@nemt said:
I should have to be specific when I criticize a game over historic realism that I'm not trying to say Americans should be included in Stalingrad?
To be honest the first thing that came into my mind when opening this topic was what HandsomeDead said. But I'm a hater, and the first reactions I get are always negative.
@nemt said:
And I don't expect perfect historic realism - mainly because that would be exceptionally boring. A perfectly realistic war videogame depicting actual history would involve waiting days, weeks, months before doing anything. I would, however, like to see the participants in specific theaters of war accurately represented. I guess it's nice to see a game about the Eastern Front at least, instead of playing Omaha Beach for the thousandth time - my gripe is it still makes many of the same historic mistakes every other Eastern Front set game has. I don't consider WHAT COUNTRIES' ARMIES FOUGHT IN THE BATTLE a "minor detail."
I totally get what you're saying, I'm bored to tears with the same old scenarios we get over and over again. Personally I do not consider any country's involvement a meaningless matter either. I'd sure as hell like to see a game about the Winter War, mostly of course as I'm a Finn, but even if I wasn't it was pretty intense what happened here. But it's not gonna happen 'cause it lacks 'USA for teh Win', the bigger war games are aimed for mass western audience, it won't sell in the US if there's no 'America is teh dominate' -formula, and when the buyers don't care about the 'minor details', the developers ain't gonna use time on them 'cause it needs to $ell and make money fastarrr.
I know there are still good developers out there (especially in eastern Europe), and I totally lost my train of thought and might've missed the point, but it's fun to rant. In the meantime, let's enjoy Red Orchestra 2...(and horray for mods<3)
Log in to comment