You Don't Want to Experience 6 Days in Fallujah discusses Konami's '6 Days in Fallujah' and why no one should want to experience a realistic game based on the famous Iraq battle.

The story is too old to be commented.
DragonWarrior_43479d ago

I know Americans died. But we killed more of them rightfully. Im sure there is some controversy that is undeniable, but you mean to tell me movies like Black Hawk Down shouldn't been made because some panseys cant handle the truth? Get over it,, if you think Fallujah was bad, you should read up on some of the war storys from the Civil War back to b.c. era. They would really sh*t their pants then.

astrobrights3479d ago

There's a huge difference between movies and games. Why would someone want to experience realistic combat? Only someone naive would want to basically. You also cannot compare one war to another or try to say one was more horrific than another. It's silly to make a comparison like that or make the "they would really sh*t their pants then" comment like you made. How do you know what anyone would do or think?

FantasyStar3479d ago (Edited 3479d ago )

I say let the market decide, if people want to see a grueling, realistic aspect of war. Then the sales will reflect that.

Video Games and Movies are the same thing. Just different mediums. One's on the big screen, and the other one is an interactive big-screen. The way I see it, both media formats should enjoy equal freedom when it comes to creative licenses.

XLiveGamer3479d ago (Edited 3479d ago )

"I know Americans died. But we killed more of them rightfully."

rightfully you say?

WTF? You are a damn ignorant don't you ?

rightfully!? That was an illegal invasion of a country without a declaration of war.

you know what watch this till the end: >>

My God wake up! stop living in ignorance. Where is justice in the U.S. Did she leave?

GameGambits3479d ago

So if this game has terrible A.I and unrealistic controls, then does that mean people even in real life war situations are super idiotic and you really can flip a 270 degree angle into a head shot super fast?

I really want to see how big of a war simulator this game turns out to be, because since it's grounded so hard in reality that if they treat it more like a game it'll fail that aspect, and if they don't treat it enough like a game, then it won't be worth 60 bucks.

Omegasyde3479d ago (Edited 3479d ago )

Fallujah was one of the biggest offensives.

They deserved to die. Why?
The islamist extremist released videos of the blackwater guys/journalist getting beheaded. Yea funny how people forget about those videos of people getting beheaded. It happens everywhere unfortunately.

Tell me as a human that doesn't get you angry. We warned them to get out a week in advance, in which most of the smart people did.

Bottom Line (I was not in offensive but I have seen the sh** in IRAQ)
The game should come out, but at the same time shouldn't glorify war. Why shouldn't this game come out? Cod4 was set in the middle east in a middle eastern country where the bad guys had the same principles/ideals.

The only difference here is that the middle eastern country is Iraq.

Timesplitter143479d ago (Edited 3479d ago )

Tell me if it would make you angry if they invaded your country like you did to them.

And how the f*** do you expect this game to glorify war if it's realistic? Almost all war games glorify war and make it sound like a great adventure or something. Now, with this game, we can finally see how war truly is : retards killing themselves and thinking it can be justified.

Omegasyde3479d ago

Invasion? I am sorry, it was more of a liberation.

Yea, I'd be pissed off too if someone took out the leader who was committing genocide on his own people.

And last time I checked, Iraqi's run Iraq, Not Americans.

RememberThe3573479d ago

They are making this game. The issue at had is whether or not they do it right. This will be a game. When you die in the game you still going to be here in real life.

There will not be the same emotional attachment to the situation. However, they can put the average person into a situation that we have only hear about.

They can take this opportunity to show what it's like over there. Many people aren't going to like the idea but I think that they can do something really special with this.

The fact is that the horror's of war will never be transfered through any entertainment medium. You don't know what it's like to watch someone die until you've done it.

PrimordialSoupBase3478d ago

Yes I do want to experience it.

If every other medium explores this tough subject matter, why the hell not a the interactive form?

It’s about time that developers think about the cultural significance of their craft -- distilling war into mindless good versus evil conflicts can only last so long before people are attuned to a little more introspection.

Every medium goes through this growing pain. It's healthy.

Viper73478d ago

Sry to say but I am a bit against this game.

a) I dont want a game that is purely based on propaganda that tryes to make this war justified by USA. Nor do I want to see american soldiers as heroes of this war when they clearly were not. (no one was)

b) I dont want a game that is based on watching your Americans bombarding hospitals and killing innocent civilans trough their bombardings and forcing their way of thinking trough torturing. Nor do I want a suicide bomber simulator.

No matter what some patriotic americans blinded by propaganda might think, there was no justice in this war, there where no reason to attack IRAQ, they didnt have any weapons of mass destruction (atleast not ones you could reach USA), nor was Osama bin laden hiding in their country.
Sadam Hussein might have been tough as a horrible dictator trough our eyes, but for them he was a leader. G.W.Bush was no better than him when choosing to attack IRAQ, and probably killed more ppl than hussein would have with his remaining life.

