Real life scenario

[hosa]

Well I felt insurgency mode in pr to be a bit edgy first. Something I doupt some big company would make a real game of it.
I heard some palestinians had made fps-game about fighting israelis.

[Cassius]

Some palestinians made mods about blowing themselfs up in a crowded market.

[The Crimson Major]

Russia/South Ossetia vs Georgia would be incredibly one-sided. I don't think it would be very fun to play as Georgia.

[Peally]

Please note that if anything offends you, it is my own opinion and you are entitled to mentally (not actually for the sake of forum work-safety) shove it up my arse . And if any mod decides this is too political feel free to use your godly powers to quite effectively kill my post.

I wouldn't consider the Georgian/Russian Conflict a full out war (the countries are quite unbalanced military-wise), and thus not a very good candidate for PR, which simulates full blown NATO vs. MEC/PLA conflicts. Just my un-political opinion on the need of this particular conflict being modelled . In either case, the Russian army is being worked on by a dedicated team, so you should be able to fight against their fictional (emphasis on fictional) OpFor. PR has the combat, while trying to avoid the actual conflicts that could anger certain parties or individuals. Notice how you don't need to have a real enemy to have a believable war breakout. Look at Call of Duty's Al Asad and ArmA's North and South Sahrani. Both depict very similar-to-life things that could happen, but avoids the political arguments. People praise gameplay instead of insulting the locations and hostile sides of the conflicts.

Plus, opinion varies extremely on personality. A buddy that plays PR with me and some others has indeed served tours in the middle east and has been engaged in combat on multiple occasions still loves to play insurgent mode as the insurgents with the rest of us. We've managed to down plenty a Merlin with our AKs and RPGs .

Short answer: You will never see most modern wars depicted in PR IMHO. Insurgencies are a different brand of combat from full out war and therefore create a radically different gametype. Insurgency mode could easily be set in any location in the world between any factions. For godly reasons that be the moderators chose the middle east as the location for the mode.

Again, feel free to tell me to shove it if need be, this is just my covered-in-potential-counter-arguments post at 3:35 AM .

[Thermis]

Originally Posted by lord rifle

good topic.
the way i see it is that it IS important to be sensitive, especially with something like war. for that reason alot of media depicting the truth of war -ripped apart burned american bodies etc- is not available to us.
however, the other issue here, besides sensitivity, that is so important is censorship. although sensitivity is important to respect, i fell it is MORE important to show EVERYTHING as rule. we are all paying for the war with our taxes so we should have FULL access to any amount of media depicting the horrors of war.
it is worse to have censorship of war than a lack of sensitivity. full availability of uncesored war media it must be the way forward. or else we live in lal al landf. it is not fair that [our] men kill on behalf of others yet they/we cannot access their expressions and and minfestations of war.
i know it is harsh, but that life and war

Please don't turn this into a political argument. Stick to the original idea of your opinion on if real life scenarios should be included or not. Censorship really has nothing to do with it.
And you really do not want to see what you describe you really don't. People complain about video games making kids screwy what do you think would happen if they were shown uncut war images on public TV. This is a game and it should keep its game atmosphere. If you want to experience the true reality of war join the service.

[Arnoldio]

Real scenarios should be included, but only if they are been done and ended.

Also there could be imaginal scenarios like hostage rescue or something...