Talk:Spec Ops: The Line - Revision history

Andrey Karchikyan: /* Not quite AK-103 */

2020-11-18T02:17:11Z

Not quite AK-103

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:17, 18 November 2020
Line 193:		Line 193:

	[[User:Andrey Karchikyan\|Andrey Karchikyan]] ([[User talk:Andrey Karchikyan\|talk]]) 08:24, 06 November 2020 (EST)		[[User:Andrey Karchikyan\|Andrey Karchikyan]] ([[User talk:Andrey Karchikyan\|talk]]) 08:24, 06 November 2020 (EST)
	:Uh, at full size that render from the game shows the black side folding hinge along the rear of the receiver and the receiver also has the stock unlocking button and catch for a folding stock, although the wood stock doesn't look like it could fold properly anyway without the cutout for the scope rail.--[[User:AgentGumby\|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby\|talk]]) 09:01, 6 November 2020 (EST)		:Uh, at full size that render from the game shows the black side folding hinge along the rear of the receiver and the receiver also has the stock unlocking button and catch for a folding stock, although the wood stock doesn't look like it could fold properly anyway without the cutout for the scope rail. -[[User:AgentGumby\|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby\|talk]]) 09:01, 6 November 2020 (EST)
	::Maybe you are right -- indeed, on the left side of the weapon you can see the stock release button and the latch for the folding stock, but on the right side there are no signs of the presence of a button, and the stock itself seems to be held not on the hinge, but on the connecting bar, and rigidly fixed without the possibility of folding). Perhaps this is a hybrid in which a fixed butt was installed on the AK-103. --- [[User:Andrey Karchikyan\|Andrey Karchikyan]] ([[User talk:Andrey Karchikyan\|talk]]) 21:11, 17 November 2020 (EST)		::Maybe you are right - indeed, on the left side of the weapon you can see the stock release button and the latch for the folding stock, but on the right side there are no signs of the presence of a button, and the stock itself seems to be held not on the hinge, but on the connecting bar, and rigidly fixed without the possibility of folding. Perhaps this is a hybrid in which a fixed butt was installed on the AK-103. - [[User:Andrey Karchikyan\|Andrey Karchikyan]] ([[User talk:Andrey Karchikyan\|talk]]) 21:11, 17 November 2020 (EST)

Andrey Karchikyan: /* Not quite AK-103 */

2020-11-18T02:15:51Z

Not quite AK-103

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:15, 18 November 2020
Line 186:		Line 186:
	== Not quite AK-103 ==		== Not quite AK-103 ==

	In-game "AK-47" ~~cannot~~ be an AK-103, primarily due to the lack of a butt folding mechanism (the game model shows that the butt is fixed). Most of all, the machine gun from the game resembles the TSS AK-103 self-loading carbine, the photo of which you can see below.		In-game "AK-47" may be not an AK-103, primarily due to the lack of a butt folding mechanism (the game model shows that the butt is fixed). Most of all, the machine gun from the game resembles the TSS AK-103 self-loading carbine, the photo of which you can see below.

