New Homefront Dev Diary Talks "Massacre Fatigue"

[felixader]

"I think it's also valid to consider whether or not gamers want it inflicted upon them in the first place."

Yes, yes that's what i want.

To be exact that is what i am actually WAITING for since FOREVER to be added to a shooter.

I don't even know why this question is asked on a side where the upbringing of games including or ESPECIALLY including, shooters is summoned for again and again.

Bit of a personality confusion?

 

[Bobbovski]

It sounds really awesome when they told about they were going to make the enemy/conflict more human and all that. But I have a feeling they won't be able to pull it off...

 

[Baresark]

I can't wait for this game. The talent behind it is amazing, and it looks like it's going to be pretty damn good. I experienced this "massacre fatigue" in Blops. I quit playing it after that. Made me not want to buy the game, so I didn't. There was just and endless torrent of enemies in Vietnam, and I just shut the game off and didn't even remotely give a damn about ever going back. The multiplayer is the same. Kill streaks and explosions is all that seems to count in a game like that. I more enjoy games like L4D because of the cooperative nature of the game and there is an actual felt consequence when you lose a team mate.

OT: There is definitely a market for a game that can make you care about people who get shot up. Then maybe we can end this useless debate over violent video games. I am reminded of the death of Ghost in Modern Warfare 2. Not just an anonymous team mate, but someone who actually mattered to you, and not just because he wore a fun face mask.

Koreans? Really? the norks barely would have enough manpower to take over Hawaii, let alone any major portion of America. Clearly they plan on trying to sell this in China at some point.

Look at the first dev. diary. One of the guys mentions that N. Korea has the fourth largest standing army in the world. I'll admit I didn't look it up to see if that's true or just for their story, but that sounds like a sufficient force to start takeing over countries with their focus on their economy.

Um, you do realize that a very, very large percentage(well over a quarter) of that force is considered a regime protection force and therefore cannot leave the country because of fear of rebellion? That and I'm curious as to how they dealt with the boomer boats. The instant Koreans hit American territory with an invasion force any remaining boomers, which would be completely unaffected by the EMP, would turn North Korea into a glass parking lot.

A standing army so large is also almost completely irrelevant. North Korea doesn't have the resources necessary for the tasks the game puts forward as the threat, nor the enconomy necessary to run a war. The reason why North Korean's aren't allowed to leave is because they would in fact never go back. I love the premise of how South Korea joins North Korea, when the reality is, the reverse is the only likely outcome if the were to happen at all. The truth is, S. Korea, Japan, and the US do not want a unified Korea. The most important of the three mentioned being SOUTH KOREA.

LoL, I love these flights of fancy, and I'm looking forward to the game because the story telling and story elements are shaping up to be amazing.

 

[GWarface]

*sigh*
I admit this looks fun, but im just tired of these american games... Its always the same...

 

[teknoarcanist]

This sounds like EA's "Freedom Fighters", a surprisingly excellent and obscure old PC shooter. Killing mattered in that, too: ammo was scarce, and the second you fired a shot your ass got handed to you by twenty hidden snipers. Lots of sneaking around fuel depots in the dark, wrenching Russians in the back of the head. Did I mention your character used to be a plumber?

FUCK that game was good. Might have to dig that out now.

 

[Oilerfan92]

*sigh*
I admit this looks fun, but im just tired of these american games... Its always the same...

Well, in Tom Clanceys End War book I think Edmonton (my city) gets invaded by Russia and we have to hold them off at the river that runds through the city. So we have that.

But I'm really excited for this game. When I first heard that the idea was pretty much Red Dawn with a but better organized American side (I'm assuming. It looks atleast a bit better than some teens rung around). But as it's gone along I've gotten more excited.

With this specific discussion, I'm glad there atleast trying to keep it away from senseless bloodbath like COD (fun too) and more sensible. Even if it isn't perfectly done, I feel that it'll still be easy to see enough.

I'm excited.

 

[Tdc2182]

Very impressive, looks good.

I tell you what, in CoD4 nothing got to my heart closer than that NPC American soldier who was gunned down that never said a word. I kid you not.

Thats gonna be an emotional part of the game for me.

They I do hope they tighten up the graphics.

 

[GWarface]

*sigh*
I admit this looks fun, but im just tired of these american games... Its always the same...

