Why WWII is more popular than Vietnam in video game context?

Thread.

I'm itching for Operation Flashpoint-scope Vietnam-based video game, or squad-based FPP at least. I wouldn't mind action strategy based in Vietnam too. But I guess it's all wishful thinking. On the other hand, I can't stand WWII setting any longer, especially when it's heavily scripted, limited, arcade-ish, overwrought and overdone to death, which practically speaking is almost 100% of the cases nowadays.

Much more rich with history, more wars and battles.jharv

Sadly, developers fail to depict and capitalize on its diversity. Maybe a WWII game based on civilian perspective without overblown drama would be a good try, or depicting Polish resistance movement with STALKER-esque attention to detail. There is so much to explore, yet so little was done so far.

Its easier to do. WWII is more straight forward and more conventional. The Vietnam War is more ambiguous and less conventional guerrilla tactics. How fun would it be to hit a trap every five seconds?Suddenstriker52

Haha, good point :D ! I giggled!

Because Vietnam isn't a 'feel good' topic in general. It was lost, and their is the stigma of all that questionable military activity going on as well, putting a real bad taste in people's mouths about it. On top of this, and largely due to the former, it does not have the famous incidents that everyone and his brother knows about.

It's similar reasoning for why you don't see WWII games where you play the Germans, or Japanese. They lost, and their activities in those wars carry a stigma to this day that people don't want to touch.

[QUOTE="jharv"]Much more rich with history, more wars and battles.Salt_The_Fries

Sadly, developers fail to depict and capitalize on its diversity. Maybe a WWII game based on civilian perspective without overblown drama would be a good try, or depicting Polish resistance movement with STALKER-esque attention to detail. There is so much to explore, yet so little was done so far.

Agreed, they sound like great ideas. The trouble is at the moment, even the titles that are branching out from the conventional (i.e. velvet assasin) are still applying by basic genre standpoints and still suffering from a horrifying level of hollywoodisation that doesn't benefit the source material at all.

Vietnam was a disgrace. A war that should not have happened, atleast not in the way it did. It makes America look bad, so why would American developers promote it in video games? Besides it was a short conflict that wasn't about an awful lot. In case you havn't realised WW2 was a war that involved almost every country in the world, and was massive in scale and length. It was a war fought with very old fashioned tactics that promote a certain amount of heroricy (Is that the right word?), becuase of the hell these soilders had to fight through. It's reported as the war that has had more deaths than any in history, even more than the First World War, and even the 100 Year War (citation needed) (Sorry, but if you can't make fun of you're self then who can you make fun of?). Probably the biggest blotch in human history. Something we should never forget, lest we start another one. WW2 can never be played out, but it should be treated with a bit more respect than the developers treat it.WasntAvailable

yeah, ww2 pretty much claimed more lives than vietnam, the iraq war, the 100 years war and the crusades combined.

Vietnam was a disgrace. A war that should not have happened, atleast not in the way it did. It makes America look bad, so why would American developers promote it in video games? Besides it was a short conflictthat wasn't about an awful lot. In case you havn't realised WW2 was a war that involved almost every country in the world, and was massive in scale and length. It was a war fought with very old fashioned tactics that promote a certain amount of heroricy (Is that the right word?), becuase of the hell these soilders had to fight through. It's reported as the war that has had more deaths than any in history, even more than the First World War, and even the 100 Year War (citation needed) (Sorry, but if you can't make fun of you're self then who can you make fun of?). Probably the biggest blotch in human history. Something we should never forget, lest we start another one. WW2 can never be played out, but it should be treated with a bit more respect than the developers treat it.WasntAvailable

I'm sorry but the Vietnam War was one of our longer wars. It last from 1963-1975 for us, not the entire war. If that is short then WWII lasted a day. I don't understand why everyone is saying the battles weren't epic. They were epic. Not Stalingrad epic but more of Iwo Jima epic. Nobody made a good Vietnam War game because it is nearly impossible to truly recreate its combat. The combat wasn't always clear cut and easy to figure out whose friend and foe. It was brutal, hard, and long. This isn't the type of war where the Geneva Convention was followed. Mines were placed. Napalm was dropped. Civilians were seen as statistics. All of this makes it impossible to really recreate the combat.