Theres no way to make this game without angering ppl.
if its pictured trough eyes of IRAQs soldiers it would anger the americans
if it would be pictured trough eyes of USA soldiers it would anger out every1 who was against this war.

just making game about this subject is like asking for trouble.

Call of duty 4 was differend, it based on imaginary terrorist group from imaginary country. COD4:s plot was completely differend from what happend in IRAQ, COD4 was more of this "OMG they have nukes we need to stop them" instead of "this country doesnt want to co-operate with us lets blow them up"

hay3478d ago (Edited 3478d ago )

I'll not buy the game. Most probably it'll be biased towards one side of the conflict(guess which one) and I bet it won't be sincere towards both sides of conflict.
Also it won't be as realistic as it is told now since it's some kind of backward advertising.
"Oh, noes, you shouldn't play the game... But show meh da money!"

@Edit: Realistic war game? No saves, no checkpoints, no health packs, no regeneration, you die: game over.

DeadlyFire3478d ago

Do you not realize that the home grown Terrorists from Iraq are part of the group that attacked twin towers. No offense to your intelligence, but when 90% of a country is terrorism and they attack a building or two in your country. That is a declaration of war my friend. Its not like we didn't give them a chance to go away. We invaded and warned most towns for people to get out and leave if they didn't want to be involved. Terrorists stayed there and challenged the troops. Sadly they were ignorant enough to believe they could take em down. They deserved a bullet. Deserving of death? maybe not. The ignorant don't always need to be killed. Just taught a lesson maybe. Unfortunately society hasn't evolved to that point in time yet where that is possible.

DragonWarrior_43478d ago (Edited 3478d ago )

Im ignorant? Dude we helped that country more then we hurt it. We killed an regime tortured its people. Saddams sons had a whore house filled with little boys 8 to 13 maybe even younger that got raped daily. They used chemical warfare on its population every time there was an uprising to over throw the government.

I actually had friends and relatives tell me some of the gruesome things they saw over there. Kids dying of starvation and chemical warefare. Radicals going into public places and killing 50 or more people with suicidal bombs. Your the ignorant one if you think that we didn't belong over there. Sure the American government had their own reasons, but we saved alot of people from a government of pure dictatorship.

BTW, im not gonna watch a youtube video of what is supposeably going on. Ive seen enough videos where they say the world is ending, obama is satan, and all this other crap that is just all in the heads of you retards that think you know whats going on when you dont even know what temperature is outside because youve been stuck inside playing video games all day in your grandmas basement. All of you guys talking crap about this game are the ones that are probably gonna get this day one. Its Ironic if you ask me.

Most of you people are oblivious to whats really going on in the world today. There is so much murder and sh*t going on in your own back yards but your stuck in your own little virtual reality. There is death everywhere, and honestly , I dont care about this game because konami has yet to prove they can make a game that doesnt suck online. I would have prefered a Zone of the Enders sequel, but they are retarded, just like every other Japanese dev and publisher. Seriously though,, grow up. There are worse things happening in this country for you to be worried about what a game is made up of.

Viper73478d ago

"Do you not realize that the home grown Terrorists from Iraq are part of the group that attacked twin towers. No offense to your intelligence, but when 90% of a country is terrorism and they attack a building or two in your country. "

Your blaming country because of some terrorist group thats location is still unknown did a terrorist attack to america. Heres some info to wipe out that propaganda that your brain has been filled with

Straight from wikipedia:
"Prior to the war, the governments of the U.S., U.K, and Spain claimed that Iraq's alleged possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) posed an imminent threat to their security and that of their coalition allies.[48][49][50] United Nations weapons inspectors found no evidence of WMD, giving support to earlier criticism of poor intelligence on the subject.[51][52][53][54] After the invasion, the U.S.-led Iraq Survey Group concluded that Iraq had ended its WMD programs in 1991 and had no active programs at the time of the invasion, but that they intended to resume production if the Iraq sanctions were lifted.[55] Although some degraded remnants of misplaced or abandoned chemical weapons from before 1991 were found, they were not the weapons for which the coalition invaded.[56] Some U.S. officials also accused Saddam Hussein of harboring and supporting Al-Qaeda,[57] but no evidence of any collaborative relationship was ever found."

No offense to your inteligence but before you start to argue bring on some facts instead of random acusations.

"I actually had friends and relatives tell me some of the gruesome things they saw over there. Kids dying of starvation and chemical warefare. Radicals going into public places and killing 50 or more people with suicidal bombs. Your the ignorant one if you think that we didn't belong over there. Sure the American government had their own reasons, but we saved alot of people from a government of pure dictatorship."