Well, in Tom Clanceys End War book I think Edmonton (my city) gets invaded by Russia and we have to hold them off at the river that runds through the city. So we have that.

Still, 80% of shooters is centered around America being awesome and everyone else is being the bad guys... And fun enough, its never the other way around...
I remember another thread where i wrote about this and was heavily flamed for saying that i wanted to play a game where you invade America for a change.. Like Homefront, but from the Korean side..

 

[The Random One]

Man, I want to take this game seriously. I really do. But they sound like an Onion News Network special. Only a lot more subtle.

Here's the lowdown of that video As I See It:

'We want to give the player a sense of being alone, of being a part of a group of untrained people struggling for survival against highly trained soldier. Your group is composed of an ex cop, a wild card shooter extraordinary, a survivalist, a ninja, a cyborg, and Batman.'

'The player will feel alone and will have no support. These other characters will show up and offer their support in a variety of ways.'

'Support characters are untrained and can't shoot very well, so we didn't bother to program quality AI.'

'We want players to feel like, this is a place I could have grown up in, this is a place that feels familiar. It is therefore a good thing that the barbarian wastelands outside of America have not yet developed the electricity necessary to run video games.'

'Every death caused by the player is supposed to be poignant, to have weight attached to it. That's why our soldiers are dressed in faceless, identical robot suits. We figured that since players remorselessly kill vividly designed civilians in GTA games they are actually from Bizarro world and will feel bad about killing the Korean combine.'

'It definitively sucks to be a civilian in a small country besieged by a vastly superior army that does not understand your culture. We made this game thinking the US would obviously be the small besieged country if such an outlandish situation were to happen in real life.'

'We tricked brand names into thinking they would be beacons of hope for life in America! It's kind of awesome.'

 

[Oilerfan92]

*sigh*
I admit this looks fun, but im just tired of these american games... Its always the same...

Well, in Tom Clanceys End War book I think Edmonton (my city) gets invaded by Russia and we have to hold them off at the river that runds through the city. So we have that.

Still, 80% of shooters is centered around America being awesome and everyone else is being the bad guys... And fun enough, its never the other way around...
I remember another thread where i wrote about this and was heavily flamed for saying that i wanted to play a game where you invade America for a change.. Like Homefront, but from the Korean side..

I definitely see your point. I'm Canadian, so we barely get any screen time. We had a roll in COD 3, but A) We were still "British" then B) It offered nothing to the game (because of point A, only being two forgettable missions, and just being nothing special).

I guess it's because America just seems to be a more... Aggressive attitude towards war. Here in Canada many people arnt really that way. Not trying to say Americans are blood-lustful. And us Canadians are willing to fight. But its just a general summary.

Also, I don't really care for nationality of characters. Either I put myself as the character (in cases where it's a silent protagonist. Like COD) or if it's a more established character (like Red Dead Redemption) as a guardian like character that has to keep that one person safe.

 

[DannibalG36]

Well, I'm definitely pre-ordering. I'm genuinely hoping to be pleasantly surprised with Homefront (Metro 2033 style surprise).

 

[GWarface]

*sigh*
I admit this looks fun, but im just tired of these american games... Its always the same...

Well, in Tom Clanceys End War book I think Edmonton (my city) gets invaded by Russia and we have to hold them off at the river that runds through the city. So we have that.

Still, 80% of shooters is centered around America being awesome and everyone else is being the bad guys... And fun enough, its never the other way around...
I remember another thread where i wrote about this and was heavily flamed for saying that i wanted to play a game where you invade America for a change.. Like Homefront, but from the Korean side..

I definitely see your point. I'm Canadian, so we barely get any screen time. We had a roll in COD 3, but A) We were still "British" then B) It offered nothing to the game (because of point A, only being two forgettable missions, and just being nothing special).

I guess it's because America just seems to be a more... Aggressive attitude towards war. Here in Canada many people arnt really that way. Not trying to say Americans are blood-lustful. And us Canadians are willing to fight. But its just a general summary.

Also, I don't really care for nationality of characters. Either I put myself as the character (in cases where it's a silent protagonist. Like COD) or if it's a more established character (like Red Dead Redemption) as a guardian like character that has to keep that one person safe.