	[[Image:SOTL_AK_model.jpg\|thumb\|none\|600px]]		[[Image:SOTL_AK_model.jpg\|thumb\|none\|600px]]
Line 194:		Line 194:
	[[User:Andrey Karchikyan\|Andrey Karchikyan]] ([[User talk:Andrey Karchikyan\|talk]]) 08:24, 06 November 2020 (EST)		[[User:Andrey Karchikyan\|Andrey Karchikyan]] ([[User talk:Andrey Karchikyan\|talk]]) 08:24, 06 November 2020 (EST)
	:Uh, at full size that render from the game shows the black side folding hinge along the rear of the receiver and the receiver also has the stock unlocking button and catch for a folding stock, although the wood stock doesn't look like it could fold properly anyway without the cutout for the scope rail.--[[User:AgentGumby\|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby\|talk]]) 09:01, 6 November 2020 (EST)		:Uh, at full size that render from the game shows the black side folding hinge along the rear of the receiver and the receiver also has the stock unlocking button and catch for a folding stock, although the wood stock doesn't look like it could fold properly anyway without the cutout for the scope rail.--[[User:AgentGumby\|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby\|talk]]) 09:01, 6 November 2020 (EST)
	::Maybe you are right - indeed, on the left side of the weapon you can see the stock release button and the latch for the folding stock, but on the right side there are no signs of the presence of a button, and the stock itself seems to be held not on the hinge, but on the connecting bar, and rigidly fixed without the possibility of folding). Perhaps this is a hybrid in which a fixed butt was installed on the AK-103.		::Maybe you are right -- indeed, on the left side of the weapon you can see the stock release button and the latch for the folding stock, but on the right side there are no signs of the presence of a button, and the stock itself seems to be held not on the hinge, but on the connecting bar, and rigidly fixed without the possibility of folding). Perhaps this is a hybrid in which a fixed butt was installed on the AK-103. --- [[User:Andrey Karchikyan\|Andrey Karchikyan]] ([[User talk:Andrey Karchikyan\|talk]]) 21:11, 17 November 2020 (EST)
	[[User:Andrey Karchikyan\|Andrey Karchikyan]] ([[User talk:Andrey Karchikyan\|talk]]) 21:11, 17 November 2020 (EST)

Andrey Karchikyan at 02:13, 18 November 2020

2020-11-18T02:13:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:13, 18 November 2020
Line 184:		Line 184:
	So, is the "sandboarding" torture that the 33rd uses actually a real thing? [[User:Spartan198\|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198\|talk]]) 02:39, 27 January 2020 (EST)		So, is the "sandboarding" torture that the 33rd uses actually a real thing? [[User:Spartan198\|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198\|talk]]) 02:39, 27 January 2020 (EST)

	== Not AK-103 ==		== Not quite AK-103 ==

	In-game "AK-47" cannot be an AK-103, primarily due to the lack of a butt folding mechanism (the game model shows that the butt is fixed). Most of all, the machine gun from the game resembles the TSS AK-103 self-loading carbine, the photo of which you can see below.		In-game "AK-47" cannot be an AK-103, primarily due to the lack of a butt folding mechanism (the game model shows that the butt is fixed). Most of all, the machine gun from the game resembles the TSS AK-103 self-loading carbine, the photo of which you can see below.
Line 194:		Line 194:
	[[User:Andrey Karchikyan\|Andrey Karchikyan]] ([[User talk:Andrey Karchikyan\|talk]]) 08:24, 06 November 2020 (EST)		[[User:Andrey Karchikyan\|Andrey Karchikyan]] ([[User talk:Andrey Karchikyan\|talk]]) 08:24, 06 November 2020 (EST)
	:Uh, at full size that render from the game shows the black side folding hinge along the rear of the receiver and the receiver also has the stock unlocking button and catch for a folding stock, although the wood stock doesn't look like it could fold properly anyway without the cutout for the scope rail.--[[User:AgentGumby\|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby\|talk]]) 09:01, 6 November 2020 (EST)		:Uh, at full size that render from the game shows the black side folding hinge along the rear of the receiver and the receiver also has the stock unlocking button and catch for a folding stock, although the wood stock doesn't look like it could fold properly anyway without the cutout for the scope rail.--[[User:AgentGumby\|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby\|talk]]) 09:01, 6 November 2020 (EST)
			::Maybe you are right - indeed, on the left side of the weapon you can see the stock release button and the latch for the folding stock, but on the right side there are no signs of the presence of a button, and the stock itself seems to be held not on the hinge, but on the connecting bar, and rigidly fixed without the possibility of folding). Perhaps this is a hybrid in which a fixed butt was installed on the AK-103.
			[[User:Andrey Karchikyan\|Andrey Karchikyan]] ([[User talk:Andrey Karchikyan\|talk]]) 21:11, 17 November 2020 (EST)

AgentGumby: /* Not AK-103 */

2020-11-06T14:01:54Z

Not AK-103

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:01, 6 November 2020
Line 193:		Line 193:

	[[User:Andrey Karchikyan\|Andrey Karchikyan]] ([[User talk:Andrey Karchikyan\|talk]]) 08:24, 06 November 2020 (EST)		[[User:Andrey Karchikyan\|Andrey Karchikyan]] ([[User talk:Andrey Karchikyan\|talk]]) 08:24, 06 November 2020 (EST)
			:Uh, at full size that render from the game shows the black side folding hinge along the rear of the receiver and the receiver also has the stock unlocking button and catch for a folding stock, although the wood stock doesn't look like it could fold properly anyway without the cutout for the scope rail.--[[User:AgentGumby\|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby\|talk]]) 09:01, 6 November 2020 (EST)

Andrey Karchikyan: /* Not AK-103 */

2020-11-06T13:37:33Z

Not AK-103

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:37, 6 November 2020
Line 192:		Line 192:
	[[Image:TSS_AK-103.jpg\|thumb\|none\|600px]]		[[Image:TSS_AK-103.jpg\|thumb\|none\|600px]]

	[[User:Andrey ~~Kachikyan~~\|Andrey ~~Kachikyan~~]] ([[User talk:Andrey ~~Kachikyan~~\|talk]]) 08:24, 06 November 2020 (EST)		[[User:Andrey Karchikyan\|Andrey Karchikyan]] ([[User talk:Andrey Karchikyan\|talk]]) 08:24, 06 November 2020 (EST)

Andrey Karchikyan at 13:24, 6 November 2020

2020-11-06T13:24:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:24, 6 November 2020
Line 183:		Line 183:
	== Grim question ==		== Grim question ==
	So, is the "sandboarding" torture that the 33rd uses actually a real thing? [[User:Spartan198\|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198\|talk]]) 02:39, 27 January 2020 (EST)		So, is the "sandboarding" torture that the 33rd uses actually a real thing? [[User:Spartan198\|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198\|talk]]) 02:39, 27 January 2020 (EST)

			== Not AK-103 ==

			In-game "AK-47" cannot be an AK-103, primarily due to the lack of a butt folding mechanism (the game model shows that the butt is fixed). Most of all, the machine gun from the game resembles the TSS AK-103 self-loading carbine, the photo of which you can see below.

			[[Image:SOTL_AK_model.jpg\|thumb\|none\|600px]]

			[[Image:TSS_AK-103.jpg\|thumb\|none\|600px]]

			[[User:Andrey Kachikyan\|Andrey Kachikyan]] ([[User talk:Andrey Kachikyan\|talk]]) 08:24, 06 November 2020 (EST)

Spartan198 at 07:39, 27 January 2020

2020-01-27T07:39:15Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:39, 27 January 2020
Line 180:		Line 180:

	:::::Besides, who in the world honestly plays FPS games for their well-written plots? You play them to shoot dudes because shooting dudes is fun. Hell, a lot of people who play CoD and even more who play Battlefield never even touch the singleplayer. I'd happily play a game if it was good even if the bad guy was the evil US General Ulysses Flagg who'd stolen a German nuclear submarine and was threatening to nuke Riyadh unless they recognised Dubai as the Neo Confederate States of TruMerica and I was alternating between a sneaky Spetznatz team and a bunch of patriotic Iranian commandoes. [[User:Evil Tim\|Evil Tim]] ([[User talk:Evil Tim\|talk]]) 20:10, 20 December 2014 (EST)		:::::Besides, who in the world honestly plays FPS games for their well-written plots? You play them to shoot dudes because shooting dudes is fun. Hell, a lot of people who play CoD and even more who play Battlefield never even touch the singleplayer. I'd happily play a game if it was good even if the bad guy was the evil US General Ulysses Flagg who'd stolen a German nuclear submarine and was threatening to nuke Riyadh unless they recognised Dubai as the Neo Confederate States of TruMerica and I was alternating between a sneaky Spetznatz team and a bunch of patriotic Iranian commandoes. [[User:Evil Tim\|Evil Tim]] ([[User talk:Evil Tim\|talk]]) 20:10, 20 December 2014 (EST)

