Call of Duty Casting Call Mentions Vietnam Operatives
- Thread starter John Funk
- Start date
mmm could be, but I don't recall any tanks or planes in it, then again I only ever played it twice at a LAN in the mid '00s, and we only played one level (a jungle level) that I got sick of very quickly because I kept getting sniped by cheesy little bastards.wasalp said:
What would be cool is if you played as Vietcong in the other side of the story. It'll never happen though.
EDIT:
EDIT:
I think the widely held view is that MW2 Price is his descendant.DarkSaber said:
I hope that you play as an MI6 operative in more stealth based subterfuge missions while the American squad is given more action heavy levels. CoD4 and MW2 had some really good parts were you wanted to avoid combat (All Ghillied Up was awesome) and I'd love to see a lot more of those. Forced stealth elements tend to stand out like a sore thumb but they seem to really work in the Call of Duty franchise. Chances are it would be the CIA rather than MI6, it would be easier to link them with the Vietnam war and a CIA character is already mentioned so yeah. The British perspective seems to be the best one in most games.John Funk said:
I'm really looking forward to a Vietnam game. It's an interesting pallete in which to create a story and I'm sure that if doen right this could be as an intelligent as Platoon, Apocalypse Now or Full Metal Jacket. Maybe not completely oriinal (Nam stories have been done to death and tend to follow the same plot anyways) but still good.
gee i can see it now ... cod7 nam , where the only 2 weapon types are american and russian staring the m16 and ak47 , plus all the guns of their time ... no thermal or 50 cal sniper ... just remember full canteen and bring plenty of bug spray ... maybe even a chainsaw
Thank you for pointing out the clearly only good Vietnam Game. Battlefeild : Vietnam was an awesome Vietnam gametkioz said:
many funs hours there.In regard to Trearch's new Call of Duty, I really don't care and won't buy it.
They released the clearly worst CoD game in the series COD3 and completely ripped off Infinity Ward's Cod4 in Cod5.
Most hated games developers = Trearch.
I dont think the Vietnam war had a Good Guys side. A lot of attrocities were commited by both sides it would seem. Americans like winning their wars, they lost Vietnam, so maybe it wont be based on that war after all.
I would like to play a Call of Duty game set in Vietnam. I hope its a bit more refreshing than their last attempt .
Well it wasn't that bad, but I hope Treyarch learned from their mistakes and this is an improvement!
JB
.Well it wasn't that bad, but I hope Treyarch learned from their mistakes and this is an improvement!
JB
Meh, trading one overplayed war for another. Vietnam, like WWII has been done to death.
Why can't we go somewhere new and interesting? Why can't we fight in the Sinai? The Falklands? Angola? Panama? The Persian Gulf? Rhodesia?
MACV: SOG could at least be an interesting choice, what with all the mystery and ambiguity surrounding the unit. Though I doubt we'll be conducting illegal operations in Cambodia or Laos. Or even be able to cut peoples ears off and wear them as trophies.
Why can't we go somewhere new and interesting? Why can't we fight in the Sinai? The Falklands? Angola? Panama? The Persian Gulf? Rhodesia?
MACV: SOG could at least be an interesting choice, what with all the mystery and ambiguity surrounding the unit. Though I doubt we'll be conducting illegal operations in Cambodia or Laos. Or even be able to cut peoples ears off and wear them as trophies.
On the contrary, the Vietnam War is a fertile, controversial enough soil for morally ambiguous gameplay, which is rarely taken up by the very big-name developers.
It's a risky venture but there are only so many wars that can be covered from modern times that involve Americans. More importantly, the profile of Frank Barnes sounds very interesting. It would suggest that this Call of Duty game has a chance to make a statement about the folly of fighting guerrilla warfare tactics with conventional, WW2-style ideas.
Not that games in that series are known (by any actual writers) for their intriguing themes or well-written plot. However, any game with this setting has a genuine enough potential to teach an unwilling lot something about the war, even if it's just how futile the whole conflict was for the invading forces.
I'll be happy with this setting, as long as there are no historical mistakes... If the Americans end up winning the war and this is hand-waved as a parallel universe or something like that, it will ruin the whole thing for me and probably for anyone who has the contextual knowledge to be specially interested in a game with this setting.