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]Vietnam was a disgrace. A war that should not have happened, atleast not in the way it did. It makes America look bad, so why would American developers promote it in video games? Besides it was a short conflictthat wasn't about an awful lot. In case you havn't realised WW2 was a war that involved almost every country in the world, and was massive in scale and length. It was a war fought with very old fashioned tactics that promote a certain amount of heroricy (Is that the right word?), becuase of the hell these soilders had to fight through. It's reported as the war that has had more deaths than any in history, even more than the First World War, and even the 100 Year War (citation needed) (Sorry, but if you can't make fun of you're self then who can you make fun of?). Probably the biggest blotch in human history. Something we should never forget, lest we start another one. WW2 can never be played out, but it should be treated with a bit more respect than the developers treat it.Suddenstriker52

I'm sorry but the Vietnam War was one of our longer wars. It last from 1963-1975 for us, not the entire war. If that is short then WWII lasted a day. I don't understand why everyone is saying the battles weren't epic. They were epic. Not Stalingrad epic but more of Iwo Jima epic. Nobody made a good Vietnam War game because it is nearly impossible to truly recreate its combat. The combat wasn't always clear cut and easy to figure out whose friend and foe. It was brutal, hard, and long. This isn't the type of war where the Geneva Convention was followed. Mines were placed. Napalm was dropped. Civilians were seen as statistics. All of this makes it impossible to really recreate the combat.

I used the wrong word, I meant it was fairly limited in scope, which it was. It is pretty much limited to very similar backdrops. From a political stand point, a Vietnam game could never really be seen as politically correct, so it's difficult subject matter on any account. And as you say the combat is difficult to simulate. There really are alot of reasons why Vietnam isn't a good war to simulate. If anyone can do it, it has to be Infinity Ward, they atleast have some tact when it comes to moral ambiguity.

Even though it's a controversial war, I don't see how it wouldn't be interesting to base a game around in terms of gameplay. There was plenty of major battles in it. Hue City, Ia Drang valley, Hamburger hill, A Shau, Tra Binh Dong, both Tet offensives, and the Son Tay Prison raid off the top of my head. And there was plenty of interesting special forces operations. You got the Navy SEALS, LRRPs, LDDNs in Vietnam, the SOG and the Pheonix Program for covert operations in Laos, Cambodia, and North Vietnam.Stabby2486

You seem to know an awful lot about the Vietnam War for someone with a cute kitten avatar :lol:. Sorry I just found that kind of ironic. Though you probably do have a point, it certainly would be possible, but it would have to be handeled with care, from both a perspective issue, and a gameplay issue. Not the easiest game to make though, and you would need a really comitted team to do it properly. CoD 6 anyone?

[QUOTE="Stabby2486"]Even though it's a controversial war, I don't see how it wouldn't be interesting to base a game around in terms of gameplay. There was plenty of major battles in it. Hue City, Ia Drang valley, Hamburger hill, A Shau, Tra Binh Dong, both Tet offensives, and the Son Tay Prison raid off the top of my head. And there was plenty of interesting special forces operations. You got the Navy SEALS, LRRPs, LDDNs in Vietnam, the SOG and the Pheonix Program for covert operations in Laos, Cambodia, and North Vietnam.WasntAvailable

You seem to know an awful lot about the Vietnam War for someone with a cute kitten avatar :lol:. Sorry I just found that kind of ironic. Though you probably do have a point, it certainly would be possible, but it would have to be handeled with care, from both a perspective issue, and a gameplay issue. Not the easiest game to make though, and you would need a really comitted team to do it properly. CoD 6 anyone?

I don't know.

Because World War II is the last war America did any good in.wado-karate

Funding and selling weapons to the germans was good?

Awesome.

[QUOTE="wado-karate"]Because World War II is the last war America did any good in.ukillwegrill

Funding and selling weapons to the germans was good?

Awesome.

Oh oh. Contemporary WWII opinions. Not a great place to argue about that, infact there is no such thing. No matter what way you put it though Britain (Where you and I hail from) and the Russians needed the America in order to achieve victory. Though what I don't like is the way people like to completely demonise one side over the other. I mean lets face it, the Americans did some pretty ignorant things, they nearly jeprodised the whole D-Day landings by sinking their own tanks, and missing with their air raids. That was a much messier afair than it should have been, and I really feel sorry for the people who died unescicarily that day that were simply caught up in some fools impatient execution. Then we have the Russians, and what they did in Berlin after the war had ended was unforgiveable. It truely is horific to hear how Stalin defended those actions. Then we have the British who failed to stop the war from happening in the first place, when they had every oppertunity to do so. Of course at the end of the day it comes down to the individuals who were in charge. Soilders that died during the Second World War, even the much hated Germans and Japanesse, deserve every honour they were given. They all fought through the same hell.