Before the war or while in the war? Ofcourse everything was F*cked up there and ppl dieing to starvation because there was a war. The suicidal bombings happened started to happen after you invaded their country, why? because there are ppl who do not welcome you in their country, and to tell the truth I can understand why.
The country is just so differend from ours, all the religion and goverments types differ greatly from ours. S.H was a terrible ruler theres no doubt about that, but that doesnt give any rights to any country to just invade the country, no matter what you might think your country is not the "world police"

Saved many and killed many, not to mention the ammount of homes and lifes you ppl destroyed in iraq. Do not think yourselfs as heroes in this. There where no wmd nor where there any connection to Osama bin laden and his group of terrorists what so ever. So now that all these reasons that US used to invade Iraq your suddenly making up excuses on how it was because after all these years sadam hussein deserved to die?

This war is just too sensitive for many ppl and religions. It should be remembered as a horrible happening in history books, instead of making it sound like a enjoyment trough videogames and films.

What next? School shooter simulator?

+ Show (11) more repliesLast reply 3478d ago
SeanScythe3479d ago

Yeah let's not play a game because it's within the last 10 years. Lets see we should play a game that had 10's of thousands die just trying to take over a beach.

The single worst day in American history remains September 17, 1862.

Battle of Antietam

Union casualites 2,108 killed, 9,540 wounded, 753 captured/missing for a total of 12,401

Confederate casualites -1,546 killed, 7,752 wounded, 1,018 captured/missing for a total of 10,316

Also consider that most of the wounded later died of their wounds.

Since the US considers both Union and Confederate casualites to be "American Casualites" that means something like 3,644 dead, and 23,000 total casualites.

Gettysburg was worse (51,112 total casualites (23,049 Union and 28,063 Confederate) KIA, WIA and MIA but that was over three days of fighting. Again it wasn't good to be wounded... there were nine wounded soldiers for every man woman and child in the town of Gettysburg after the battle, so getting the wounded medical care was difficult to say the least.

Spotsilvania, Chancelorsville, and Chickamaugua, also were worse than Antetam, but like Gettysburg they were all mulit day battles as well.

Fredricksburg was pretty horrible (for the Union at least) as well.

Total Allied casualties on D-Day are estimated at 10,000, including 2500 dead. Casualties” refers to all losses suffered by the armed forces: killed, wounded, missing in action (meaning that their bodies were not found) and prisoners of war. There is no "official" casualty figure for D-Day. British casualties on D-Day have been estimated at approximately 2700. The Canadians lost 946 casualties. The US forces lost 6603 men. Note that the casualty figures for smaller units do not always add up to equal these overall figures exactly, however (this simply reflects the problems of obtaining accurate casualty statistics).

So 6,603 casualites at D-Day are nothing compared to 23,000 at Antetam.

The entire four years of the Iraq War is less than one really bad afternoon of the Civil War.

So lets play war games that haven't happened in the last 10 years, because it upsets you. How do you think Veterains feel knowing we are playing all these games about WW2 and others. When all we care about is the Achivement or trophy. Grow up people it's a game and I look forward to playing it.

astrobrights3479d ago

The Civil War was horrible. But do we have realistic Civil War games? Not really. What I am saying is that people don't want "realistic" war games. A realistic experience wouldn't be a very good one.

SeanScythe3479d ago

Maybe if they would be more real people would understand what real soilders go through. It's because war is violent and grusome that we hate them. But if we only see them are cool weapons and perks then we lose that sence of reality. I think realistic games are a good thing. I mean for COD5 the devs bragged that the flame thrower would show the flesh burning on the bodies. That sounds pretty realistic to me so what is the differance?

lokiroo4203479d ago (Edited 3479d ago )

astro, who are "we" when you are using it, speak for yourself. your clueless bro, like this is different than any other war game where blood is spraying all over the place. people dont want realism, seriously, do your eyes and ears function?

RememberThe3573479d ago

If there were virtual war zones where everything seemed real, but you never really got hurt, people would be going bananas for them.

People want the rush of having their lives in danger without actually having their lives in danger. People want the mental exercise of having to problem solve under pressure.

Most people don't want to directly experience war, but they do want to experience aspects of it with out the risk.

DeadlyFire3478d ago

I know many say realism isn't want people want or its too graphic of a thing for people to see. In reality most people NEVER get to see the realism. If more people saw it they would understand more about why people don't like war or why its so bad to goto war with some countries.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3478d ago
jay23479d ago

I can't wait to kill those evil monsters.

Spike473479d ago (Edited 3479d ago )

Killing is not a game, I would hate to take the life of another person because of one man's arrogance.
I don't know whether the game should be released or not, I'm on the fence.

Show all comments (63)
The story is too old to be commented.