China creates video game simulating combat against US troops

[LukeB]

You all mock, but these things are dangerous. For example I am single handidly capable of overthrowing the Soviet Union should it reform due to my many well spent hours training on Goldeneye as a child.

 

[McHrozni]

The US Army has war games and actual war fighting plans for virtually every nation and grouping of nations on the face of the planet and beyond. I don't understand the proposed outrage of this thread.

Obviously so does every other army in the world. This is not an issue.

The issue is that the Chinese state sponsored a video game in which their soldiers (persumably on the "Glorious mission") kill American soldiers.

How do you think the Chinese would react if the US government sponsored a video game, where you'd play a SEAL, on a glorious mission killing the Chinese?
I'd say they would be angry. Rightfully too.

McHrozni

 

[TubbaBlubba]

You all mock, but these things are dangerous. For example I am single handidly capable of overthrowing the Soviet Union should it reform due to my many well spent hours training on Goldeneye as a child.

I've gotten great training in assassinating the POTUS from Metal Gear Solid 2.

 

[Trakar]

Obviously so does every other army in the world. This is not an issue.

The issue is that the Chinese state sponsored a video game in which their soldiers (persumably on the "Glorious mission") kill American soldiers.

How do you think the Chinese would react if the US government sponsored a video game, where you'd play a SEAL, on a glorious mission killing the Chinese?
I'd say they would be angry. Rightfully too.

McHrozni

http://www.goarmy.com/downloads/games.html

 

[Roboramma]

It's the People's Republic of China. Pretty much every company is state-sponsored.

Um, no.

 

[HansMustermann]

Obviously so does every other army in the world. This is not an issue.

The issue is that the Chinese state sponsored a video game in which their soldiers (persumably on the "Glorious mission") kill American soldiers.

How do you think the Chinese would react if the US government sponsored a video game, where you'd play a SEAL, on a glorious mission killing the Chinese?
I'd say they would be angry. Rightfully too.

McHrozni

What difference does it make? Either you think the games actually influence people and attitudes, in which case it doesn't matter if it's made by the government or by Bethesda, or you don't, in which case the Chinese government is just wasting taxpayer money. And frankly, let the Chinese worry about the latter.

And really, we have worse. In Fallout 3 and New Vegas, for example, you see a whole America in radioactive ruins after being nuked by the Chinese. And you get to fight in defense of Alaska in a Chinese invasion there. And you find lots of Chinese manuals, guns, swords, uniforms, remains of sleeper cells, submarines and documents, on both coasts, as apparently they actually landed all over the USA before the nuke-fest. And I don't mean just a few. THE most abundant weapons in Washington DC are Chinese Pistols (C96 clones), Chinese Assault Rifles (Type 81), and Chinese Officer Swords.

So, really, what difference does it make? A bunch of us like a portrayal of China in a game as the bad guys who started a world war. They portray the USA as the bad guys in their games. Whop-de-do. Big difference that

 

[Nerd]

http://www.goarmy.com/downloads/games.html

The US government's game doesn't have a real country as an enemy.

What difference does it make? Either you think the games actually influence people and attitudes, in which case it doesn't matter if it's made by the government or by Bethesda, or you don't, in which case the Chinese government is just wasting taxpayer money. And frankly, let the Chinese worry about the latter.

And really, we have worse. In Fallout 3 and New Vegas, for example, you see a whole America in radioactive ruins after being nuked by the Chinese. And you get to fight in defense of Alaska in a Chinese invasion there. And you find lots of Chinese manuals, guns, swords, uniforms, remains of sleeper cells, submarines and documents, on both coasts, as apparently they actually landed all over the USA before the nuke-fest. And I don't mean just a few. THE most abundant weapons in Washington DC are Chinese Pistols (C96 clones), Chinese Assault Rifles (Type 81), and Chinese Officer Swords.

So, really, what difference does it make? A bunch of us like a portrayal of China in a game as the bad guys who started a world war. They portray the USA as the bad guys in their games. Whop-de-do. Big difference that

Well the difference is that the Chinese military is sponsoring and developing this game. The people who make games like Fallout 3 are private developers - they're not affiliated or sponsored by a government. One of the purposes of this game is supposed to be a combat simulator to kill American soldiers.

The US government has a combat simulator/war game, but it does not sponsor the killing of enemy soldiers of a real country. The only problem is that the Chinese military - not a set developing group is creating the game.

 

[McHrozni]

What difference does it make?

To me it makes a world of differance. A private company isn't making a political statement, whereas a government is - the reasons are obvious, since a private company is making the game with profit as a motive, whereas a national government is not.

So, really, what difference does it make? A bunch of us like a portrayal of China in a game as the bad guys who started a world war. They portray the USA as the bad guys in their games. Whop-de-do. Big difference that

Fallout series has a slightly more complex storyline, with the USA taking over the last of the worlds' oil and forcing Canada to become a part of the Union in order to survive among other things. I wouldn't call that "good guys".

That said, see the part above.

McHrozni

 

[Trakar]

The US government's game doesn't have a real country as an enemy.

Then you haven't advanced far enough into the game!
It is true, that you won't see Chinese flags on the Czervenian Nocza Militarni zo ta Ekspedi (NME), but in many senarios they are using Chinese arms and armaments. But this is mostly true of the Chinese version as well. I didn't notice any US flags, rather it is the Apaches, M4s and Abrahms which largely lead one to recognize the enemy as American.

