Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - RSS Headlines   RSS Headlines   Twitter   Twitter

Op Ed

War Is Boring - ‘The Witcher 3’ Understands War. Thanks JDreyer.
"Many video games are power fantasies, and most that involve warfare depict the glory of combat and put the player in the lead role. Not so in The Witcher 3. Geralt has his own motivations, and he does his best to avoid politics and the larger conflict between Nilfgaard and the Northern Kingdoms.

And CD Projekt never depicts war as glorious or fun. Soldiers describe combat as a lot of boredom and waiting punctuated by moments of frenzied madness. The Northern War of the The Witcher 3 is all about waiting, survival and boredom."

Gamasutra - Game dev veterans speak out against game industry ageism.
"It's a topic that's rarely broached, and during the ensuing discussion a broad array of points were made about how "old" in the game industry is often much younger than you think, and what game makers can do to keep their skills sharp and find new ways to apply them as they grow older.

Everything from becoming a game development educator to crafting games for new markets (including the small but growing audience of people over 50 who regularly play video games) was discussed, and if you missed catching it in person you should definitely watch it for free now via the official GDC YouTube channel."

View
24 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


24. Re: Op Ed Dec 31, 2015, 11:33 Megalodon
 
InBlack wrote on Dec 31, 2015, 05:12:
Soldiers live and wonder why...

Glen Cook is awesome.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

23. Re: Op Ed Dec 31, 2015, 05:12 InBlack
 
Soldiers live and wonder why...  
Avatar 46994
 



I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

22. Re: Op Ed Dec 31, 2015, 04:43 eRe4s3r
 
jdreyer wrote on Dec 31, 2015, 03:12:
eRe4s3r wrote on Dec 31, 2015, 02:35:
The funny thing is that Daesh would grow infinitely in strength if a single western soldier entered Syria to fight on the side of Assad which would be the only side Russia would accept foreign intervention on. Do you realize that is exactly what Daesh wants? Once they can say "those are all invaders" they'd have the rebels and Saudi Arabia on their side. And Russia would only protect Assad, I doubt you'd see Russia protect US ground troops....

Anyone who thinks there is a western military solution to Syria/Iraq and yes, Afghanistan is lacking historical background knowledge.

Also war nowadays is not against other nations anymore... asymmetrical war can not be won with drone or air strikes without massive ground troops but in the same way you can not sent western ground troops into Syria.. it'd be suicide.

Russia is only interested in two things:

1. Propping up Assad. Which is a shame, seeing that Daesh is the much larger and much better funded regional threat. Also, Russia wouldn't be losing precious military assets if going after Daesh, since bombing Syrian Turkmen tends to piss off Turkey enough to shoot down your planes. Also, it pisses off the Turkmen.

2. Showcasing Russian military wares. You don't launch super expensive cruise missiles from the Caspian when dropping dumb bombs from Sukhois costs a tenth the price. You do it to show off your military prowess in hopes of making sales.

Yeah, and by propping Assad and establishing local air control Russia made the play that everyone else has to follow. Russia is there legally, authorized by the elected "dictatorment", unlike literally any other combat aircraft in Syrian airspace who don't even have any UN mandate. So Russia could in theory close the air-space and shoot anything down, if it wanted and if Assad asked nicely.... you don't put air superiority fighters within Syria just to show them off for no reason after all... so the thought must have crossed the planning staff in Russia After all, who has planes in Syria that need S400's as AA? Sure as hell not Daesh or the rebels.
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

21. Re: Op Ed Dec 31, 2015, 03:24 Scottish Martial Arts
 
jdreyer wrote on Dec 31, 2015, 02:36:

It's worse than that even. I largely agree with this article which is where I must have read about the study.

That suggests people are willing to support a war, as long as it doesn't impact them. Which is kind of the opposite from how it should be. It also suggests a delta between the military and the rest of the population. SHould the lack of understanding and common ground grow, it could have severe consequences for our democracy.

I agree completely. The end of the citizen-soldier ethos, the professionalization of the US military, and the end of the draft have created a situation in which military service, or at least the willingness to go if necessary, has ceased to be a part of civic obligations. Instead, wars are fought by other people, namely a minuscule minority of our fellow citizens, most of whom we don't know or interact with, and the costs of the wars we ask for are born by everyone but ourselves. We can ask for war when we feel frightened, unburdened of the obligation to consider whether its really a good idea, never have to look at the consequences for a moment, and then, if our military adventures turn out to be less than thoroughly victorious, we can tune out the stalemate and the casualty reports and the destroyed lives and countries and pretend that it's not even happening. That was exactly what we did in the post 9/11 years, we should be ashamed for it, and it makes me sick to my stomach that we're all to ready to do it again. And we're ready to do it over again over a couple of losers with AKs who have no choice but to engage in international terrorism because the strategic position of their actual "Islamic State" is so fucked that they need to do something to inspire people to continue to join up, because being hemmed in by enemies on all sides and engaging in a long term attritional stalemate is hardly a rallying cry to jihad.

