As you well know, I play Battlefield Vietnam and the game feel feels too much like Apocalypse Now and Full Metal Jacket and Hollywood Movies, rather actual history about the Vietnam War. Instead we have this Apocalypse Now ripoff called Battlefield Vietnam published by EA Games in California made by DICE in Sweden.
The game is a total waste of time. It only is any good with mods in it. The weaponry is unrealistic. The Huey’s rockets only fire two at a time and reload. The only thing people look forward to in the entire game is taking a Huey helicopter and shooting rockets at targets like in Apocalypse Now.
Much like this. Which is why the fun is taken out of these games with stupid noobs wanting to be like Apocalypse Now and Vietnam War movies like Full Metal Jacket, instead of real historical gameplay.
Now we have pseudo-historical, pseudo-Hollywood crap like Battlefield Vietnam that is a Vietnam War movie dressed up as a PC game. The Vietcong did not have AA guns, as seen in Operation Irving map. You could easily shoot down a Huey with an AK-47 assault rifle. Ermey demonstrated in Lock n’ Lock with R’ Lee Ermey that the Huey did not have armored glass to stop bullets. In BFV, you can’t even dent the Huey with an AK. You can’t have real guerrilla combat to hide and disappear like the real VC would.
Instead, you have to face the American imperialists, (LOL) out in the open and fight. If the VC fought like they do in BFV, they would have gotten massacred without question. They knew that small precise assaults against the Americans were the best option because they were costly to us and not so costly to them.
Instead, we have characters that look like wannabes from Apocalypse Now and Full Metal Jacket that look more like they are playing the part of a soldier in a Vietnam movie, rather than a real Vietnam combat game. The game also has invincible tanks. The LAW rocket is ineffective against tanks. A hit in the rear would destroy a T-55. In the Balkan Wars, a Serb took out a PT-76 Yugoslav tank with an LAW rocket launcher.
The one thing that the PC games get wrong is that they make the LAW reloadable. In RL, the LAW was non-reloadable. It could only be fired at one time and disposed, like the Panzerfaust of World War II. The realism of these games is questionable. Though OFP is more realistic than BFV or Call of Duty World at War or Call of Duty series, which are games that are pseudo-historical, pseudo-cinematic, pseudo-Hollywood, wannabes that look more like Saving Private Ryan.
There is more to World War II than Hollywood movies, people. Call of Duty World at War is a total abomination of a game. They ripped off the entire plot of the movie Enemy at the Gates and placed into Call of Duty and placed in people with fake Russian accents, instead of real Russian dialogue of speaking REAL Russian. They speak English and sound like Soviet propaganda posters, rather than real Soviet soldiers. They sound more like characters from a Soviet or Russian war movie like Ballad of a Soldier or 9th Company, rather than real characters. The characters are hackneyed cliches of Hollywood movies about Russia.
Instead, they glorify Soviet communism in the entire Call of Duty, like Marxist Soviet movies about heroic soldiers, that far-left Hollywood loves because they are FAR-LEFT MARXISTS fighting evil Nazis. It is too much like Enemy at the Gates. Enemy at the Gates is historically inaccurate. The movie plays the anachronistic 1977 version of the Soviet National Anthem by the Red Army Choir, for a movie that takes place in 1942. The would have played the Russian version of the Internationale. The woman in the movie is typical American copulation lover films, rather than a real honest Soviet soldier. Sovyetskaya soldatka.
Anyway, Call of Duty is too slanted against Russians and sterotypes them. Stalingrad is NOT about Enemy at the Gates or some Hollywood movie. Activision and EA Games need to stop ripping off Hollywood movies and focus on real history and real fun games that we can relate to. The Call of Duty game has no squad coordination. Instead, it is an FPS shoot em up game.