Yeah your propably right about that..
I really dont care about nationality of characters either, its just hard not to be annoyed when you get american patriotism showed down your throat all the time when you dont really give a fuck about america... And its not just in games, but movies and tv shows as well...
Its hard to avoid since they basicly run the entertainment business here in the western world...

 

[IBlackKiteI]

Epic snip

Agreed with the whole 'massacre fatigue' and propaganda thing, but I don't see how some sort of pro-war game could be good to anyone.

War sucks and no games really try to properly convey that, in the this game the dev's are at least considering showing death as much more substantial than just shooting a bunch of guys and blowing up a base, which is more than you could say for most games.

 

[Therumancer]

Epic snip

Agreed with the whole 'massacre fatigue' and propaganda thing, but I don't see how some sort of pro-war game could be good to anyone.

War sucks and no games really try to properly convey that, in the this game the dev's are at least considering showing death as much more substantial than just shooting a bunch of guys and blowing up a base, which is more than you could say for most games.

Well, war does suck for a lot of people. The problem is that I think in the US we get a little too fixated on the negative side of war, and with the victims, than we do with the gains that can be made from war, or the glory involved in fighting and dominance. As a result I don't believe the US is as aggressive as it really needs to be for it's own good, and our engagement doctrine has suffered.

Simply put, if your so concerned with the consequences for the guys on the receiving end that you can't fight properly and really get the job done, you have problems. Heck, right now in the US in paticular there is a lot of discussion over that that job is on a fundemental level.

I believe a healthy society that wants to remain dominant and at the top of it's game, has to find a balance in it's attitudes between the glory of war, and empathy with the potential consequences. Right now we are far too focused on the latter, as you can see by the anti-war and peace at any price sentiment, as well as people not wanting to do the nessicary things at times (or even support them) because the cost is seen as being too high.

To put things into perspective, look at the attitude of warriors like Conan in expressing "what is best in life" in the first Arnie movie. Not to mention the attitudes held by vikings, or even Klingons in Star Trek. Such things exist on the fringes of mainstream fiction, but rarely are those kinds of attitudes explored, made the focus of a story, and cast in a postive light. Aggression and violence always being portrayed as something to overcome, when really it's a big part of our nature.

The few examples you see of any kind of "glory through war" attitude tend to be in a greatly detached context like "Warhammer 40k", where the protaganists are presented as villains or anti-heroes, justified only by the prescence of worse villains, with the situations being so over the top that it's impossible to take anything meaningful away from it.

Games like "Modern Warfare" pretty much sat down and made the same kind of statement that "Homefront" seems to be striving for with the whole "Nukez R Bad" message among other things. I think it's about time where games set in similar settings put a bit less of a focus on trying to be empathic, and more on what dominance and glory can bring to victorious soldiers and warriors and their society.

It's a balancing act, and right now I simply feel that we need to see things go in the extreme other direction just to get things towards the middle where they belong. What's more, I admit that all justifications aside, I am tired of seeing game developers present the same basic things again and again and try and present them as being profound when we've seen it all before and pretty bloody recently.

We might very well have to agree to disagree, this is just my opinion after all.

 

[IBlackKiteI]

Snip

But the current war on terror is unlike any war fought by the US before.

There is no clear front line or even combatants, you can't just go in and say "That's the enemy, fuck 'em up."
Its a complete mess which is why it is so hated.

Anyways, what I mean is some sort of game showing the prosperity that war brings to the victor would not be suitable in this time period.
Theres no more of this love of country or belief that your countries cause is just like decades ago.
I think to have a chance at showing war in a somewhat positive way you would need to focus on a past conflict, probably WWI.
Of course the war was disastrous, but entire populations were bullshitted into the belief that they were in the right no matter what.
Therefore it could disregard the brutality of war and focus on the prosperity brought to the victors in a sort of 'Ignorance is bliss' kind of way.

 

[duchaked]

I can honestly say that I really, really, really like what they are trying to do with this game...

but can they pull it off? their track record doesn't say much but we'll see what they have to show soon

 

[Fr]anc[is]

I can kind of see where they are coming from. But mass slaughter will always be fun. If they try to hard the juvenile Peter Griffin laugh I sometimes do when I kill a dude will be that much more fun.