EA removes Taliban from Medal of Honor for “the men and women serving in the military”

just seems like they are giving in to the extremists on our ‘side’

-facepalm-

That’s bullshit. I’m still buying the game, but if they had half the cojones before, they wouldn’t give a crap what it was called. The least they could do is call them Insurgents. That also doesn’t DIRECTLY state whom they are either. I guess the pressure just got to them.

Oh, way to cave, EA!

They should’ve just renamed them a bit, like racing games used to do back in the day before they had proper licensing.

“Yeah, these guys are the Tilabun. They’re nasty sorts.”

Well done EA.

Majority rules, in action.

Looks like they have been Talibanned haha terrible i know.

/ gets coat

lol @6

My cat is called ‘osama’ shall i kill it?

Wow, that sucks.
Well, i can understand why they would have done this. If the majority of the consumers (i believe mostly US residents) were not going to buy this game because of its inclusion of the Taliban then it was a smart business decision to remove them.

@6 LOL

So… in the end… they keep the Talibans in the game but they’ll just change their name ?

This is just ridiculous, it makes no difference !
It’s as if they would make a game that would imply the destruction of the twin towers and, after a violent backlash from victims’ families, just decide to keep everything but replace the name “World trade center” by “two buildings”

The only place the Taliban belong is in the cross hairs of a US Marine or Soldier.

Overall I think this is a good decision and should have been an easy change to make

@11, given the number of friendly fire incidents I was under the impression US troops were issued with weapons without any sort of sight.

I suppose that’s what happens when you contract out to the lowest bidder.

@12, find: “Taliban” Replace: “Anti-American Brigade if Doom!!!”

Seems like Jack Thompson’s fax hit them hard, whenever it landed…

@11 and 13
We dont need any of that.

Colour me conflicted.

On one hand I respected EA for sticking with their creative vision, but on the other I didn’t think it was very considerate to those few who would be genuinely affected.

@13 Gotta love a bit of couch potato wisdom for the guys in uniform.

Keep this thread clean, please.

I haven’t logged in for a while but I just had to for this! I can’t believe EA buckled under the pressure! Americans are so fucking hipocrite! They started this war, thanks to them their soldiers are dead. If anyone deserves to wear the bad guy hat is the Americans. And please don’t start with 9/11, their gov knew it was coming and didn’t do shit to stop it! So stop you bitching, if Americans died it was because of their own free will and this bad guy/good guys argument is just plain stupid. If the Taliban got banned from this game then the stupid ass americans deserve to get banned too. (of course then you would have no game, but it would be fair)

EA is Gay confirmed

Sounds like they have planned it from the beginning. No really, read the passage from “However … To Opposing Force” again and dont tell me, that its not heavy marketing speech. I call marketing hysteria just like the airportscene of MW2, so they make shure they got their attention around the globe. And press will write about that kind off stuff. Which eventually boils down to cewl sales, because every FPS-flick is now willing shoot those damn Forces aka Taliban.

@20
Great observation. Thats makes sense actually. Right on dude.

So… it seems everyone who has complained about the Taliban being in this game, would rather American (& European) soldiers shot by friendly fire.
^Well that’s untrue, they just don”t want the game all together, i think it’s stupid for EA to cater to the audience who i can bet will not buy it anyway.
OK, let’s remove the Nazi’s from WWI & WWII games, the Zombies from zombie shooters, the Helghast from Killzone, the Convenant from Halo, C’mon EA! you do not cave in & cater to the people who won’t support you regardless of weather you listen or not, you cater to the people willing to support you, don’t give into their stupid demands.
I in no way support the terrorist, nor the war itself, it’s pointless, no one will benefit from it, lives will be lost & families will be ruined & i blame their own governments-America shouldn’t be interfering in something that does not concern them & the other countries strict rules & restrictions force these extremists to power through intimidation & manipulation.
The fact that this is based on a current war has 0 impact on me, I may give the game a try but i have pretty low expectations & expect another generic CoD-like game

At least they actually are listening to the fan response! I f****** hate stubborn developers that no matter how bad a response they get from certain things in a game, they won’t change it, even if it’s the most simple change or addition in the world.