COD 5 ripped off the war movie about the Pacific and Medal of Honor Pacific Assault Makin Atoll raid for a plot to the video game. COD 5 also rehashes the same Stalingrad level from Call of Duty 1 and 2. All Call of Duty has done in the series is rehash Stalingrad and feature different versions of the Stalingrad battle over and over. Isn’t it time for something new?
I’m afraid that Americans will never fully understand the horrors that took place on the Eastern Front. Like babies thrown into fires, whole villages razed to the ground by the Nazis, German women raped by Russian soldiers. The works.
Call of Duty glorifies the Red Army communists like Soviet propaganda movies. It does not show the Red Army raping German women, looting houses, killing innocent people. They need to show a better Call of Duty Eastern Front game.
I have an idea. How about you have a young Ukrainian peasant boy who witnesses his mother being raped by German soldiers and his village razed to the ground by the fascist invaders? And he joins the Red Army. That would be more plausible than this Enemy at the Gates knockoff. Or witnesses his Jewish neighbors being murdered by the Nazis and decides to do something about it. What are they going to do next? Rip off Defiance?
Activision will probably rip off the movie Defiance after reading this blog post. EA Games and Activision need to get a clue. Do something more plausible. Quit glossing over the horrors of the Eastern Front and trivializing into a video game. This is why Americans will never understand the real horror of the Eastern Front. Americans never had to witness their sisters and wives being raped, or seeing people hanged for “partisan activity” and having to watch like Gladiatorial death matches. The Nazis loved death. They were a culture of death that warped the minds of young Germans and the Soviets warped the minds of young Russians, where a pissing contest between two dictators, became a horrific war of racial porportions. The Russians were branded as subhumans and untermenschen by the Germans. They were racially inferior by Aryan standards. The Nazis wished to exterminate the Slavs and create German settled lands.
German soldiers were told to think of Russians in this way. German soldiers didn’t care about property because these people were inferior subhumans. The Germans and their racist ideas to kill the Slavs off. The Polish Catholics were first on the list. The Poles were subhumans.
Hitler proclaimed that he wanted to kill off the Polish race. Americans will never understand how people lived through this horrific savagery. The horrors of the Eastern Front that are vividly captured by the documentary series: Russia’s War: Blood Upon the Snow, better than some cheesy American war film like Enemy at the Gates.
Activision needs to spend more time watching Russia’s War: Blood upon the Snow, and less time watching Enemy at the Gates. Shame on you at Activision for featuring Stalingrad only. Shame on you, Activision.
Activision is stupid. They should quit showing Stalingrad all over again and quit using Hollywood sterotypes and cliches about Russians and feature real Russian people dying for their country, instead of retarded characters from Soviet propaganda movies.
They depicted the Polish Forces in Exile in Call of Duty 3, but not in other games. They need to feature them again. The Polish Forces in Exile were the toughest, most loyal and determined soldiers of the Allied cause during the war. They were highly respected and feared by the Germans.
Call of Duty games are too Hollywood. They don’t even feature the Italians in any of their games. They need more Italian soldiers. They should have a game about the Yugoslavian resistance movement called the Chetniks or Partisans led by Tito and the conflict between them that tore Yugoslavia and amounted to a pissing contest between Mihailovic and Tito.
Mihailovic, unlike the biased Wikipedia articles about him, was not a collaborator. Would a collaborator rescue 500 American airmen and prove his loyalty to the Allies when they abandoned him for Tito. Tito was the master manipulator. Mihailovic was a simple soldier. Tito was better at the political game better than Mihailovic was and that is why Tito won.
Tito was a better politician. The Yugoslav Kingdom was racked by factional disloyalties. The treasonous Croats allied themselves with the Nazis to get back at the Serbs who ruled their country. Unlike the anti-Serb bias in Sworn to Secrecy, it was not to overthrow “Serbian domination” Although that was an Ustasha propaganda staple, it was to establish a fascist state called the Independent State of Croatia, or NDH, or Nezavisna Drzava Hrvatska.