[QUOTE="ukillwegrill"]

[QUOTE="wado-karate"]Because World War II is the last war America did any good in.WasntAvailable

Funding and selling weapons to the germans was good?

Awesome.

Oh oh. Contemporary WWII opinions. Not a great place to argue about that, infact there is no such thing. No matter what way you put it though Britain (Where you and I hail from) and the Russians needed the America in order to achieve victory. Though what I don't like is the way people like to completely demonise one side over the other. I mean lets face it, the Americans did some pretty ignorant things, they nearly jeprodised the whole D-Day landings by sinking their own tanks, and missing with their air raids. That was a much messier afair than it should have been, and I really feel sorry for the people who died unescicarily that day that were simply caught up in some fools impatient execution. Then we have the Russians, and what they did in Berlin after the war had ended was unforgiveable. It truely is horific to hear how Stalin defended those actions. Then we have the British who failed to stop the war from happening in the first place, when they had every oppertunity to do so. Of course at the end of the day it comes down to the individuals who were in charge. Soilders that died during the Second World War, even the much hated Germans and Japanesse, deserve every honour they were given. They all fought through the same hell.

Lol, never said we didnt need them. Just on somes ways ... we needed them less. What i said being prime examples

Lol, never said we didnt need them. Just on somes ways ... we needed them less. What i said being prime examples

poster

I don't see how what you stated would make the Americans any less needed. Maybe less helpful not but less needed.

"Lol, never said we didnt need them. Just on somes ways ... we needed them less. What i said being prime examples"

What you have to remember though is that America was not on good terms with Britain or Russia or France (Russia for communism, Britain and France for the whole United Nations failure). I think the mentality was that it wasn't of any concern to the Americans. The Axis didn't pose a threat, and hell as far as they were concerned Fascism > Comunism (Bad spelling I know). It wasn't until they were attacked they turned round, and said "Mabye this isn't for the best". The Axis lost because of one act of sheer stupidity (Pearl Harbour). The Germans came friegteningly close to winning at Stalingrad, and France had been lost at that point, what the hell chance did a small country hanging off the edge of Europe have on it's own? We may see it as wrong now, but the Americans were really scared of a communist uprising, as were the British and in fact were very anti Russian before the Russians allied at the last minute. We only really ended up with the American support because the allies were the lesser of two evils to them I suppose.

[QUOTE="ukillwegrill"]

[QUOTE="wado-karate"]Because World War II is the last war America did any good in.WasntAvailable

Funding and selling weapons to the germans was good?

Awesome.

Oh oh. Contemporary WWII opinions. Not a great place to argue about that, infact there is no such thing. No matter what way you put it though Britain (Where you and I hail from) and the Russians needed the America in order to achieve victory. Though what I don't like is the way people like to completely demonise one side over the other. I mean lets face it, the Americans did some pretty ignorant things, they nearly jeprodised the whole D-Day landings by sinking their own tanks, and missing with their air raids. That was a much messier afair than it should have been, and I really feel sorry for the people who died unescicarily that day that were simply caught up in some fools impatient execution. Then we have the Russians, and what they did in Berlin after the war had ended was unforgiveable. It truely is horific to hear how Stalin defended those actions. Then we have the British who failed to stop the war from happening in the first place, when they had every oppertunity to do so. Of course at the end of the day it comes down to the individuals who were in charge. Soilders that died during the Second World War, even the much hated Germans and Japanesse, deserve every honour they were given. They all fought through the same hell.

The difference is it wouldve taken MUCH longer

Vietnam was a disgrace. A war that should not have happened, atleast not in the way it did. It makes America look bad, so why would American developers promote it in video games? Besides it was a short conflict that wasn't about an awful lot. In case you havn't realised WW2 was a war that involved almost every country in the world, and was massive in scale and length. It was a war fought with very old fashioned tactics that promote a certain amount of heroricy (Is that the right word?), becuase of the hell these soilders had to fight through. It's reported as the war that has had more deaths than any in history, even more than the First World War, and even the 100 Year War (citation needed) (Sorry, but if you can't make fun of you're self then who can you make fun of?). Probably the biggest blotch in human history. Something we should never forget, lest we start another one. WW2 can never be played out, but it should be treated with a bit more respect than the developers treat it.WasntAvailable

Im pretty sure the civil war had much more deaths then WW2

To put it simple, the vietnam war was boring. No new weapons, no major battles, no one really knows about it as much as WWII.

carrot-cake

That's the one part of your post that was correct..... and probably why the rest of your post fails. sorry :(

Thread.