@20 Actually that wouldn’t be very efficient. People are bound to be running stories on the game having the taliban around release, so you’d at least wait for that.

Then you might hope for outrage, or somehow try to make it look like outrage is going on, and THEN you slam this story on people.

That would be maximizing effect. You’d get 2-3 times the stories out of that.

@22 The nazis are a historical entity. They aren’t killing people right now, whereas the taliban are probably killing people as we speak, and also look to be winning the war they’re fighting.

It’s about sensible distance.

Has anyone asked the Taliban what they think?

@25 Won’t someone please think of the taliban?!

Obvious trademark infringement.

@24, Regardless of whether or not it’s current or pass, many more people have been affected in one way or another because of the world wars, the Taliban should not be viewed any differently from the Nazis, sure different motives & what not, but they shall always be seen to the masses as the ‘bad guys’.
People have grown up & never knew their parents because of the world war, people will be grown up in 20 years time & never known their parents because of the Taliban, same story, different path.

@DSB hmm, good point, but how are they going to change the names, when the game is already released, with a download? Nevertheless the media is obviously already into this and seing the launch around the corner maybe thats enough to gather attention, bit by bit.

@18
The American Government is not the American people buddy. The American Government is also not the American soldiers.
American soldiers fight for the American people and not for the American Governemt. If the American Soliders chose not to become American Soldiers, the American Government would have drafted American Citizens to fight the war instead.

Please dont be so naive and short sighted.

@27 Those people don’t play videogames. My uncle was in Buchenwald KZ and he’s dead, my great grandmother was murdered in Norway, and I’m here playing Enemy Territory.

Thus, distance.

You can keep trying to compare present day terrorists to a long dead genocidal movement, but that doesn’t make them any less different.

Today people are coming home dead or maimed by taliban. I don’t see anyone coming home dead and maimed from the battle of Berlin.

20 years from now, no one will care about the taliban. Today, they do.

First, I had no interest in playing the Taliban. However, I don’t think this honors them, I think it dishonors them because it represents censorship and lack of freedom. They fight for freedom for all, not just those that share their belief systems. At least that is why I served.

What if somebody mods the PC version to have Taliban in it?
Would that satisfy those who wanted the game left as is?

Maybe they should include a name editor like they used to have in old football games.

@30, i understand what you’re saying, i just think it’s pretty weak of EA to cave in like that, though they should have known how controversial it was in the first place & just call them ‘The Terrorists’ or something like that from the absolute start, anyone with any interest in the game would have still had a look & it would have shut those damned critics up, i do feel sympathy for those who have lost family in the war, but let’s face it, it was their own choice to go there in the first place, fighting for your country was a lousy excuse for so many of these young men to die, they weren’t helping any body, possibly the locals, but they may have just made things worst, if the American government didn’t interfere with everything, it’s likely 9/11, among many other attacks would not have happened.

@34 I don’t disagree. Soldiers know the risks. It’s their own responsibility. But I don’t think it’s wrong to feel sorry for those who are destroyed by war.

Some of them end up as very broken people when they come home. I’ve talked to a few myself, and it seems to me like you haven’t met one of those guys.

No matter what they signed up for, or what they thought they were doing, nobody deserves to be broken like that. Most of those guys have no idea what combat is until it hits them.

Of course it’s EAs right to put taliban in their game, I’m not disputing that. I even respected them for being controversial. But it is also inconsiderate to those few damaged soldiers.

does tht mean the campaign has gone shorterrrrrrrrrrrrr

i cant believe ea gave into the vocal minority here, i am indeed quite disappointed in them now =(

@35, i have not personally met any veteran since Australia’s military role is generally quite small, but i do respect them & feel sympathy for those who have not came back the same, or at all & the families of those men but it angers me that these situations have started in the first place, how these extremists grow to power is disturbing on how much influence they have.

DSB ftw, well said

@39
Didnt know it was a contest LOL

“Blah, blah, blah, blah, we’re pussies.”

