GameStop's MOH Tali-ban

Star Bingo

http://ps3.gamespy.com/playstation-3/medal-of-honor-2010/1117847p1.html

"GameStop has agreed out of respect for our past and present men and women in uniform we will not carry Medal of Honor in any of our AAFES based stores...," GameStop told Kotaku. "As such, GameStop agreed to have all marketing material pulled by noon today and to stop taking reservations. Customers who enter our AAFES stores and wish to reserve Medal of Honor can and should be directed to the nearest GameStop location off base."

"GameStop fully supports AAFES in this endeavor and is sensitive to the fact that in multiplayer mode one side will assume the role of Taliban fighter."

who's the terrorist now? if they're banning that for fear of distaste or possible influence, then what to make of all the wartime shooters i've been through as first-person yank! gamestop sucks :mad: they lost this battle for heart and mind. avoid

ChunkyLover_53

Star Bingo wrote: »

http://ps3.gamespy.com/playstation-3/medal-of-honor-2010/1117847p1.html



who's the terrorist now? if they're banning that for fear of distaste or possible influence, then what to make of all the wartime shooters i've been through as first-person yank! gamestop sucks :mad: they lost this battle for heart and mind. avoid

This only applies to AAFES stores. The American Armed Forces Exchange
You have to be in the US military or be an ally in a mission area to shop there.

Star Bingo

its that the AAFES made the request in the first place that annoys me! and GameStop to succumb to it. but then they probs had no option due to 'fearmongering' lol

but seriously, best avoid gamestop n buy elsewhere imo.

this US Army medic says it best:

The idea that a gameplay mode in a game people choose to or not to play could be so inherently damaging is simply silly. Giving things this kind of weight and power is the problem, not that they exist in and of themselves. It's something I had to learn myself. For about 3 years after I returned from Iraq, I found it impossible to play any realistic shooters, or to enjoy fireworks. There were little things within those experiences that set off powerful sense memories. Eventually, it took sitting down and trying to remember what was enjoyable about these things to me in the past to make them enjoyable again. Releasing that self-imposed power made me remember, hey, this is a video game, and I like video games.

That's the point here that the officials at AAFES are overlooking in favor of being cautious. This isn't a tool to convert American Soldiers into Taliban. It is a game, and in the game you play one of two roles. In the Army, you sometimes have field exercises in which you are placed on the side of "Opposing Forces." In that, you are role-playing as modern enemies in order to improve your knowledge and your fellow soldiers' knowledge of how to combat them. Games don't come with an inherent evil, an inherent power, or even, most of the time, any specific political message. In the campaign of Medal of Honor, it will be no doubt clear that the Taliban are the enemies. In multiplayer, sometimes, people will be "Opposing Forces." That's not offensive to me as a soldier. The offensive thing to me as a soldier is AAFES thinking I can't protect myself from a product they deem harmful. If it feels potentially damaging to an individual, then the individual doesn't play it and that's all that needs to happen.

ChunkyLover_53

I agree with you it sounds like some sort of top brass psycologist told them not to stock it as it might affect the boys on the ground.

It kinda always struck me as odd though, think about this if your a young American soldier stomping around fields & valleys in Afghanistan getting shot at by insurgents then why the hell would you won't to back to your room/tent after an operation & play a game that simulates a young American soldier stomping around fields & valleys in Afghanistan getting shot at by insurgents!

The same goes for Magic Mushroom Addicted Italian Brothers who are plumbers who like to play Super Mario

Star Bingo

lol man u said it :pac:

but maybe they'd have permitted if the taliban were demonized in the game, rather than the likelyhood of keeping a sense of reality by still being the good guys - albeit from the taliban's perspective - and even if only in multiplayer.. remains to be seen though how the taliban are portrayed. roll on the release. that its so similar to BC2 sucks though, not so sure i'll even buy

dreamers75

Video games prolly got them into the arma (AA) fact its a live war prolly dictated that policy was not to let the troops play.

Reckon all the WW2 soliders are dismayed that ****ing soldiers are allowed play video games at all!

Redlion

What you all have to remember is that this game isn't being banned entirely, soldiers are still allowed to purchase the game off-base without a problem. So the question of censorship can be put to rest.To be perfectly honest i can agree with the army's stance, considering the war is ongoing and that many US soldiers know casualties from the war. At least read the following link before jumping the gun: http://kotaku.com/5629429/airman-defends-militarys-video-game-sales-ban

Star Bingo

the Medic's opposing view i also quoted from Kotaku

http://kotaku.com/5628960/an-ex+soldiers-take-on-the-militarys-medal-of-honor-decision

dealer v healer whose opinion to side with? i've more respect for a doctor.. but flyin em jets sure is cooler eh. is GameStop the only army outlet they could obtain it through? there won't be a ban on troops caught playing it i hope cos i suspect they'll only want it more now

Redlion

Star Bingo wrote: »

the Medic's opposing view i also quoted from Kotaku

http://kotaku.com/5628960/an-ex+soldiers-take-on-the-militarys-medal-of-honor-decision

dealer v healer whose opinion to side with? i've more respect for a doctor.. but flyin em jets sure is cooler eh. is GameStop the only army outlet they could obtain it through? there won't be a ban on troops caught playing it i hope cos i suspect they'll only want it more now

Like I said there is no blanket ban, troops are still allowed purchase the game off-base and play it on-base...why would you trust a medic's view over a soldier's view? You do not know this man personally, nor is there any proof that a doctor is a more reliable source than a soldier. Profession means nothing when it comes to honesty, for example, the magnitude of corruption that takes place within the ranks of the police forces and medical professions of the world.

Star Bingo

Redlion wrote: »

Like I said there is no blanket ban, troops are still allowed purchase the game off-base and play it on-base...why would you trust a medic's view over a soldier's view? You do not know this man personally, nor is there any ..

its only been requested of the GameStop vendor when its easily obtainable to em anyhow? playing as the taliban may be the only reason i for one'd buy the game.. but off the back of this 'moralistic stance' i'd trust a medic's opinion over the pilot's opinion as he knows the direct consequences of bein strafed on the human appendage, whereas the pilot just knows dealing the grisly business to the ground from high above - its not like the taliban are tearin around in migs up there; no challenge! n he's too isolated/detatched from the realities at ground level so i'll go with the medic on this.