/games/ - Games

Lol, good thread op

4 was the last one I'd consider 'good', but they've functioned as US military propaganda since its inception as well as acting as a simulacra of the war films that influenced them like Saving Private Ryan and Black Hawk Down.

>>47650
Saving Private Dicklicker came out and every military shooter for the next 10 years had to have a fucking Normandy Beach scene

>>47652
MoH Frontline was a decent military shooter at least, but I did notice that basically every military shooter felt like they needed a D-Day scene because of that movie.

>>47668
Until band of brothers came out and suddenly all the normandy beach scenes became paratrooper scenes

>>47636
Call of Duty was always absolute garbage. I’m grateful that the 7th-generation era of generic military shooters remains dead—today and forever. I’d take the current era of Rollslop and gachaslop over going back to that dark age. Nostalgia is fascist.

Im telling you

Nowadays modern cod is meant for children if you pay close attention to it you can see it

>>47636
Anyone remember that CoD4 had an anti-war message?

>>47854
When did it have time for that when it was breathlessly lionizing nato militarism

>>47913
Sorry, did you maybe intend to post another clip, or were you trying to support my point?

>>47652
the first cod didn't have a normandy scene. you start as a paratrooper behind german lines. speaking of cod1, it had a relatively neutral depiction of the soviet union, it was the expansion that added the ridiculous propaganda, like not giving you a rifle and having to pick one up from the dead

>>47937
>the first cod didn't have a normandy scene. you start as a paratrooper behind german lines

Trading one spielberg slop for the other

>>47935
okay im speaking in good faith aka trying to understand you
But how is something lionizing when the military invasion ends with a nuclear explosion. That implies the usa invasion ultimately ended with achieving nothing. Except for the deaths of the marines and the whole city they just invaded.
The british campaign sure did lionize things with the whole we got the bad guy. But the usa campaign ends with your character dying in a irradiated wasteland. Achieving nothing in the end

>>47979
Did you miss the part where the mission opens with the us military rolling in in an overwhelming show of technological military force, where it effortlessly brushes aside all resistance and the player character is an invincible superhero? The reason you get nuked in the first place is because you voluntarily stay behind on some retarded "No one gets left behind" suicide mission. You getting nuked isn't meant to show the consequences of us military hubris, it's an example of the barbaric brutality of America's enemies, and that bullshit with you wandering around after initially surviving a nuclear blast is only underscores that.

>>47986
>Did you miss the part where the mission opens with the us military rolling in in an overwhelming show of technological military force, where it effortlessly brushes aside all resistance and the
which can be seen as building up the foundations for later deconstruction. The beginning is meant to build up all the common tropes of america might and technological domination.
Then later missions of the campaign deconstruct it by having such military might be wiped away to a pointless nothing. To become ash. (nuke)

>The reason you get nuked in the first place is because you voluntarily stay behind on some retarded "No one gets left behind" suicide mission.
Which is the game deconstructing the america saves the day trope. With your player character doing america military "hero" shit and then shortly after getting punished for that. (NUKED)

>You getting nuked isn't meant to show the consequences of us military hubris, it's an example of the barbaric brutality of America's enemies,
But the main reason why the enemy does the nuke is because the invasion happened. The only reason why things escalated to that point was because of the invasion.

>that bullshit with you wandering around after initially surviving a nuclear blast is only underscores that
I disagree. I think that scene was meant to show that despite how powerful the usa is, in the end the usa still achieves nothing. That despite how much miltiary strength the usa brought in the beginning of the campaign, in the end all there was is just ash. With your player character being a witness to it as he crawls out of the destroyed helicopter and sees not usa glory but just destruction

>>47988
>which can be seen as building up the foundations for later deconstruction

There isn't any deconstruction. The narrative intention you're imagining doesn't exist. The entire game only reinforces the perception of western military power. That's the point. You're playing the yankee propaganda game. It's the narrative equivalent of Rocky Balboa getting knocked down. It makes him getting back up and overcoming the challenge even more heroic.

>But the main reason why the enemy does the nuke is because the invasion happened.

No, the main reason the nuke happened is because the sas kill squad botched their assassination job and failed to murder Zakhaev, the insane Russian villain that orchestrated the entire sequence of events. The middle east nuke isn't there to "deconstruct" American power but to underscore the need for its use, an intention which is underscored by the Russian madman attempting to nuke the US, which is only narrowly averted by nato superheroes.

There isn't a single moment in this game where the use of force by nato or its military dominance is ever in question. From start to finish its justified by its opponents being insane murderers who if left to their own devices will gladly kill millions. From start to finish it is shouting WE ARE THE GOOD GUYS AND YOU HAVE TO KILL THE BAD GUYS AND YOU ARE RIGHT AND JUSTIFIED AND A BADASS AND AWESOME FOR DOING SO at the very top of its lungs.