Few Chetniks sympathized with the Germans. It was a campaign for the Germans to take advantage of the factionalized split between Mihailovic and Tito and their Chetniks and Partisans. They recruited zealous Chetniks that were anti-Communist into their ranks.
I’d rather believe history.army.mil rather than the biased and innaccurate Wikipedia on the Chetniks. Mihailovic never cleansed Bosnian villages, although like the media, Wikipedia conflates every Balkans situation like the 1990s wars over there and seeing it that lens, rather than looking at the straight history.
Enough of the tangent. Call of Duty is too much like cinematic Hollywood movies. Call of Duty is pseudo-history pure and simple, though more accurate than Wikipedia and some Hollywood movies. At least it contains some real history and allows players to experience history in ways that history books could never do.
Because you’re playing it with and keyboard and mouse and living it for yourself. I just wanna see players live the real history instead of this pseudo-historical, pseudo-cinematic, garbage that already constitutes Call of Duty, Medal of Honor, and Battlefield series of games. I suppose no one would play them without the cinematic Hollywood appeal.
I’m afraid I am divided on that one.
They need more realism and less bang bang shoot em up Hollywood fake stuff. World War II is not like Saving Private Ryan. The P-51s at the end of the movie should have been P-47 Thunderbolts because P-47s were more suited to ground attack and were generally used in that role because P-47 could take more damage than a P-51.
Silent Hunter III is too much like Das Boot and Subsim regularly takes advantage of that, which is why GWX 3.0 mod is EXTREMELY popular. Hats off to the people at subsim.com folks. I recommend modding the hell out of Call of Duty and rehashing the plot of Call of Duty to capture the essence of the carnage, savagery, and horror of the Eastern Front, instead of Enemy at the Gates rehashes.
Stop showing Stalingrad over and over again. Please do a real game with a peasant boy named Dmitri Petrov, speaking ACTUAL Russian, instead of fake accented Russian accent, there’s subtitles people. Start using them. That takes place in the Donbass or Stalino Oblast of Eastern Ukraine where a farmboy joins the Soviet Red Army and has to escape for his life or be killed by the Fascist invaders. That would be more fun than a Stalingrad Enemy at the Gates, ripoff, rehashed as a video game. Stop showing Stalingrad over and over again. There is more to the Eastern Front that Stalingrad. How about Leningrad? The Siege of Leningrad was horrific in of itself and just as dramatic as Stalingrad and not shown in American movies. But Activision has to use hackneyed cliches.
They should have a game take place during the siege of Leningrad. They need to have Global War Call of Duty, where you play an American soldier in Europe and an American in the Pacific, a British soldier in Burma, North Africa, and
British fighting Japanese. That would be awwwwwwwwwwwwwwesome. To have a Gurkha soldier fighting for the British would even more awesome. They should have a Nepalese Gurkha soldier fighting for the British during a British campaign. To have a Nepalese mountain hillbilly join the British. The Gurkhas are some of the bravest motherfuckers to ever call themselves soldiers.
Those people are ballsy. Their kukri knife and their bravery of never surrendering in battle and always being loyal, never having to be yelled at with the usual bluster, which I admit would put R. Lee Ermey to shame. He’d wonder why they were laughing at him.
Those people rock. It would more plausible to have a Gurkha mountain boy and more dramatic and exciting to have a Gurkha fighting for the British Army.
I’d love to see that. Call of Duty 7: Global War. They need to go back to their roots and make a real World War II game. They need to have squad coordination, instead of lone wolf with a bunch of guys action. They need a ranking system to issue orders. They need to have characters that act like professional soldiers, instead of whiners would under normal circumstances would fold in REAL combat.
Call of Duty 7 would be awwwwwwwesome. They need forgotten campaigns like the Australians fighting at Tobruk and New Guinea. The forgotten, but just as dramatic campaigns like Normandy or Berlin.