I'm itching for Operation Flashpoint-scope Vietnam-based video game, or squad-based FPP at least. I wouldn't mind action strategy based in Vietnam too. But I guess it's all wishful thinking. On the other hand, I can't stand WWII setting any longer, especially when it's heavily scripted, limited, arcade-ish, overwrought and overdone to death, which practically speaking is almost 100% of the cases nowadays.

Salt_The_Fries

If you'll notice that they don't even have any Japanese invasion campagns like the battle of Guadalcanal. Why because it's not politically correct to blow up Japanese soldiers. So what it boils down to is only clear cut villains such as Nazis, North Koreans, Terrorists, and cold war Russians can be portrayed as bad guys. Oh and don't forget the Aliens, cause we all know that Aliens are bad.

[QUOTE="Salt_The_Fries"]

Thread.

I'm itching for Operation Flashpoint-scope Vietnam-based video game, or squad-based FPP at least. I wouldn't mind action strategy based in Vietnam too. But I guess it's all wishful thinking. On the other hand, I can't stand WWII setting any longer, especially when it's heavily scripted, limited, arcade-ish, overwrought and overdone to death, which practically speaking is almost 100% of the cases nowadays.

pimperjones

If you'll notice that they don't even have any Japanese invasion campagns like the battle of Guadalcanal. Why because it's not politically correct to blow up Japanese soldiers. So what it boils down to is only clear cut villains such as Nazis, North Koreans, Terrorists, and cold war Russians can be portrayed as bad guys. Oh and don't forget the Aliens, cause we all know that Aliens are bad.

Wait... Why would an enviromentalist be angry about a bad portrayal of the Vietcong? That link sort of comes way out of left field.

It starts with the anti war folks, then moves down to the parents and quickly the games become controvercial and devs get cold feet. No parent wants their kid playing a game that glorifies the Vietnam War. Cause that was suppose to be the wrong war.

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]Vietnam was a disgrace. A war that should not have happened, atleast not in the way it did. It makes America look bad, so why would American developers promote it in video games? Besides it was a short conflict that wasn't about an awful lot. In case you havn't realised WW2 was a war that involved almost every country in the world, and was massive in scale and length. It was a war fought with very old fashioned tactics that promote a certain amount of heroricy (Is that the right word?), becuase of the hell these soilders had to fight through. It's reported as the war that has had more deaths than any in history, even more than the First World War, and even the 100 Year War (citation needed) (Sorry, but if you can't make fun of you're self then who can you make fun of?). Probably the biggest blotch in human history. Something we should never forget, lest we start another one. WW2 can never be played out, but it should be treated with a bit more respect than the developers treat it.JangoWuzHere

Im pretty sure the civil war had much more deaths then WW2

[QUOTE="JangoWuzHere"]

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]Vietnam was a disgrace. A war that should not have happened, atleast not in the way it did. It makes America look bad, so why would American developers promote it in video games? Besides it was a short conflict that wasn't about an awful lot. In case you havn't realised WW2 was a war that involved almost every country in the world, and was massive in scale and length. It was a war fought with very old fashioned tactics that promote a certain amount of heroricy (Is that the right word?), becuase of the hell these soilders had to fight through. It's reported as the war that has had more deaths than any in history,even more than the First World War, and even the 100 Year War (citation needed) (Sorry, but if you can't make fun of you're self then who can you make fun of?). Probably the biggest blotch in human history. Something we should never forget, lest we start another one. WW2 can never be played out, but it should be treated with a bit more respect than the developers treat it.AdrianWerner

Im pretty sure the civil war had much more deaths then WW2

WWII around 70 mil

American civil war is under 1 mil

[QUOTE="JangoWuzHere"]

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]Vietnam was a disgrace. A war that should not have happened, atleast not in the way it did. It makes America look bad, so why would American developers promote it in video games? Besides it was a short conflict that wasn't about an awful lot. In case you havn't realised WW2 was a war that involved almost every country in the world, and was massive in scale and length. It was a war fought with very old fashioned tactics that promote a certain amount of heroricy (Is that the right word?), becuase of the hell these soilders had to fight through. It's reported as the war that has had more deaths than any in history, even more than the First World War, and even the 100 Year War (citation needed) (Sorry, but if you can't make fun of you're self then who can you make fun of?). Probably the biggest blotch in human history. Something we should never forget, lest we start another one. WW2 can never be played out, but it should be treated with a bit more respect than the developers treat it.AdrianWerner

Im pretty sure the civil war had much more deaths then WW2

I'm pretty sure he misread that post and thought he was talking about American deaths.