IG: Recent controversy surrounding multiplayer aspects of the game have arisen; specifically that players will be allowed to play as Taliban forces while engaging U.S. military personnel in-game. Is playing as an enemy during an on-going conflict a problem, and do you think that gamers playing as the Taliban reflects anti-U.S. military sentiments, ones that will allow gamers to ‘learn to kill U.S. military personnel?’
Ranger: Personally, I feel that this claim of attacking U.S. soldiers is malarkey. It’s a video game and has a mature rating to ensure those playing it are competent enough to know the difference between life and a game.
Special Forces: Again, we played Arab terrorists and militants killing Americans in MW2, DF: TF Dagger already. We killed Americans in Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon, but we were ambiguous third world brown guys in aviator glasses. If the game is set on the current world situation, who else should the bad guys be? I am also curious why nobody has ever made a truly big deal like this about gangsters killing cops in games.
JTAC: I don’t think everyone that plays the Taliban will have anti-U.S. sentiment. If I were to play the game, I eventually will take on the role as the “Taliban.” I wouldn’t think anything of it. It’s just a game. Just like the other games with Nazis as the enemy or the Japanese, this will add “realism” to the game. It’s better than Dirka Dirka from Dirkastan.
IG: Does the subject material of this game offend you?
Ranger: I thoroughly enjoy playing games that depict the things that I’ve been through. I also enjoyed my job, so it makes it easier.
Special Forces: No. I am more offended that people are in an uproar over this game but let their kids watch movies filmed with real people doing the same thing and not protesting that.
JTAC: The subject is “war.” “War” is a fact of life and it does not offend me. I think the idea of the Taliban will be around for a long time. Not everyone we fight is the “Taliban.” They are called the Taliban but in fact, they are just foreign fighters who want to fight the big bad Americans.
IG: Electronic Arts' games label president Frank Gibeau knew that EA was taking “a creative risk” in portraying the Taliban as playable characters. Though they hired former/current SF and even enlisted the help of the Medal of Honor Society, is this the right course of action, or should they have left well enough alone and followed suit with other games that portray modern military engagement (such as naming middle eastern enemies as OPFOR in Modern Warfare 2)?
Ranger: I am a risk taker and I’m not afraid to hurt people’s feelings. I respect him for having the testicular fortitude to put this “sensitive subject matter” out to the public.
Special Forces: Why not call a spade a spade? If you're an Operator in the mountains killing guys in turbans and flip-flops, why not call them what they are? I applaud them for not bowing to people’s misguided sensibilities, as well as seeking the advice of people who do the real thing for a living.
JTAC: You can’t succeed in life without risk. It may or may not pay off. I give them credit for trying. You can’t appease everyone. It’s good to have controversy out there.
IG: Frank Gibeau also went on record to say that games are becoming the new medium for this type of controversy, comparing the game to The Hurt Locker (perhaps not the best comparison…) and The Red Badge of Courage, along the lines that the game was as dramatically developed and therefore warranted the right to break the mold. Do you believe that games can accurately depict the type of scenarios that U.S. servicemen face in the line of duty?
Ranger: It can re-enact certain aspects of engagements and such, just as movies have. It cannot recreate it though because there is so much more involved on the battlefield that a game can’t make a gamer feel. The noise, the adrenaline, the man next to you, the wounds, the grit and grime. It just isn’t there sitting on your couch. But when a game gets close to it, I know it does get people excited, especially those who have been in engagements.
Special Forces: I do not think they can accurately portray real life based on a game because it's a game, and the experience is individual in nature and controlled by the end user at home. I do think they can make an effort to reflect the sacrifice, emotion, and heroism of U.S. servicemen and relay that to a player. They can't make them feel the fear, fatigue, or gravity of the situation, because the penalty for poor vigilance in a game is reverting to a checkpoint, not death. They can tell a fantastic interactive story, though. Video games are at a technical and financial level that has made them an ideal medium for ideas and stories. I hope EA makes the best of that opportunity.
JTAC: No war game will ever depict the type of scenarios a U.S. soldier will experience in direct combat. When I played war games before, I have never thought my life was in jeopardy while playing, thus you will never get the same depiction as real life.
IG: Lastly, considering the circumstances, would you still play this game?
Ranger: I already have it pre-ordered and plan on playing until I’ve mastered it.
Special Forces: Absolutely.
JTAC: Of course. I’ll give it a shot. I think the only way I will “hate” this game is if they show soldiers being executed (beheaded), torture females or something along those lines. Distasteful to say the least.
IG: Any other comments?
Ranger: I’m all about the game. I like doing that kind of stuff. That was my job, and I enjoy playing as those characters. It’s kind of fun to play what I did in a video game, then go in and critique what they’ve done right and what’s realistic and what might not be as real; regardless it’s still fun to do.
I don’t think this game could be used as a training tool. What actually happens compared to the online experience, even when real military people are playing the game is vastly different than real life. Within the game, they aren’t going to be playing as a cohesive unit, trying to act like Special Operational Forces. There isn’t going to be “room clearing” and other tactics; this isn’t about training to be a cohesive force. It’s simply gamers running around shooting each other. To believe that the Taliban or even the U.S. military can use this game for anything referred to as “training” is just nonsense.
Special Forces: [Nothing Provided]
JTAC: The Taliban will use this game as a recruiting tool. If you are thinking about a reason to hate this game, I just gave you the only reason that makes sense to me. Every time they make the news for claiming a bomb or whatnot, even if they didn’t do it, you are giving the Taliban un-needed press. Adding them to this game is a small victory for them as they are now recognized as a legitimate fighting force.
