EA Boss Was "Surprised" By Medal of Honor Uproar

Andy Chalk

One Flag, One Fleet, One Cat
Nov 12, 2002
45,698
1
0
EA Boss Was "Surprised" By Medal of Honor Uproar


EA boss John Riccitiello claims he was "surprised" by the uproar over Medal of Honor [http://www.amazon.com/Medal-Honor-Limited-Pc/dp/B002ZJPYHS/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=videogames&qid=1284651688&sr=8-3], saying that nobody even noticed the presence of the Taliban until a journalist decided to take advantage of a grieving mother to stir up some easy controversy over the game.

We all know what happened when word got out that the Taliban would feature as a playable faction in the multiplayer portion of EA's Medal of Honor reboot. People got excited, and not in the good way. Arms went up, harsh words were spoken, bans were called for; it was enough to bring Jack Thompson himself [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/103328-Jack-Thompson-Vows-to-Stop-Medal-of-Honor] back for another kick at the videogame cat. But there was one man who apparently saw none of this coming: Riccitiello.

"The controversy... kind of caught me by surprise," the Electronic Arts [http://www.ea.com] CEO said at the Bank of America Merrill Lynch Media, Communications and Entertainment Conference yesterday. "No-one noticed" that the Taliban was a multiplayer faction, he added, "until a journalist decided to put the game box in front of a mom who'd lost her son in Afghanistan to create some controversy."

"I think that says more about the newspapers than it does the game industry," he said. "Having said that, we're incredibly sensitive to the challenges that a non-gamer who doesn't really understand what I've just described might imagine when a journalist who also doesn't understand a game describes it to her. It tends to excite a little bit of angst."

Nonetheless, Riccitiello said he's "incredibly proud" of the game, although he reiterated an earlier admission that Medal of Honor Call of Duty: Black Ops [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/102573-EA-We-Wont-Beat-Halo-and-Call-of-Duty-in-2011] this year. Next year, however, is another matter. "It's 2011 that we've always felt we can have a reasonable shot at recapturing the leadership," he said. "And from when we said that till 2011 that now seems possible."

Medal of Honor comes out on October 12 for the PC, Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3.

Source: GamesIndustry [http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2010-09-16-riccitiello-moh-outrage-says-more-about-newspapers-than-it-does-the-game-industry]


Permalink
 

rockyoumonkeys

New member
Aug 31, 2010
1,527
0
0
What a liar. That crap was put in there deliberately to cause exactly this kind of uproar, considering what it did for Modern Warfare 2.
 

SultanP

New member
Mar 15, 2009
985
0
0
rockyoumonkeys said:
What a liar. That crap was put in there deliberately to cause exactly this kind of uproar, considering what it did for Modern Warfare 2.
Playing as the Taliban on one side in the multiplayer is nothing like the stuff from MW2. And frankly putting it in for controversy seems highly unlikely because people actually being upset over it is so completely ridiculous, that anticipating it wouldn't have made any sense.
 

2xDouble

New member
Mar 15, 2010
2,310
0
0
Is this PR spin? or is it a genuine FU to the news media and a designer finally standing up for their work? You decide. I, for one, applaud at least the effort in appearing to defend oneself. Good for you, EA.

To everyone else (especially those who haven't seen it yet), watch this:You may recognize the makers.
 

Assassin Xaero

New member
Jul 23, 2008
5,392
0
0
I can kinda understand why he'd be surprised. I haven't heard of anyone causing an uproar over the generic terrorist groups and the military conflicts in Middle-Eastern-stan that were in games such as Call of Duty 4, but when you actually give them a name such as "Taliban" it is horrible and wrong? That is like setting a game in 1942 with a fascist group led by an insane dictator that is taking over a continent and killing off an entire group of people, but without using the names Nazi, Jew, Europe, and it being completely different from WWII and ok.
 

GiantRedButton

Senior Member
Mar 30, 2009
599
0
21
Yeah was kinda weird that people got upset by multiplayer only skins.
But someone will always fell offended nowadays which is exactly why it shouldn't mean anything anymore.
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
In before all the: "No you weren't - it's just free advertising!" comments.