Call of Duty needs to quit starting off the Eastern Front campaign at Stalingrad and go back to a whole war before that in 1941. Men of War better captures the essence of the War on the Eastern Front, because it is made by Russians that better understand what the war was like, than American Hollywood wannabes at Activision. It is still a real and sacred issue to them. They NEVER bash Great Patriotic War heroes the way the Far-left bashes veterans in America. If they did that, and said that about Great Patriotic War veterans, they’d get killed. The far-left knows absolutely NOTHING about Russia. Russian people, for one, respect their elders, and don’t badmouth their parents like these far-left Leninist wannabes do. And Russians appreciate what they have in front of them. They learned to live with nothing to eat at times at harsh conditions that changed over time. The far-left activist jackasses would not last long in Russia with the kind of anti-patriotic attitude that they have. Sadly, Russia is being taken over by self-hating liberal American scum ideas and forced down their throat by the American feminist news media. Their ways are sexist, compared to our own, they keep saying, to a society that respects women and is horrified by American media garbage.
That is why people in Russia don’t like Call of Duty because it is too much like American media propaganda about Russia, instead of cold-hard unpolitically-correct varnished history that Americans love so much. The far-left college professors and their varnished politically-correct history wouldn’t last long against Russians that experienced horrors that would make jealous far-left Marxist wannabe Starbucks drinking college students want to cringe. They would hate Russia if they actually went there and understood them. They live with their parents when these assholes make fools of themselves with their fake protest signs condemning American fascism, sexism, racism, etc.
If they said that about Russia, they would be shunned from society. The far-left praises “dissidents” that turn that country into a self-hating cesspool like America is. America hates Russia because it proud of its identity as a nation. As seen by this propaganda piece in Front Page Magazine by Ben Shapiro.
My point is Call of Duty needs to stop making Hollywood pseudo-historical crap like they are currently making and focus on real history.
I suppose they’ll base the Australian campaign on the film Kokoda.
They need to feature more players. An Axis game would be too politically incorrect for many people. But in OFP, they have a Soviet player that defects to the Resistance, they could do that for the Germans. They could have it be like the film Stalingrad, which is far better than Enemy at the Gates any day, with an Anti-Nazi German soldier that surrenders to the Americans. They feature the Japanese in Letters from Iwo Jima.
Why not do that? I suppose people would be screaming about racism, trivializng the Holocaust, etc, and ADL and all those braying jackasses would start screaming about the Holocaust, even though we won’t be glorifying the Holocaust like Neo-Nazis do.
Playing the other side and supporting evil. Let’s not do that.
No one cares about oblasts or krais or what they are called in Russia, because it is not average American talk that people care about the states of the USA because you live there, you know.
Saving Private Ryan is also historically inaccurate. Too many Hollywood war movies make the mistake of having the lead characters have their rank insignia on their helmets. All this does is tell the enemy sniper, “Hey I’m a high-ranking officer here, shoot me!”
Note the Tom Hanks character is wearing his captain’s rank insignia on his helmet. This would make him an easy target for an enemy sniper. In the real war, officers never wore their rank insignia painted on their helmets because that gave you away to an enemy sniper as a leader of an outfit of men. This would alert the enemy sniper and they would shoot you first. That makes you an easy target in real life. In the real war, Captain Miller would have been killed by an enemy sniper without question. They would have shot him first, rather than the other guy.
That would make him an easy target for an enemy sniper. That’s one thing Hollywood always got wrong about war movies. They would feature a soldier with his insignia painted on his helmet. They never did this in the real war. War is not a Hollywood movie. There is more to World War II than Saving Private Ryan. Sadly, Activision fails to understand or comprehend this. World War II is not an action movie like in an arcade.
Medal of Honor is too biased towards accuracy points. In the real war, you did not earn rewards for high accuracy in combat. That didn’t matter because combat is not training. You’d only get that in training and not in combat. all that matters is getting lead on target. Accuracy rating is secondary. They have to make it fun so that player’s will play it I suppose.
