Why Russia?
- Thread starter Spartan1175
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Well it is true; Russia is a force to be reckoned with along with Middle Eastern countries, hence why both of them are shown as the antagonists in these games. Both have control of oil supplies and both have thrown some serious punches at America.JourneyThroughHell said:
See argument above - few nations have the military power to seriously go against America on their own. Considering Chinese censorship standards, they'd likely ban the game on sight if Chinese were the enemy (and considering they're N. Korea's ally, there's another reason for not having NK), so as it is now, it's either going after Russia or saying something even stupider like "European Union has banded together to attack the US".AwesomePeanutz said:
Don't get me wrong, I love the Russkies, but they just make sense as a war opponent to America. Take it as a compliment, you're the only ones who could single-handedly kick their arses
Actually, you lost that title to the Chinese, they're the "crazy communist people" now (and hell, I'm not sure if I'd even be against the stereotype myself in general >.< ). You saw the way MW2 provoked a war out of you, only by killing a pile of civilians (which is funny cause I don't think Russians are the same as Americans in that regard that they'd start a war over a terrorist incident - I'd say that's more projecting on the Yanks' part).Torrasque said:
It was before Reagan even. Senator McCarthy was the source of the Red Scare and Anti-Communist hysteria. Others just exacerbated it over the course of the Cold War, Nixon and HUAC being some of them.shootthebandit said:
And that's a very Russian thing to do, by the way. Turn anything into a political discussion (or complaining, if politics is way too out of place).GoodApprentice said:
I guess because somehow we still respect Russia that has us on the edge since 1946 to 1989.
not saying that they are the perfect BAD guys though , i remember they also had their own "vietnam" in Afghanistan (Fyi that time the CIA supplied training to the Afghans, while the russians trained the Vietcong lol)
ahh history never ceases to amuse me...
you know wut, we need a new enemy why not make the second American civil war i doubt anyone would complain lol..
not saying that they are the perfect BAD guys though , i remember they also had their own "vietnam" in Afghanistan (Fyi that time the CIA supplied training to the Afghans, while the russians trained the Vietcong lol)
ahh history never ceases to amuse me...
you know wut, we need a new enemy why not make the second American civil war i doubt anyone would complain lol..
ok people make a point about the cold war, but you do realise that America and the USSR didnt fight eachother? they just fought other countries. So that actually makes less valid.
Buton the topic of Korea. the North Korean military isnt that outdated, it may not be as advanced as NATO but its till pretty good, and the 4th largest in the world with a standing army of over 1million and 800,000 in reserve as well as some of the most effective air and missle defences, so they would be a good target in these kinda things.
Buton the topic of Korea. the North Korean military isnt that outdated, it may not be as advanced as NATO but its till pretty good, and the 4th largest in the world with a standing army of over 1million and 800,000 in reserve as well as some of the most effective air and missle defences, so they would be a good target in these kinda things.
For some reason that reminded me of Reagan's Star Wars http://www.atomicarchive.com/History/coldwar/page20.shtmlAnAngryMoose said:
"Try it, my friends, is in real life, we used them to their own fried ass back. As we say - remove the American soldier from knapsack toilet paper and all - fighting capacity at zero.Lord_Gremlin said:
Learn nothing, I swear. We broke Napoleon, Hitler broke, it really is still interested?"
That's what I got from Google Translator.
OT: I just don't know. But I've been playing Sniper: Ghost Warrior, and there the enemies are Mexican.
But a lot of points of why they are still being used have come up in this thread. And none of them bear repeating.
