On Sunday, Dr Fox said that it was "shocking that someone would think it acceptable to recreate the acts of the Taliban against British soldiers".
"At the hands of the Taliban, children have lost fathers and wives have lost husbands," he said.
"It's hard to believe any citizen of our country would wish to buy such a thoroughly un-British game. I would urge retailers to show their support for our armed forces and ban this tasteless product."
An Electronic Arts spokesman said the game "does not allow players to kill British soldiers".
"No British troops feature in the game," he said.
Which is more offensive, allowing players to shoot British troops, or taking such an American-centric view of the situation that you didn't bother putting the British there to begin with? :)
Posts
3 comments:
Would anyone even comment if it was a movie about the war?
Hard to say really. Some people would raise a fuss if a movie was "too sympathetic" to "terrorists" but that would depend on just how sympathetic the presentation was.
I guess the argument is that by putting the player in the shoes of the "enemy" they're automatically promoting them more than just their existence as characters in a war game would be. Empathising with the other side does somewhat encourage people to see them as people and not as faceless warmachines, after all... (But then, I'm enough of a pacifist to think it's a good thing to remember that the other side is human, even when you DO need to fight them.)
funny blog, i got something to whine about for ya. how bout how so many of the 360 games that are great multiplayers only multi on-line! what a rip off. lol
Post a Comment