heywood on 26/3/2021 at 17:59
I've got to agree, this is pretty distasteful. And it seems like a really niche market to be going after. I read that Konami abandoned this 10 years ago. Can't imagine why... :rolleyes:
It seems like the kind of pet project that some dude always wanted to do but everyone else at the studio thought it was a bad idea.
Now they have another publisher. But who is Victura?
june gloom on 26/3/2021 at 18:39
Quote Posted by DaBeast
I think you folks are kneejerking over the game's title rather than any actual content.
And what, pray tell, is the "actual" content?
t850terminator on 26/3/2021 at 22:51
Ehhh, SWAT4 looked good artstyle-wise (very effective use of colored lighting) and is the peak of tactical shooters, only really matched by Raven Shield. Not to mention that weird Ken Levine-touch that shook things up (like cults and serial killer levels) and a killer soundtrack.
This Six Days looks really bland visually and seems like alot of it is just riding the coattails of controversy.
Starker on 27/3/2021 at 05:15
Quote Posted by heywood
But who is Victura?
It's a company formed by Peter Tamte, the CEO of Atomic Games (the studio previously working on the game) and a former Bungie executive.
heywood on 27/3/2021 at 13:15
Thanks. So I guess this is some weird-ass labor of love thing for him.
DaBeast on 27/3/2021 at 14:52
Quote Posted by june gloom
And what, pray tell, is the "actual" content?
A tactical FPS set in a real world battle within a real world conflict. I didn't get any stereotypical America FUCK YEA! vibes from it. It has it's marketing wank, don't get me wrong, but its par for the course with video games and I'm sure you know this. There was no political message in the video, nothing pro republican, pro-spreading democracy etc. There was an actual effort, small perhaps, maybe a token, but it was an effort to show that there
were two sides and both felt they were in the right.
I've vague memories of a glut of bargain bin trash games based on the conflict, while it was happening, these were clearly cheap dirt games built to cash in on sentiment of the time. Despite first glance appearance, this game doesn't appear to be in the same category, though that name does kind of bother me a bit. It's likely part of the games focus/branding on the appeal of realism, which is kind of what TFPS people look for.
catbarf on 27/3/2021 at 17:11
Quote Posted by DaBeast
I didn't get any stereotypical America FUCK YEA! vibes from it.
Frankly, I can't remember Call of Duty ever billing itself as survival horror, or having interviews with veterans talking about being scared to die on their kid's birthday. The industry standard is stoic grizzled special forces operators fighting evil caricature terrorist supervillains (Middle Eastern, Russian, or both) while rock music blares; pretty much War Is Fun writ large. So this is at least big step up from that.
What concerns me is the developers' statements about the game being about the experience on the ground rather than politics, and using that as a justification to shy away from depicting the civilian casualties (~40% of all deaths) and war crimes that occurred in the battle- a sanitized, tacitly pro-US portrayal.
But hey, it's not like Genericistan shooters are hot to trot on depicting Western forces committing war crimes either. So if gamers feel that whitewashing a specific battle is egregious, but effectively whitewashing the entirety of Western involvement in the Middle East is fine, maybe it's time for some introspection. The industry really loves having its cake and eating it too; cashing in on the aesthetics and themes of real-world conflicts while pretending to be wholly fictional and thus avoid engaging with problematic truths.
Maybe the civilian confrontation at the end of the trailer is a hint that they're going to be complete in their depiction of the conflict after all and I'll be pleasantly surprised.
Quote Posted by heywood
It seems like the kind of pet project that some dude always wanted to do but everyone else at the studio thought it was a bad idea.
Wikipedia says that the developers were originally making training tools for the USMC, the Marines they were working with got deployed, and when the Marines came back they suggested making a game based on their experiences. So yeah, sounds like a passion project.
WingedKagouti on 27/3/2021 at 18:20
Quote Posted by catbarf
But hey, it's not like Genericistan shooters are hot to trot on depicting Western forces committing war crimes either. So if gamers feel that whitewashing a specific battle is egregious, but effectively whitewashing the entirety of Western involvement in the Middle East is fine, maybe it's time for some introspection. The industry really loves having its cake and eating it too; cashing in on the aesthetics and themes of real-world conflicts while pretending to be wholly fictional and thus avoid engaging with problematic truths.
On the other hand, those generic Tacticool FPS games don't
directly link themselves to a war with several major atrocities against civilians and then have the devs go "We don't need to acknowledge those atrocities, just go bang bang on some designate bad guys."
DaBeast on 27/3/2021 at 20:41
Quote Posted by WingedKagouti
On the other hand, those generic Tacticool FPS games don't
directly link themselves to a war with several major atrocities against civilians and then have the devs go "We don't need to acknowledge those atrocities, just go bang bang on some designate bad guys."
Are there any games based on real wars that do?
WingedKagouti on 27/3/2021 at 21:03
Quote Posted by DaBeast
Are there any games based on real wars that do?
There's a difference between not talking about something at all and actively saying "This is not important, look at the pretty colours instead."