EA brags about 43 million killed by Battlefield 1943 players

TG Daily - 43 million killed by Battlefield 1943 players

EA is, from what we can tell, truly excited about its financial success as well as what gamers have achieved so far. That achievement is apparently not measured in game time, but kills gamers score. “Watching and participating in this non-stop multiplayer action has been a real treat for us and we can’t believe how fast our fans reached 43 million kills,” said Gordon Van Dyke, producer on Battlefield 1943.”

We can now truly say that we have set a new standard for what can be done in the downloadable games category and gamers recognize the endless value that Battlefield 1943 provides for just $15.” Backing up the game success story is G4TV.com, which is quoted saying that the downloadable game has “great sound, great graphics, great fun, and [a] great price.”

 

I admit that I enjoy these games--but haven't played them in years.But this type of stuff warps people's perception's of what WWII was--a terrible event that was populated by many acts of courage and cruelty.Acts that would be classified as Good and Evil were present at the same time and not always perpetrated by the side you expect.

These games are great for keeping the conflict in people's minds, but it also distorts the image of the war in minds that are uneducated about the time period.Hence, I have mixed feelings about them.

 

Actually, games really depend on their target.

I'm sure EA employs its share of historians, to keep at the very least the facts straight. EA, with Medal of Honor and Battlefield series, has displayed the war in a bad picture, but only because its target area is the masses. If they made a game truly akin to the war, imagine how little success it might meet.

For example, Brothers in Arms. This series is more realistic in terms of combat and fighting, as well as tactics. The game's story also explores to a small extent the horrors of war, and the haunting effects it has on the protagonist, who is not only morally confused, but also heavily occupied with the many who he had killed, and the many he had lost.

The campaigns are hard and long, and repetitive. Guess how popular it is? Not very. Not just Brothers in Arms. Operation Flashpoint and Armed Assault are two series where, the military is reflected as best the programmers could. Weapons, squad tactics, actions, vehicles, even company tactics. However, such a large game comes at the expense of graphics or performance, meaning that it wouldn't be too fun to the average gamer. Not very popular, unlike Call of Duty, where the hero run and guns down entire regiments of banzai Japanese infantry. The video game companies cater to entertain, not to educate. Either way, like you said, the games are really fun.

Then, for the history enthusiasts, like, many on the forum for example, there are the games that virtually no one else in the world plays. For example, Hearts of Iron. In that game, realism is the core, not really catering to the masses.

In video games, realism and fun are not synonymous, except to those who fully appreciate the history behind the games. Otherwise, if you want to make a best-seller, best leave the realism out of it.