I was surprised too, if I'm honest.

rockyoumonkeys said:
What a liar. That crap was put in there deliberately to cause exactly this kind of uproar, considering what it did for Modern Warfare 2.
Are you seriously saying that MW2 wouldn't have sold so well if not for some stupid little controversy?
 

rockyoumonkeys

New member
Aug 31, 2010
1,527
0
0
Woodsey said:
Are you seriously saying that MW2 wouldn't have sold so well if not for some stupid little controversy?
Yes. It still would have sold extremely well, but it absolutely gained a boost from the controversy.
 

Sigmund Av Volsung

Hella noided
Dec 11, 2009
2,999
0
0
Oh oh, I know, how about they just do what MW2 did and skip the really controversial missions!
But seriously, that mission MW2 has you killing HUNDREDS of innocent russians and this game just has you play multiplayer with about 5 a side per match.

And what about the part of black ops where you shoot innocent vietnamese people in A FUCKING HELICOPTER. SERIOUSLY, how DOES the dev team of COD get away with this shit when Medal of Honor doesn't?
 

kaiser_what

New member
Feb 19, 2009
138
0
0
You know what they say, there is no such thing as a bad publicity. GTA 3 sold well because of these sort of things.
 
May 28, 2009
3,698
0
0
A multiplayer faction does not warrant such controversy.

Imagine if Infinity Ward had named the middle eastern forces in the multiplayer anything other than "OpFor". Wow, what a difference, I want to be angry now!

This is why I continually dislike mainstream journalists. Anything for a scoop.
 
May 25, 2010
610
0
0
rockyoumonkeys said:
What a liar. That crap was put in there deliberately to cause exactly this kind of uproar, considering what it did for Modern Warfare 2.
Yeah but it was beneficial for Modern Warfare 2. The uproar this time around is so big that it'll be bad for them.
 

L4hlborg

New member
Jul 11, 2009
1,050
0
0
rockyoumonkeys said:
What a liar. That crap was put in there deliberately to cause exactly this kind of uproar, considering what it did for Modern Warfare 2.
I don't really know... I think it's only logical that if you are making a shooter set in the real world, you'd want the enemy to be real too. And I'd call making taliban a multiplayer faction a little more subtle than making a mission where you gun down a ridiculous ammount of civilians-
 

WelshDanny

New member
May 10, 2010
319
0
0
It is quite strange, after all, we've been able to play as terrorists in Counter-Strike for over a decade. Have the likes of Fox, and other media outlets been saying that CS is an outrage for all that time?

Answer: No.
 

The Bandit

New member
Feb 5, 2008
967
0
0
rockyoumonkeys said:
What a liar. That crap was put in there deliberately to cause exactly this kind of uproar, considering what it did for Modern Warfare 2.
If he did do that, why lie at all? Sure, he wouldn't come out saying "yes, I just wanted some press" but he certainly wouldn't deny it either. He's telling the truth.
 

rockyoumonkeys

New member
Aug 31, 2010
1,527
0
0
GeneticallyModifiedDucks said:
rockyoumonkeys said:
What a liar. That crap was put in there deliberately to cause exactly this kind of uproar, considering what it did for Modern Warfare 2.
Yeah but it was beneficial for Modern Warfare 2. The uproar this time around is so big that it'll be bad for them.
No, it won't. The uproar was exactly the same. It was very negative for MW2 at the time, but as is well known, even bad publicity is good publicity. It was ultimately beneficial for MW2, just like it'll ultimately be beneficial for MoH. See also: Grand Theft Auto.
 

rockyoumonkeys

New member
Aug 31, 2010
1,527
0
0
The Bandit said:
rockyoumonkeys said:
What a liar. That crap was put in there deliberately to cause exactly this kind of uproar, considering what it did for Modern Warfare 2.
If he did do that, why lie at all? Sure, he wouldn't come out saying "yes, I just wanted some press" but he certainly wouldn't deny it either. He's telling the truth.
If he's telling the truth, he's an idiot who has no business running EA.
 

lemby117

New member
Apr 16, 2009
283
0
0
I see alot of people saying "there are tonnes of WWII games where you play as nazi's" yeah but most people are fine with that because it happend 65 years ago. people are still dying in afgahnistan, it's not made to be a middle finger to servicemen but it is bad taste.