Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

America's Army 3.0 "May Return" To Linux

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by deanjo View Post
    Which is exactly my point. As with any game that places you in a situation where real-life situations exist your always going to have differing point of views. The only real exception to this would be to set the game in a complete fantasy setting but even then you would have moral objectors saying screaming that it's a perfect example as to why society is not ready if the day ever comes to interact with a new alien race. There is two sides to every conflict and each side will glorify it's own POV. Neither of them really being more correct then the other.
    Well, people have a beef with it (me included), because the whole point of the game is to be a propaganda recruiting tool for the us army, none other, of course, you can ignore that and play away, but it still was made with taxpayer money as a publicity stunt for the military. And as a game, its not a very good or realistic military sim either. ArmA and its upcoming sequel are much better at that.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by xav1r View Post
      Well, people have a beef with it (me included), because the whole point of the game is to be a propaganda recruiting tool for the us army, none other, of course, you can ignore that and play away, but it still was made with taxpayer money as a publicity stunt for the military. And as a game, its not a very good or realistic military sim either. ArmA and its upcoming sequel are much better at that.
      Sure, but it doesn't even try to hide the fact of who it's from. Propaganda comes in all sorts of shapes and sizes from tv shows, advertisements, etc. Why should games carry any more "moral fibre" then the millions of other ways that are utilized as well. One could also argue that recruiting is great all one has to do is look at the great scientific and product achievements that have benefited people well outside of the military. Just think of how behind technology and mankind would be without those contributions. You may have moral objections to it but those same organizations are responsible for a large part of the lifestyle you enjoy now.

      I'd highly doubt we would even be able to have this discussion if it wasn't for people that were recruited into the military.
      Last edited by deanjo; 01-07-2009, 07:31 PM.

      Comment


      • #33
        In the end it's still propaganda... selling ami-army as the next best thing since sliced bread and that I simply consider questionable. If you are not based on a real world army or war you can do what they try at all costs to not happen: that in war there exists no winner... nobody is glorious. They try to sell military as the solution and no matter if propaganda or not this is troublesome.

        Comment


        • #34
          All products are propaganda. They all exist to profit someones pocket or ideals. FOSS is pure propaganda as are all of it's organizations with it's licenses. How you feel about what they are trying to sell you is your own opinion and it's up to the individual to balance their own pro's and con's of what they are trying to sell you. At least AA is up front about it which is more the 99.9% of what others do.
          Last edited by deanjo; 01-07-2009, 08:51 PM.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by deanjo View Post
            Sure, but it doesn't even try to hide the fact of who it's from. Propaganda comes in all sorts of shapes and sizes from tv shows, advertisements, etc. Why should games carry any more "moral fibre" then the millions of other ways that are utilized as well. One could also argue that recruiting is great all one has to do is look at the great scientific and product achievements that have benefited people well outside of the military. Just think of how behind technology and mankind would be without those contributions. You may have moral objections to it but those same organizations are responsible for a large part of the lifestyle you enjoy now.

            I'd highly doubt we would even be able to have this discussion if it wasn't for people that were recruited into the military.
            Nobody is arguing whether everything is propaganda, which probably is. Games arent special nor have any special fiber, i just choose not to consider them. Like the army, some special interest group like the kkk, terrorist organizations, etc can come up with their own propaganda games, and in fact, i think they have actually, i wouldnt play their games either.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by deanjo View Post
              All products are propaganda. They all exist to profit someones pocket or ideals. FOSS is pure propaganda as are all of it's organizations with it's licenses. How you feel about what they are trying to sell you is your own opinion and it's up to the individual to balance their own pro's and con's of what they are trying to sell you. At least AA is up front about it which is more the 99.9% of what others do.
              The fact that theyre upfront about it being "join the army" propaganda doesnt make it better. But its true, propaganda is everywhere. FOSS' propaganda just doesnt benefit someone in particular directly, well, maybe it gives richard stallman a sense of accomplishment but nothing more. It doesnt seek a political, economic, or military gain.

              But if people want to play that game, go ahead, it's all fair. I just wont play it. I've heard from many that do not care at all about the us army, and play AA just because of the fun of the game.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by xav1r View Post
                FOSS' propaganda just doesnt benefit someone in particular directly, well, maybe it gives richard stallman a sense of accomplishment but nothing more. It doesnt seek a political.
                Excuse me? Even Richard Stallman admits it's all about politics.

                http://linux.sys-con.com/node/34189

                http://www.spinwatch.org.uk/latest-n...s-eu-diplomats

                I'm sorry but politics is alive and well in the FOSS community. Stallman has done many interviews on the politics of free software. The very idea of FOSS is political in itself. Stallman has never cowered mixing open development with politics, you can look at the DMCA act for example.