			== Grim question ==
			So, is the "sandboarding" torture that the 33rd uses actually a real thing? [[User:Spartan198\|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198\|talk]]) 02:39, 27 January 2020 (EST)

Jake Stuckey at 19:13, 29 December 2019

2019-12-29T19:13:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:13, 29 December 2019
Line 118:		Line 118:

	::Well, clearly Walker's ability to pull a Deagle out of his ass when injured is because he's Delta. You're not an operator, you wouldn't understand. [[User:Evil Tim\|Evil Tim]] 04:46, 27 August 2012 (CDT)		::Well, clearly Walker's ability to pull a Deagle out of his ass when injured is because he's Delta. You're not an operator, you wouldn't understand. [[User:Evil Tim\|Evil Tim]] 04:46, 27 August 2012 (CDT)

			:::Given the fact that Walker isn't all there in the head, it could be possible that's he's actually using his standard issue M9 and hallucinating it as a Desert Eagle. It certainly fits with the central theme of the story-Walker thinking that he's some badass action hero coming to save the day.--[[User:Jake Stuckey\|Jake Stuckey]] ([[User talk:Jake Stuckey\|talk]]) 14:13, 29 December 2019 (EST)

	:::Yes, I am, my phone number is 0 and people call me when they can't find a phone number, yet I still don't understand. [[User:Spartan198\|Spartan198]] 15:35, 27 August 2012 (CDT)		:::Yes, I am, my phone number is 0 and people call me when they can't find a phone number, yet I still don't understand. [[User:Spartan198\|Spartan198]] 15:35, 27 August 2012 (CDT)

Spartan198: /* Mortar scene */

2015-11-22T16:14:33Z

Mortar scene

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:14, 22 November 2015
Line 164:		Line 164:

	::: I think this was just a terrible, generic third person shooter desperately trying to be special by pretending it has a message. If the idea was truly to deconstruct the gaming genre, they'd give you the choice to fire the Willie Pete rounds, so a clever player isn't forced to be a monster, but they don't. Add to that the general lack of research into this game (when ''Call of Duty 4'' is more realistic than your title, something's gone wrong). I wasn't impressed with the guns, the entemies have all waltzed out of ''Modern Warfare 2'' without bothering to change their clothes, and the political heavy handidness was just upsetting. Not impressed; I can't figure out why it got so much acclaim. I mean, it's not even a ''good'' third person shooter. --[[User:Godzillafan93\|That's the Way It's Done]] ([[User talk:Godzillafan93\|talk]]) 20:41, 4 August 2014 (EDT)		::: I think this was just a terrible, generic third person shooter desperately trying to be special by pretending it has a message. If the idea was truly to deconstruct the gaming genre, they'd give you the choice to fire the Willie Pete rounds, so a clever player isn't forced to be a monster, but they don't. Add to that the general lack of research into this game (when ''Call of Duty 4'' is more realistic than your title, something's gone wrong). I wasn't impressed with the guns, the entemies have all waltzed out of ''Modern Warfare 2'' without bothering to change their clothes, and the political heavy handidness was just upsetting. Not impressed; I can't figure out why it got so much acclaim. I mean, it's not even a ''good'' third person shooter. --[[User:Godzillafan93\|That's the Way It's Done]] ([[User talk:Godzillafan93\|talk]]) 20:41, 4 August 2014 (EDT)

			:::::Originally, there ''was'' going to be an option to use the WP, because I remember a preview talking about it, but the devs changed it at some point because who knows. [[User:Spartan198\|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198\|talk]]) 11:14, 22 November 2015 (EST)