Furthermore, while we collectively lost our shit over Paris and San Bernadino, and not entirely without justification, why do we think that it is any different for the people in Iraq, or Afghanistan, or Pakistan, or Yemen, or anywhere else where we conduct drone and air strikes that occasionally obliterate a wedding party or a hospital? Just because our bombs are dropped from 30,000 feet rather than be hand carried by a suicide attacker doesn't mean the dead civilians are any less dead, and the anger that that engenders is any less real.

I am not a pacifist by any stretch. But only an idiot -- and apparently we are a nation of idiots -- thinks the cost-benefit analysis of warfare works to your benefit by default. Sometimes war is worth the costs, but that's pretty rare. Far more often, the costs far outweigh the benefits, but because of poor leadership, concerns about national honor, short sighted greed, or simple fear, war is pursued when it wasn't worth it. Now that America has established a system in which we enjoy the luxury of never having to perceive the cost of war, we're only going to further waste our strength on ill-conceived ventures that may make us "feel" safe, but do nothing to actual further our interests or enhance our actual security.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

20. Re: Op Ed Dec 31, 2015, 03:12 jdreyer
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Dec 31, 2015, 02:35:
The funny thing is that Daesh would grow infinitely in strength if a single western soldier entered Syria to fight on the side of Assad which would be the only side Russia would accept foreign intervention on. Do you realize that is exactly what Daesh wants? Once they can say "those are all invaders" they'd have the rebels and Saudi Arabia on their side. And Russia would only protect Assad, I doubt you'd see Russia protect US ground troops....

Anyone who thinks there is a western military solution to Syria/Iraq and yes, Afghanistan is lacking historical background knowledge.

Also war nowadays is not against other nations anymore... asymmetrical war can not be won with drone or air strikes without massive ground troops but in the same way you can not sent western ground troops into Syria.. it'd be suicide.

Russia is only interested in two things:

1. Propping up Assad. Which is a shame, seeing that Daesh is the much larger and much better funded regional threat. Also, Russia wouldn't be losing precious military assets if going after Daesh, since bombing Syrian Turkmen tends to piss off Turkey enough to shoot down your planes. Also, it pisses off the Turkmen.

2. Showcasing Russian military wares. You don't launch super expensive cruise missiles from the Caspian when dropping dumb bombs from Sukhois costs a tenth the price. You do it to show off your military prowess in hopes of making sales.
 
Avatar 22024
 



The land in Minecraft is flat, Minecraft simulates the Earth, ergo the Earth is flat.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

19. Re: Op Ed Dec 31, 2015, 02:36 jdreyer
 
Scottish Martial Arts wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 23:39:
jdreyer wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 22:10:
There was an interesting survey the other day. 65% of the people thought we needed boots on the ground to battle ISIS. However 65% of people said they had no interest personally in joining the military to ensure that the job got done.

To get on my soapbox for a moment, it's further evidence that the American people don't take the military and military affairs seriously. We'll praise the military to high heaven, proclaim every last service member a hero -- ignoring that the military like every other human institution is made up of actual people and not superheroes, some of whom may indeed be heroic, but some of whom are truly terrible, and most are somewhere in between -- and thump our collective chests about having the most powerful military on the planet, while once again ignoring that you can have the most powerful military on the planet and be nowhere close to omnipotent. But the thing we won't do is give serious thought to military policy, military weapons acquisitions, and whether or not what we can reasonably hope to achieve in a military campaign has a cost-benefit analysis that comes out in our favor. Unless you genuinely believe that a given threat is great enough, and a military response likely enough to succeed, that you would be willing to sacrifice the life of your son or daughter to see that threat defeated, then it's time to stop posturing, and stop dick wagging, and start doing some serious thought about our foreign policy goals and what military intervention might do to further or set back those goals. But why think when we can just pretend that going to war is as simple "killing them all"?

Thus endeth the soapbox rant.

