though we'd like them. But, hey, I still think they would have Custom Classes, because, like I said, there would be a huge-ass missing part of the game.
Other points made were that "Why is Halo: Reach having a Multiplayer Beta?" Well, we still think because it's the release of a new Halo game, that they'd do it anyway. Sure there was no Beta or Demo for Halo 3: ODST, but...that's maybe because Bungie had one year to make it, and they had no time for it. And besides, it would be giving away the campaign, since there is no multiplayer, really, besides Firefight, which would give away some of themes of the Campaign. Sarcastic Gamer also stated that "Reach will obviously have a new engine and a whole new style of multiplayer (Due to the Beta)." But, really, even Halo 3 had a Beta, and it turned out very similar to Halo 2.
So, final points?
We think that Bungie is seriously considering of Classes, but, what makes Halo fun, is trying to get the weapons, not just mow people down with your huge-ass machine gun, every god damn minute. Bungie has all these ideas in consideration, and I'm not doubting that statement. But, if classes come into the bubble, then Halo would be your "Red vs. Blue" feel. It would be individual, which is what Call of Duty has adapted, and many dislike. I'd rather play as a team, not just myself, and kill a teamate for the 'Oddball' or 'Flag.' Sure, it happens all the time, but not like CoD. Many of Halo's fans want to be a team, and many games do not keep the team feel anymore. It's just like, "Hey, I'm on your team, but I'm gonna watch you die. Oh, and don't worry, after you shoot the guy a few times, and you fall, I'll take the easy kill."
Still in the process of a mid-life crisis,
-USKB, The Little Gecko in Your Pocket.