	::::I don't think you really understand the point of deconstructing the game genre. We play shooting games as entertainment. We are entertained by shooting these because we have the justification that these are truly evil and bad people. Just as Walker uses Konrad as justification for his actions. The game forces you to do the mortar scene because that is typical of a shooter game. "Here is this cool destructive weapon, use it to kill bad guys." Then it shows you the horrible thing you have just done and you feel bad for being entertained by doing it. Then you try to distance yourself from Walker, and you justify it by saying that you were forced to, but then they give you the important choice to prove you're not like Walker. Lugo is surrounded by unarmed civilians who are justifiably angry at the Delta operators after all the destruction they caused. I, like most other players I'm sure, opened fire on these civilians to avenge Lugo. While the gameplay was average, I loved the narrative of this game because it was one of those rare games that made me feel terrible at the end for enjoying it. It made me feel bad for finding it entertaining before knowing the full cost of my actions, and it forces you to fight enemies that aren't necessarily bad guys or good guys. They are just people trying to survive just like you. It basically tells you that there is no good and bad, unlike other shooters, and it forces you to think about who you are killing and why you are killing them and it causes you to almost distance yourself from Walker unlike most games where you are happy to play as the badass protagonist. --[[User:SmithandWesson36\|SmithandWesson36]] ([[User talk:SmithandWesson36\|talk]]) 00:26, 5 August 2014 (EDT)		::::I don't think you really understand the point of deconstructing the game genre. We play shooting games as entertainment. We are entertained by shooting these because we have the justification that these are truly evil and bad people. Just as Walker uses Konrad as justification for his actions. The game forces you to do the mortar scene because that is typical of a shooter game. "Here is this cool destructive weapon, use it to kill bad guys." Then it shows you the horrible thing you have just done and you feel bad for being entertained by doing it. Then you try to distance yourself from Walker, and you justify it by saying that you were forced to, but then they give you the important choice to prove you're not like Walker. Lugo is surrounded by unarmed civilians who are justifiably angry at the Delta operators after all the destruction they caused. I, like most other players I'm sure, opened fire on these civilians to avenge Lugo. While the gameplay was average, I loved the narrative of this game because it was one of those rare games that made me feel terrible at the end for enjoying it. It made me feel bad for finding it entertaining before knowing the full cost of my actions, and it forces you to fight enemies that aren't necessarily bad guys or good guys. They are just people trying to survive just like you. It basically tells you that there is no good and bad, unlike other shooters, and it forces you to think about who you are killing and why you are killing them and it causes you to almost distance yourself from Walker unlike most games where you are happy to play as the badass protagonist. --[[User:SmithandWesson36\|SmithandWesson36]] ([[User talk:SmithandWesson36\|talk]]) 00:26, 5 August 2014 (EDT)

Evil Tim: /* Mortar scene */

2014-12-21T03:13:02Z

Mortar scene

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:13, 21 December 2014
Line 173:		Line 173:
	:::::It's childish to expect that every action we take will necessarily translate into the outcome we desire, but it's adolescent sulking to believe that no action we take can possibly have the result we desire, or that the possibility of failure is reason enough to not act.		:::::It's childish to expect that every action we take will necessarily translate into the outcome we desire, but it's adolescent sulking to believe that no action we take can possibly have the result we desire, or that the possibility of failure is reason enough to not act.

	:::::The central argument is the same one that almost kept America out of WW2, and the game is basically the same as if Spielberg stomped onto the set three minutes before the end of ''Schindler's List'' and started angrily berating the audience for being entertained by the Holocaust. If he actually thought that, ''what would it have said about him that he made the movie anyway?'' [[User:Evil Tim\|Evil Tim]] ([[User talk:Evil Tim\|talk]]) 20:10, 20 December 2014 (EST)		:::::The central argument is the same one that almost kept America out of WW2, and the game is basically the same as if Spielberg stomped onto the set three minutes before the end of ''Schindler's List'' and started angrily berating the audience for being entertained by the Holocaust. If he actually thought that, ''what would it have said about him that he made the movie anyway?''