History Channel needs to quit showing this Ancient Aliens pseudo-history nonsense that has led it to being a laughing stock among historians everywhere. Ancient Aliens is a bunch of bullshit. It makes the point that aliens built the pyramids. Ancient man was far smarter than these idiots like Giorgio Tsoukalos want us to believe. These people are frauds. They are idiotic people that suggest aliens left their mark on ancient history.
That is a myth, a lie. It is not true. Most real historians do not think that it is true. Most people would laugh it off. Sadly, Wikipedia calls it pseudo-history, which it is, but that implies, that it historical basis, which it doesn’t. It’s junk history at best. Ancient Aliens has shown how debased the History Channel has become. Ancient Aliens is the worst TV program in the History Channel’s history. It is the least historically accuract TV show to ever air on TV. It gives a mouthpiece to lying historians and caters to the reality TV market.
The guy in SpongeBob had a point about how his viewers eat that paranormal stuff up. I’m beginning to think that writer who wrote that SpongeBob episode was right. I think the writer was making a jab at TV shows like Ancient Aliens. Ancient Alienation. They should rename it Ancient Bullshit. It is bullshit at its finest. The History Channel has chosen to debase itself with this nonsense. A professor called it pseudo-history and full of pseudo-science. Just look it up in Wikipedia. Be warned, Wikipedia is as hysterical as those guys are. Nobody believes junk historical theories about aliens. There are no aliens that left their mark on history. I do not see any ET evidence on monuments. It caters too much the UFO nuts on the far-left that always hate the government and are anti-American. The lunatic UFO nuts that make up this nonsense to sell lies that ancient history was built by aliens because primitive man was too stupid to build them himself. This view is factually WRONG.
An English professor with pulleys and primitive lifts proved that ancient man could do it. This junk history will never die. Please write a letter to the History Channel to tell them to stop this nonsense. History Channel has become like Wikipedia. They should rename it the Wiki History Channel because of the debased nonsense.
There are too many nagging people who pronounce the History Channel as pseudo-history because of Ancient Aliens, rather than taking into account the other programs on there. RationalWiki is right when it says it is not a source of historical programming anymore. Why have you debased yourself, History Channel? My advice, DO NOT WATCH ANCIENT ALIENS!
Ancient Aliens is absurd! The absurdity is so obvious to suggest that the Germans had help from aliens building their advanced equipment! WRONG! BULLSHIT! The Germans were among the smartest and most intelligent designers of equipment far ahead of their time and they didn’t need aliens from other worlds to help them. Why watch a show with prepostorous theories about history? The rise of the pseudohistory genre. Very interesting book. Wikipedia has bred a generation of idiots. Wikipedia is the sign of a debased society. Most people would laugh at these fools, but Wikipedia has to label them and pretend it’s authorative with rational skepticism. There is nothing rational about Wikipedia when it’s edited by a bunch of irrational and hysterical idiots.
The editing quality sounds like second-hand opinions from an editorial, rather than real expert analysis
Giorgio Tsoukalos is not accepted by academia, Eric von Daniken isn’t either, and neither is Wikipedia.
Wikipedia just fuels the hysteria of these clowns. These fringe theory idiots by Wikipedia pretending that it is “rational” and “intelligent” on this subject and having academia back it up on Wikipedia, is pure nonsense. Wikipedia was never and never will be accepted by academics.
Historians think that Wikipedia is pseudo-history because Wikipedia makes numerous errors, misquotations, wrong dates, poorly-written half-assed articles, and articles that sound like poorly-written high-school or college essays.
Wikipedia IS pseudohistory by its own definition of history not being accepted by academia, not having a historographic method. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that anyone can edit. People that don’t have peer-reviewed degrees can write hysterical nonsense like in the pseudo-history article. Be aware of this. Do not use Wikipedia to rely on pseudo-history, either.