BTW which one are you referring to? I'm looking mainly at America's Army game

here are some screen shots from the PLA play:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCOu4e8luF8&feature=player_embedded

Sorry, I still just don't see any reason for a sense of outrage or dismay at this.

 

[Wildy]

Isn't China the baddie in the remake of Red Dawn that's in the works?

Nope.

 

[McHrozni]

Sorry, I still just don't see any reason for a sense of outrage or dismay at this.

Perhaps it's unwarranted, perhaps not. One thing is certain, it is not a statement of goodwill from the Chinese.

McHrozni

 

[Praktik]

Nope.

Ha well maybe the chinese need to make the baddies Canadian in their game then as a quid pro quo!

 

[Trakar]

Perhaps it's unwarranted, perhaps not. One thing is certain, it is not a statement of goodwill from the Chinese.

McHrozni

As a representative element of western democracies and the populaces of which they are composed, neither are posts like yours.

 

[egslim]

One thing is certain, it is not a statement of goodwill from the Chinese.

In another thread you said:

Which is hardly surprising and was obvious from the start.

So you admitted we lied to the Chinese about our goals in Libya to avoid their veto of UNSC resolution 1973.*

It's not very sensible to expect goodwill from people you lied to.

* Of course this is merely an example you conveniently provided. American political and military representatives have referred to China as a rising threat for some time now. We also misled/lied to them before. Actions always have consequences. If a computergame where GI's get shot is the only result, count yourself lucky.

 

[McHrozni]

In another thread you said:
So you admitted we lied to the Chinese about our goals in Libya to avoid their veto of UNSC resolution 1973.*

It's not very sensible to expect goodwill from people you lied to.

* Of course this is merely an example you conveniently provided. American political and military representatives have referred to China as a rising threat for some time now. We also misled/lied to them before. Actions always have consequences. If a computergame where GI's get shot is the only result, count yourself lucky.

Which is, of course, utterly irrelevant to the topic at hand

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

As a representative element of western democracies and the populaces of which they are composed, neither are posts like yours.

It's a good thing I'm not a government spokesman then.

You do realize there is a differance between a private citizen making a certain statement as opposed to a government official in official function right?

McHrozni

 

[Praktik]

I hope everyone realizes who has the bigger political phallus now:

- China makes videogame with Americans as bad guys. Americans whine. China continues to make videogame with Americans as bad guys.

- America has finished movie, Red Dawn - and instead of releasing it spends cash, all a straight loss and dent in whatever profits the movie will bring in, to redesign the baddies to be North Korean before China even says word one about it. At least publicly, who knows... maybe they complained and the Americans bent over backwards real quick...

 

[Nerd]

I hope everyone realizes who has the bigger political phallus now:

- China makes videogame with Americans as bad guys. Americans whine. China continues to make videogame with Americans as bad guys.

- America has finished movie, Red Dawn - and instead of releasing it spends cash, all a straight loss and dent in whatever profits the movie will bring in, to redesign the baddies to be North Korean before China even says word one about it. At least publicly, who knows... maybe they complained and the Americans bent over backwards real quick...

Again: Difference between a government sponsored military creating something and a private company/group creating something. Last time I checked the US government isn't sponsoring the 2011 Red Dawn. (The movie is going to be dumb anyway.)

In another thread you said:
So you admitted we lied to the Chinese about our goals in Libya to avoid their veto of UNSC resolution 1973.*

It's not very sensible to expect goodwill from people you lied to.

* Of course this is merely an example you conveniently provided. American political and military representatives have referred to China as a rising threat for some time now. We also misled/lied to them before. Actions always have consequences. If a computergame where GI's get shot is the only result, count yourself lucky.

Governments lie to each other all the time. Its not an uncommon phenomena.

 

[Trakar]

It's a good thing I'm not a government spokesman then.

You do realize there is a differance between a private citizen making a certain statement as opposed to a government official in official function right?

McHrozni

In legal terms, yes. But we are talking about international relations and diplomacy and when, vocal groups of citizenry in a representative democracy, and federal legislative representatives pandering to those groups begins slinging mud a making unsound, over the top arguments attempting to create boogeymen to further their own hypernationalistic agenda, it still impacts reasonable international relationships and negotiations. It is your right, but it is counterproductive to reasonable international relations.

As to the game in question it is a joint production between a private Chinese gaming corporation and the Chinese government. While you can argue that the government approved and authorized the use of a hypothetical future military confrontation with the US in a gaming senario, it is really a stretch to try and argue for any more significance to the issue. And as stated before, this is certainly less provocative than standing attack and combat plans for a wide range of US Military engagements with China that the Pentagon regularly updates including everything from First-strike nuclear attacks to cyber warfare economic attacks.

 

[Trakar]

I hope everyone realizes who has the bigger political phallus now:

- China makes videogame with Americans as bad guys. Americans whine. China continues to make videogame with Americans as bad guys.

- America has finished movie, Red Dawn - and instead of releasing it spends cash, all a straight loss and dent in whatever profits the movie will bring in, to redesign the baddies to be North Korean before China even says word one about it. At least publicly, who knows... maybe they complained and the Americans bent over backwards real quick...

This was an "American" decision? Looks more like a business decision to me. Have you seen box office returns from the world's most populous market-place recently? If I were making a movie with the primary goal of making money, reconsidering the potential alienation a market of over 1.3Billion potential ticket buyers sounds like a wise business decision to me.