			:::::Besides, who in the world honestly plays FPS games for their well-written plots? You play them to shoot dudes because shooting dudes is fun. Hell, a lot of people who play CoD and even more who play Battlefield never even touch the singleplayer. I'd happily play a game if it was good even if the bad guy was the evil US General Ulysses Flagg who'd stolen a German nuclear submarine and was threatening to nuke Riyadh unless they recognised Dubai as the Neo Confederate States of TruMerica and I was alternating between a sneaky Spetznatz team and a bunch of patriotic Iranian commandoes. [[User:Evil Tim\|Evil Tim]] ([[User talk:Evil Tim\|talk]]) 20:10, 20 December 2014 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:17, 18 November 2020
Line 193:		Line 193:

	[[User:Andrey Karchikyan\|Andrey Karchikyan]] ([[User talk:Andrey Karchikyan\|talk]]) 08:24, 06 November 2020 (EST)		[[User:Andrey Karchikyan\|Andrey Karchikyan]] ([[User talk:Andrey Karchikyan\|talk]]) 08:24, 06 November 2020 (EST)
	:Uh, at full size that render from the game shows the black side folding hinge along the rear of the receiver and the receiver also has the stock unlocking button and catch for a folding stock, although the wood stock doesn't look like it could fold properly anyway without the cutout for the scope rail.--[[User:AgentGumby\|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby\|talk]]) 09:01, 6 November 2020 (EST)		:Uh, at full size that render from the game shows the black side folding hinge along the rear of the receiver and the receiver also has the stock unlocking button and catch for a folding stock, although the wood stock doesn't look like it could fold properly anyway without the cutout for the scope rail. -[[User:AgentGumby\|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby\|talk]]) 09:01, 6 November 2020 (EST)
	::Maybe you are right -- indeed, on the left side of the weapon you can see the stock release button and the latch for the folding stock, but on the right side there are no signs of the presence of a button, and the stock itself seems to be held not on the hinge, but on the connecting bar, and rigidly fixed without the possibility of folding). Perhaps this is a hybrid in which a fixed butt was installed on the AK-103. --- [[User:Andrey Karchikyan\|Andrey Karchikyan]] ([[User talk:Andrey Karchikyan\|talk]]) 21:11, 17 November 2020 (EST)		::Maybe you are right - indeed, on the left side of the weapon you can see the stock release button and the latch for the folding stock, but on the right side there are no signs of the presence of a button, and the stock itself seems to be held not on the hinge, but on the connecting bar, and rigidly fixed without the possibility of folding. Perhaps this is a hybrid in which a fixed butt was installed on the AK-103. - [[User:Andrey Karchikyan\|Andrey Karchikyan]] ([[User talk:Andrey Karchikyan\|talk]]) 21:11, 17 November 2020 (EST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:13, 29 December 2019
Line 118:		Line 118:

	::Well, clearly Walker's ability to pull a Deagle out of his ass when injured is because he's Delta. You're not an operator, you wouldn't understand. [[User:Evil Tim\|Evil Tim]] 04:46, 27 August 2012 (CDT)		::Well, clearly Walker's ability to pull a Deagle out of his ass when injured is because he's Delta. You're not an operator, you wouldn't understand. [[User:Evil Tim\|Evil Tim]] 04:46, 27 August 2012 (CDT)

			:::Given the fact that Walker isn't all there in the head, it could be possible that's he's actually using his standard issue M9 and hallucinating it as a Desert Eagle. It certainly fits with the central theme of the story-Walker thinking that he's some badass action hero coming to save the day.--[[User:Jake Stuckey\|Jake Stuckey]] ([[User talk:Jake Stuckey\|talk]]) 14:13, 29 December 2019 (EST)

	:::Yes, I am, my phone number is 0 and people call me when they can't find a phone number, yet I still don't understand. [[User:Spartan198\|Spartan198]] 15:35, 27 August 2012 (CDT)		:::Yes, I am, my phone number is 0 and people call me when they can't find a phone number, yet I still don't understand. [[User:Spartan198\|Spartan198]] 15:35, 27 August 2012 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:14, 22 November 2015
Line 164:		Line 164:

	::: I think this was just a terrible, generic third person shooter desperately trying to be special by pretending it has a message. If the idea was truly to deconstruct the gaming genre, they'd give you the choice to fire the Willie Pete rounds, so a clever player isn't forced to be a monster, but they don't. Add to that the general lack of research into this game (when ''Call of Duty 4'' is more realistic than your title, something's gone wrong). I wasn't impressed with the guns, the entemies have all waltzed out of ''Modern Warfare 2'' without bothering to change their clothes, and the political heavy handidness was just upsetting. Not impressed; I can't figure out why it got so much acclaim. I mean, it's not even a ''good'' third person shooter. --[[User:Godzillafan93\|That's the Way It's Done]] ([[User talk:Godzillafan93\|talk]]) 20:41, 4 August 2014 (EDT)		::: I think this was just a terrible, generic third person shooter desperately trying to be special by pretending it has a message. If the idea was truly to deconstruct the gaming genre, they'd give you the choice to fire the Willie Pete rounds, so a clever player isn't forced to be a monster, but they don't. Add to that the general lack of research into this game (when ''Call of Duty 4'' is more realistic than your title, something's gone wrong). I wasn't impressed with the guns, the entemies have all waltzed out of ''Modern Warfare 2'' without bothering to change their clothes, and the political heavy handidness was just upsetting. Not impressed; I can't figure out why it got so much acclaim. I mean, it's not even a ''good'' third person shooter. --[[User:Godzillafan93\|That's the Way It's Done]] ([[User talk:Godzillafan93\|talk]]) 20:41, 4 August 2014 (EDT)

			:::::Originally, there ''was'' going to be an option to use the WP, because I remember a preview talking about it, but the devs changed it at some point because who knows. [[User:Spartan198\|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198\|talk]]) 11:14, 22 November 2015 (EST)

	::::I don't think you really understand the point of deconstructing the game genre. We play shooting games as entertainment. We are entertained by shooting these because we have the justification that these are truly evil and bad people. Just as Walker uses Konrad as justification for his actions. The game forces you to do the mortar scene because that is typical of a shooter game. "Here is this cool destructive weapon, use it to kill bad guys." Then it shows you the horrible thing you have just done and you feel bad for being entertained by doing it. Then you try to distance yourself from Walker, and you justify it by saying that you were forced to, but then they give you the important choice to prove you're not like Walker. Lugo is surrounded by unarmed civilians who are justifiably angry at the Delta operators after all the destruction they caused. I, like most other players I'm sure, opened fire on these civilians to avenge Lugo. While the gameplay was average, I loved the narrative of this game because it was one of those rare games that made me feel terrible at the end for enjoying it. It made me feel bad for finding it entertaining before knowing the full cost of my actions, and it forces you to fight enemies that aren't necessarily bad guys or good guys. They are just people trying to survive just like you. It basically tells you that there is no good and bad, unlike other shooters, and it forces you to think about who you are killing and why you are killing them and it causes you to almost distance yourself from Walker unlike most games where you are happy to play as the badass protagonist. --[[User:SmithandWesson36\|SmithandWesson36]] ([[User talk:SmithandWesson36\|talk]]) 00:26, 5 August 2014 (EDT)		::::I don't think you really understand the point of deconstructing the game genre. We play shooting games as entertainment. We are entertained by shooting these because we have the justification that these are truly evil and bad people. Just as Walker uses Konrad as justification for his actions. The game forces you to do the mortar scene because that is typical of a shooter game. "Here is this cool destructive weapon, use it to kill bad guys." Then it shows you the horrible thing you have just done and you feel bad for being entertained by doing it. Then you try to distance yourself from Walker, and you justify it by saying that you were forced to, but then they give you the important choice to prove you're not like Walker. Lugo is surrounded by unarmed civilians who are justifiably angry at the Delta operators after all the destruction they caused. I, like most other players I'm sure, opened fire on these civilians to avenge Lugo. While the gameplay was average, I loved the narrative of this game because it was one of those rare games that made me feel terrible at the end for enjoying it. It made me feel bad for finding it entertaining before knowing the full cost of my actions, and it forces you to fight enemies that aren't necessarily bad guys or good guys. They are just people trying to survive just like you. It basically tells you that there is no good and bad, unlike other shooters, and it forces you to think about who you are killing and why you are killing them and it causes you to almost distance yourself from Walker unlike most games where you are happy to play as the badass protagonist. --[[User:SmithandWesson36\|SmithandWesson36]] ([[User talk:SmithandWesson36\|talk]]) 00:26, 5 August 2014 (EDT)