I also disagree that Americans "butchered" Vietcong forces in the sense that you say it. It's just worded here in such a one-sided manner. As hard as it may be to hear, the Americans lost the war because, however many sacrifices the Vietcong might have made (and I agree that there were many, it's all a part of the guerrilla style of warfare), Vietnam was their country and there was a relatively endless supply of new recruits who were furious at America's intrusion and believed that removing said invaders would lead to a better state. It's much like Iraq in that way, really, and both sides were just as deluded into believing what they were doing was right. That is, until many of them saw what was really going on.
Which brings me to my next question: since this is a war game, where is all of the rape of civilian women? Sorry, but that's just integral to all warfare. It wouldn't make sense without it. Wouldn't be realistic enough. To keep that out would be grossly "ahistorical", wouldn't you say?
Clearly, there are some things that are just inappropriate however you implement them. Butchering thousands of Vietcong, much like displaying the rape of civilians, isn't any more appropriate (from an international perspective) than doing so to Americans... even if some Americans like it more. If that's the way the game is, then it doesn't deserve respect. At the end of the day though, that's what people expect from an FPS - the convention is that you are the hero and therefore can do what is normally impossible. That's why I think that maybe though this war setting is fertile for games in general, it would really work better in an RTS, since a single unit isn't required to do most of the heavy lifting in that way.
It's a risky venture but there are only so many wars that can be covered from modern times that involve Americans. More importantly, the profile of Frank Barnes sounds very interesting. It would suggest that this Call of Duty game has a chance to make a statement about the folly of fighting guerrilla warfare tactics with conventional, WW2-style ideas.
Not that games in that series are known (by any actual writers) for their intriguing themes or well-written plot. However, any game with this setting has a genuine enough potential to teach an unwilling lot something about the war, even if it's just how futile the whole conflict was for the invading forces.
I'll be happy with this setting, as long as there are no historical mistakes... If the Americans end up winning the war and this is hand-waved as a parallel universe or something like that, it will ruin the whole thing for me and probably for anyone who has the contextual knowledge to be specially interested in a game with this setting.
That is absolute nonsense. Very few single people have ever killed hundreds on a battlefield, except anecdotally and that kind of military story is subject to a great amount of bias and Chinese whispering, especially by patriotic soldiers who want to beef up the image of their forces. It would make sense for neither side.Hardcore_gamer said:
I also disagree that Americans "butchered" Vietcong forces in the sense that you say it. It's just worded here in such a one-sided manner. As hard as it may be to hear, the Americans lost the war because, however many sacrifices the Vietcong might have made (and I agree that there were many, it's all a part of the guerrilla style of warfare), Vietnam was their country and there was a relatively endless supply of new recruits who were furious at America's intrusion and believed that removing said invaders would lead to a better state. It's much like Iraq in that way, really, and both sides were just as deluded into believing what they were doing was right. That is, until many of them saw what was really going on.
Which brings me to my next question: since this is a war game, where is all of the rape of civilian women? Sorry, but that's just integral to all warfare. It wouldn't make sense without it. Wouldn't be realistic enough. To keep that out would be grossly "ahistorical", wouldn't you say?
Clearly, there are some things that are just inappropriate however you implement them. Butchering thousands of Vietcong, much like displaying the rape of civilians, isn't any more appropriate (from an international perspective) than doing so to Americans... even if some Americans like it more. If that's the way the game is, then it doesn't deserve respect. At the end of the day though, that's what people expect from an FPS - the convention is that you are the hero and therefore can do what is normally impossible. That's why I think that maybe though this war setting is fertile for games in general, it would really work better in an RTS, since a single unit isn't required to do most of the heavy lifting in that way.
This would add much to the concept, but it would be a risky route. If a Western-side Vietnam veteran sees it, imagine the controversy... though said controversy may just increase the game sales anyway.Mortagog said:
I'm pretty sure it wont be written as "We won the War" the way the World War II ones were made. You can probably expect some sort of Bittersweet ending, kind of how the end of the Pacific Campaign in WaW was handled.
Some folks are born made to wave the flag,Blindswordmaster said:
Ooh, they're red, white and blue.
And when the band plays "Hail to the chief",
Ooh, they point the cannon at you, Lord,
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no senator's son, son.
It ain't me, it ain't me; I ain't no fortunate one, no,
and we can't have a Viet Nam era game without a UH-1.