lamegame621's forum posts

#1 Posted by lamegame621 (975 posts) -

Well, I decided to buy it. I will soon know what the numbers mean!
 
 
I still hate war.

#2 Posted by lamegame621 (975 posts) -
@Tarsier said:
" @lamegame621:    do you really think 'war is bad' is a good way to look at it? life isnt as simple as that, it would be nice if it was, but its not.  "
I agree, it's not that simple. However, rather than arguing the case of the "just war", I decided to base that opinion off of practically every military engagement we've been in since World War II, which is the best-known example of the "just war", although some very unjust things happened, i.e. firebombing of Dresden and Tokyo, atomic bombs at Hiroshima/ Nagasaki--events that caused hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths.
#3 Posted by lamegame621 (975 posts) -
@AngeTheDude said:
" The Call of Duty series as it is now treats war in such a ridiculous manner that there's no way any normal person could take it seriously. While this particular game has the grittiest and grimiest storyline the series has had so far, it's still pretty outrageous.  "
Yeah, this is probably what's going to tip me in favor of buying it. I have played some of a friends copy, but I wondered what other people had to say about it. Also, I'll try to be a "normal person" from now on. :D
 
@Fripplebubby said:
" If you don't believe in killing Cubans, GET THE HELL OUT OF MY COUNTRY!  

lol rite?
#4 Posted by lamegame621 (975 posts) -

 @tooPrime said:

" @lamegame621 said:

" Recently I've been delving more and more into the ethics behind killing and exploitation. This has, by some measure, kept me from buying Call of Duty: Black Ops. Essentially my thinking breaks down as such:  1. War is, ethically, bad. It deprives humans of the right to live. (*If you don't agree with this, feel free to stop reading.)2. This video game is representing a hegemonic view of war. 3. This video game could be propaganda for the further militarization of our culture (America, specifically, and the American south, even more specifically.) 4. By buying and supporting this game with capital, I am contributing to the above.   So I'm eliciting your help in this matter. Is it really "just a game" that has multiple interpretations, or is buying it a way of supporting war culture and the secretive, clandestine operations that occur without the knowledge of the general populace? "
From where is the right for life derived? "
In America, it's derived from our Declaration of Independence, which was in turn developed from Enlightenment thinking (I'm not trying to sound important, but I'm not sure if you're from the U.S.). Beyond that, I suppose there is no concrete "right" to life other than the fact that humans can only, in fact, experience things while they are living. I'm not a complete pacifist, (and perhaps I didn't explain # 1 very clearly) but I believe that through the observation of emotional and physical stresses on humans in a war environment, it can be considered "bad", as much as anything can be considered "bad". It is the creation of human suffering I am against.  

I know that rights aren't absolute, but I I would be more interested in hearing an argument against the right to life, honestly. Unless we're getting all Nietzschean up in this bitch, the violent ending of life, whether it (life) is a right or not, seems to be undesirable--or however you wish to quantify it. 
 
Thanks for the inquiry. 
#5 Posted by lamegame621 (975 posts) -
@FluxWaveZ said:
" It's just a game. No, it doesn't have multiple interpretations (not many possible, anyways), but it's still just a game. War isn't demonstrated to be a particularly good thing in the game itself, so I don't think its serving very well as propaganda. Sure, war is ethically bad, but its something that will never go away. The game's representing this aspect of life that's not all rainbows, but it's an aspect of life that, "funnily" enough, can be made pretty well into a video game. "
Yeah, this is the other way I've basically been "selling" myself on it. Treyarch didn't create war, or the Cold War, or the "war on terror". Essentially, should I fault any number of movies for "supporting" vigilantism just because they portray it? I'll admit I've never bought into the "video games make you angry/ want to join the military" argument, but I just have some reservations about supporting something so seemingly one-sided.
#6 Posted by lamegame621 (975 posts) -
@Vitor said:
" @lamegame621: Despite what it may appear to be on the surface, Modern Warfare 2 was almost entirely anti-war, anti-military industrial complex in terms of its story arc. Besides the face of the enemy, the ridiculous quotes thrown up by former members of the Bush cabinet after each death only went to further cement this idea for me.  Black Ops though, not sure the same argument could be made. "
Yeah, I definitely got the same vibe from MW2. I suppose part of it is that I'm worried that some people didn't "get" it. Though, Call of Duty being as big as it is, can I really be expected to feel bad that some people think it's an accurate political statement on the legitimacy of foreign wars? Probably not.
#7 Posted by lamegame621 (975 posts) -

Recently I've been delving more and more into the ethics behind killing and exploitation. This has, by some measure, kept me from buying Call of Duty: Black Ops. Essentially my thinking breaks down as such: 
1. War is, ethically, bad. It deprives humans of the right to live. (*If you don't agree with this, feel free to stop reading.)
2. This video game is representing a hegemonic view of war.
3. This video game could be propaganda for the further militarization of our culture (America, specifically, and the American south, even more specifically.)
4. By buying and supporting this game with capital, I am contributing to the above. 
 
So I'm eliciting your help in this matter. Is it really "just a game" that has multiple interpretations, or is buying it a way of supporting war culture and the secretive, clandestine operations that occur without the knowledge of the general populace?

#8 Posted by lamegame621 (975 posts) -

This is something I've been struggling with too. Granted I'm from the American south, and everyone here is a self-proclaimed "patriot" (personally I think patriotism and nationalism are two ways in which governments manage to manipulate their populace) . I've been trying to weigh the ethical dilemmas of playing a game like this that could, for some, merely reinforce their nationalist views. As much as I hate fascism, pretending the Nazis were somehow not human because of their horrible atrocities essentially means that we've given ourselves the right to do whatever we want to them. They're terrorists, or Communists, or fascists, so they "deserve" what they get. It's a dangerous way of thinking, but I'm not exactly convinced we're going to figure out anytime soon that it's actually destructive to all of us.

#9 Posted by lamegame621 (975 posts) -
@Kierkegaard said:
" Torture is illegal and ineffectual, but it's been accepted in pop culture as long as it seems justified in the fucked up logic of the narrative. In reality, the ticking time bomb case never happens. In reality, 24 is bullshit. But, in reality, administrations that use torture and basically brag about it are not brought to justice and allowed to write memoirs about it instead, so I can't blame the public for being so open to its inclusion in war.  "
Holy shit, best answer.
#10 Posted by lamegame621 (975 posts) -
@smokemare said:
" I think censorship will be a problem for the foreseeable future in both Germany and Australia.  Their conservative, slightly authoritarian governments are not likely to change their opinions on this despite the lack of conclusive evidence that violent games are broadly harmful.  I suppose the only hope is that a new generation who have grown up with games and have a better understanding of the media eventually comes into power and starts to initiate some changes. "
"Won't someone PLEASE think about the CHILDREN???"