                There are plenty more examples of the FSF getting mixed in with politics. What do you think the whole "free as in speech" has it's roots in? The free software movement is all about giving individuals certian rights. That my friend is a political issue.

                As far as the monetary concern goes, the FSF has no issue with having to pay for software. To quote right from the GNU definition of free software:
                Free software is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of free as in free speech, not as in free beer.
                You should also take a look at the suit brought against Cisco and see who the benefactor of any ruled damages. It isn't the software developers, it's the FSF who is asking for all profits made from license violations. Why wasn't it filed as a class action suit?
                Last edited by deanjo; 01-08-2009, 12:36 AM.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                  Excuse me? Even Richard Stallman admits it's all about politics.

                  http://linux.sys-con.com/node/34189

                  http://www.spinwatch.org.uk/latest-n...s-eu-diplomats

                  I'm sorry but politics is alive and well in the FOSS community. Stallman has done many interviews on the politics of free software. The very idea of FOSS is political in itself. Stallman has never cowered mixing open development with politics, you can look at the DMCA act for example.

                  There are plenty more examples of the FSF getting mixed in with politics. What do you think the whole "free as in speech" has it's roots in? The free software movement is all about giving individuals certian rights. That my friend is a political issue.

                  As far as the monetary concern goes, the FSF has no issue with having to pay for software. To quote right from the GNU definition of free software:
                  You should also take a look at the suit brought against Cisco and see who the benefactor of any ruled damages. It isn't the software developers, it's the FSF who is asking for all profits made from license violations. Why wasn't it filed as a class action suit?
                  I know it is about politics. That has nothing to do with this. The mostly grassroots nature of FOSS is political too, as in it's a vehicle for expressing and divulging certain principles and values. The difference is, it doesnt have a centralized entity benefiting from it all, it's (at least in theory) supposed to benefit everyone. It's different from a very specific entity, which happens to be a us governent entity, which falsely disguises this recruitment tool as a "fun entertaining game". They sell the false idea that if you join the army, you will get to play the "real, more cooler than this" thing. "Hey kids, you liked this game? Wanna see the real stuff? Enlist!".
                  It's akin to mcdonalds donating free bigmacs to many schools, not out of generosity, but to entice them to get them addicted to their fast food, or microsoft "tolerating" piracy, because it creates (in their own words) a habit of using their products. In all cases, it's not politics, it's just deceiving, false advertising, that only chases a selfish beneficial end.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Anybody here besides me ever been in the Army, much less any of the other branches? Anybody here besides me currently in the Sand Box doing what is necessary?

                    As far as America's Army being a recruiting tool, so be it. The Marines did the same thing years ago with mods to Doom. Is the real Army like it is in the game? No. Do I wish they would put as much effort into AFN as they did America's Army? Sure do.

                    As far as your morals go, fine, do what you have to do. Don't play the darn game. If you like the game and don't plan on joining up, so what? Go for it. Have fun.

                    If the game comes to Linux, even better. That tells me there might be a chance the computer systems I work on for admin work might be able to have Linux installed on them. For me, that is a good thing.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Dragonlord View Post
                      In the end it's still propaganda... selling ami-army as the next best thing since sliced bread and that I simply consider questionable. If you are not based on a real world army or war you can do what they try at all costs to not happen: that in war there exists no winner... nobody is glorious. They try to sell military as the solution and no matter if propaganda or not this is troublesome.
                      War sucking is not a reason not to have an army. Countries that haven't been in a war in centuries have an army. Just in case. So how do you get people in it? Do you force them to serve, or ask (with propaganda or whatever)? Asking people to serve, in case, is not the same as being pro war or saying war is neato. It's just something that happens once in a while and you'd better not be defenseless if it comes your way.

                      And I'll always hold that asking for people to volunteer to be ready for such a contingency is superior to forcing people to do it, and it doesn't bother me.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by MamiyaOtaru View Post
                        War sucking is not a reason not to have an army. Countries that haven't been in a war in centuries have an army. Just in case. So how do you get people in it? Do you force them to serve, or ask (with propaganda or whatever)? Asking people to serve, in case, is not the same as being pro war or saying war is neato. It's just something that happens once in a while and you'd better not be defenseless if it comes your way.

                        And I'll always hold that asking for people to volunteer to be ready for such a contingency is superior to forcing people to do it, and it doesn't bother me.
                        You have no idea where I come from:

                        militia type army: serving is a must for men ( unless you know how to cheat your way out of it... I didn't... I stood my man )

                        So don't brush me the wrong way about what is propaganda as I can compare propaganda with forced service. At last in our country you know exactly what you get into but making misguided propaganda to acclaim innocent ( and naive ) citizens is a moral crime, period!

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X