Seriously, what a let down.

You’re fighting in Afghanistan. You’re killing Taliban there, not “Opposing Forces”. That’s what i loved about this game, it’s authenticity.

I really hope that only the Multiplayer is effected by this. if i hear one Tier 1 soldier say “Look it’s the opposing forces.” I’ll not buy it.

Instead of looking at EA as being weak for changing the name, I think it was weak for them to use the name in the first place.

I think the reason that wwii settings work so well is that enough time has passed. I agree with DSB 100%. I think it is best for warsim to take a generic pov on this type of thing.

After giving this whole thing some thought I feel that EA is playing the media and playing the public. Remember the “hey we are controversial” story there PR guys talked to the media about a week or so back? And now this “we changed the name, want to be respectful” stuff. I think its all a scam to build brand awarness and create a buzz amoung potiental buyers.

As for 18, seek help.

hey can I sign a petition somewhere to have the taliban name back in the game? this is stupid! whoever asked the name to be removed is a joke of a human and can be in now way associated with the military. military personnel can not be that weak. psychologically I mean. whoever did that is not playing the game, I am, and I want it to be as realistic as possible. and now I’m being as serious as possible: If I could I would cancel my copy of the game because of this. too bad it’s been bought through steam. well, that will teach me.

@42 Thats what I meant. They knew the end from the begi… err wait! @43 dont play it then, moron. I think the point that DSB made, should make you think about your words, man.

@43 are you for real? fuck sake

@33 +1

@18 “Americans are so fucking hipocrite….If anyone deserves to wear the bad guy hat is the Americans.”

Please don’t generalize the whole country’s population over a very vocal minority. Ever seen a news report after a tornado decimates a trailer park over here? That should be a good enough example for you.

EA suckers, damn you!!! Who are you afraid of???? Even my 1yr old son has more courage than those bastards!!!!

HONOR

RESPECT

REVERANCE

GUFF

A play for the media attention? I suppose there’s a chance it is.
What’s going to be available, under the title of Medal of Honor, is a video game. Not a documentary, not some kind of vid blog, or anything similar – I suppose the thing that does suck about this, is that initially, they definitely adopted one position, and now, a short time before the game’s out, they’ve u-turned.

As I read what Goodrich put, I just find it a bit…”This is a voice that has earned the right to be listened to. It is a voice that we care deeply about.”

That’s ok. So you graciously gave up your right to tell the story the way that you intended. I’m not arguing with what is said, because I agree with what he wrote, but still, I find myself asking where a line is drawn, on that. (it’s their call, absolutely in this case, but)
Is it fine, like #10 suggested to portray an event similar to the 9/11 WTC attack, as long as you alter some of the details likely to cause distress? (Is this why Ubisoft’s I Am Alive has completely and utterly vanished from sight, for the reason it depicts potentially catastrophic, harrowing events and tasks the player to survive them – just what IS that thing about??)

This sort of precedent though, particularly now, I’m concerned could play very nicely in to the hands of those who would go in front of the American Supreme Court, and claim that video games should not be afforded protection under Freedom of Speech. (sale of video games to minors, retailers liability, etc, etc) Speech, here, can be seen to be so free, that people end up getting all of a fluster, at the mere use of a name in a story, so the makers waive their right to tell the game in the way they were going to, anyway. I’m not convinced that offence would be caused.
Now, the two factions should no longer be considered to be acceptable fodder, akin to a kid’s game of cops and robbers, because it suits their current position on the matter. Is that how it is?

This bit also rings of convenience, it’s a catch-all: “this franchise will never willfully disrespect, intentionally or otherwise, your memory and service.”

On this, I think that best established with a sincere, INFORMATIVE foreword/acknowledgement in the manual, personally, and reference in the credits.

On the one hand, EA make games, and they like to make money from games. On the other, the real-life operatives whose testimonies and combat stories we’re told were used as inspiration, and an understanding built from their time. But, the two mixed altogether, that’s when it becomes really messy.