I do agree with your initial point. I'm not saying America hasn't done any good (it has! Really!), it has just been a bit too arrogant and pompous what with believing that it was the leader of the free world during the Cold War regardless of the rampant racism. However, having said that during the Cold War America and Russia were both paranoid of one another because they both knew they could more-or-less destroy the world at the push of a button and up until recently, no other country had been on par with America, technologically. Also, America associated Russia (and Communism) with Stalin who allied with Hitler (albeit for his own ends) and committed horrid civil atrocities. As far as America was concerned, Russia's record of human rights was on par with Nazi Germany's and you had people like McCarthy, Reagan and Nixon blowing the threat posed by Russia at the time completely out of proportion. Although, yes it was unfair, and I'm not disagreeing with you.Lord_Gremlin said:
Who else should the enemy be? the concept of being attacked by the japanese and the germans have worn pretty thin over the years, and there's not exactly much else to shoot at, is there?
The french? Just mute the cries of "we surrender" and it'll be like a rail shooter.
The norwegian? (yeah, using them as an example out of national pride. Or something.) Last time the norwegians went to a war -if that was what it was, they never really decided if it was a corporate takeover, a war, a military action, or an act of peace negotiations- most of the soldiers were sent home due to lead poisoning. And that's not slang for getting shot, either. Good old, honest to ned flanders, chew on your pencil lead poisoning.
Maybe we should give new zealanders a chance to get shot in a virtual war game? Do they even have an army?
And the list goes on. Looks like we're stuck with russia for now; they might not be the best choice, but they're better than risking bad publicity by using some minority group from ooga-boogaland. And they have voice actors who manage to sound passable; that's a big plus over german, where everyone either speaks american, or sounds like they learned german from an american wartime sitcom.
The french? Just mute the cries of "we surrender" and it'll be like a rail shooter.
The norwegian? (yeah, using them as an example out of national pride. Or something.) Last time the norwegians went to a war -if that was what it was, they never really decided if it was a corporate takeover, a war, a military action, or an act of peace negotiations- most of the soldiers were sent home due to lead poisoning. And that's not slang for getting shot, either. Good old, honest to ned flanders, chew on your pencil lead poisoning.
Maybe we should give new zealanders a chance to get shot in a virtual war game? Do they even have an army?
And the list goes on. Looks like we're stuck with russia for now; they might not be the best choice, but they're better than risking bad publicity by using some minority group from ooga-boogaland. And they have voice actors who manage to sound passable; that's a big plus over german, where everyone either speaks american, or sounds like they learned german from an american wartime sitcom.
Theyre the only country (except China) that has the technology, soldiers or stupidity to possibly WANT to invade America.
Iran? Not enough soldiers.
N Korea? Same.
Britain? Struggled to get rid of America in the first place, we definitely dont want it again!
Iran? Not enough soldiers.
N Korea? Same.
Britain? Struggled to get rid of America in the first place, we definitely dont want it again!
Because for a LOT of Americans, communists pose the same threat as Zombies. that might sound rude but, Americans despise people who unquestioningly follow a cause that is different from their beliefs. so they think communists followed their govt like zombies, and zombies are always bad. of course the irony is that according to that theory, the Americans (who "willingly" sell their soul to Uncle Sam) are Hypocrites, but they don't see that, cause no one points that out to them. (btw, i'm not russian, i'm just an outside observer)
I suppose another factor is to make the game feel more grounded and concrete. Instead of using Plotdeviceistan, Russia sounds more convincing than saying "You are fighting OpFor, who we don't know the names of, nor their native country."
Although, it's getting a tad ridiculous. I suppose America just wants to wave it's Super Power cock about because it hasn't got a chance to show it's military superiority since the Cold War.
Although, it's getting a tad ridiculous. I suppose America just wants to wave it's Super Power cock about because it hasn't got a chance to show it's military superiority since the Cold War.
I wouldn't say that it would be a stupid move for Russia to oppose America. After all, between them and the Middle East they could cripple American industry by cutting off important oil supplies and Russia is just as technologically advanced as America, if not a tad behind.Baradiel said:
I doubt stroke victims can type like that. It is giving me epilepsy though... :|MrhalfAwake said:
Grargh
Honestly, I thikn Russians are used because they're one of the few 'evil' forces that could really conceivably threaten America.