It's worse than that even. I largely agree with this article which is where I must have read about the study. Key takeaways:

The seemingly honest efforts of the Department of Defense to make the composition of the military vaguely resemble a slice of the actual American populace are undermined by the fact that most Americans of military fighting age don’t serve. More precisely, they don’t want to serve. Which wouldn’t be hypocritical if they didn’t also want a “boots on the ground” military response to the Islamic State.

Supporting the rights of women, LGBT and religious minorities to serve in the military is fine, but asking that they kill and die on behalf of a war that you yourself refuse to participate in is, to resuscitate a word, dishonorable. It’s an improper attitude towards violence that reduces the call for shared sacrifice to an ironic, detached gesture of vague “support”.

That suggests people are willing to support a war, as long as it doesn't impact them. Which is kind of the opposite from how it should be. It also suggests a delta between the military and the rest of the population. SHould the lack of understanding and common ground grow, it could have severe consequences for our democracy.
 
Avatar 22024
 



The land in Minecraft is flat, Minecraft simulates the Earth, ergo the Earth is flat.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

18. Re: Op Ed Dec 31, 2015, 02:35 eRe4s3r
 
jdreyer wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 22:10:
HorrorScope wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 18:23:
harlock wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 14:32:
war isnt nation vs nation.. its man vs man - thats why its such a fucking horror...

nobody understands shit until it happens to them and thats the problem - they are locked into their own little world, mistakenly imagining it to be the whole wide world out there - and everybody does this, confusing their own private bullshit for how "it really is" because they cant accept how insignificant they really are in the actual BIG scheme of things... every little personal thing has to be universally relevant - its just ass-backwards

Lot of truth in that. War is nation to nation and man to man imo. Yeah I'm pretty disgusted how too many people are ok with war as if it's a spectacle and if someone looks at you wrong... WAR!, especially when it isn't any of theirs. I honestly I'm hung up on why people want machine guns in their home and think that is an ideal world to live in and/or think the boogie man is coming to get them and then praise be to the God of Love, Jesus. Hmmm...
There was an interesting survey the other day. 65% of the people thought we needed boots on the ground to battle ISIS. However 65% of people said they had no interest personally in joining the military to ensure that the job got done.

The funny thing is that Daesh would grow infinitely in strength if a single western soldier entered Syria to fight on the side of Assad which would be the only side Russia would accept foreign intervention on. Do you realize that is exactly what Daesh wants? Once they can say "those are all invaders" they'd have the rebels and Saudi Arabia on their side. And Russia would only protect Assad, I doubt you'd see Russia protect US ground troops....

Anyone who thinks there is a western military solution to Syria/Iraq and yes, Afghanistan is lacking historical background knowledge.

Also war nowadays is not against other nations anymore... asymmetrical war can not be won with drone or air strikes without massive ground troops but in the same way you can not sent western ground troops into Syria.. it'd be suicide.
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

17. Re: Op Ed Dec 31, 2015, 01:28 Suppa7
 
HorrorScope wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 18:23:
I honestly I'm hung up on why people want machine guns in their home and think that is an ideal world to live in and/or think the boogie man is coming to get them and then praise be to the God of Love, Jesus. Hmmm...

It's proof we are just monkeys with a few extra brain cells, aka humans are better understood as still members of the animal kingdom, not civilization. Hate to say it but some people just have shitty genes which lead to certain nervous systems behaving strangely.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

16. Re: Op Ed Dec 30, 2015, 23:39 Scottish Martial Arts
 
jdreyer wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 22:10:
There was an interesting survey the other day. 65% of the people thought we needed boots on the ground to battle ISIS. However 65% of people said they had no interest personally in joining the military to ensure that the job got done.

To get on my soapbox for a moment, it's further evidence that the American people don't take the military and military affairs seriously. We'll praise the military to high heaven, proclaim every last service member a hero -- ignoring that the military like every other human institution is made up of actual people and not superheroes, some of whom may indeed be heroic, but some of whom are truly terrible, and most are somewhere in between -- and thump our collective chests about having the most powerful military on the planet, while once again ignoring that you can have the most powerful military on the planet and be nowhere close to omnipotent. But the thing we won't do is give serious thought to military policy, military weapons acquisitions, and whether or not what we can reasonably hope to achieve in a military campaign has a cost-benefit analysis that comes out in our favor. Unless you genuinely believe that a given threat is great enough, and a military response likely enough to succeed, that you would be willing to sacrifice the life of your son or daughter to see that threat defeated, then it's time to stop posturing, and stop dick wagging, and start doing some serious thought about our foreign policy goals and what military intervention might do to further or set back those goals. But why think when we can just pretend that going to war is as simple "killing them all"?

Thus endeth the soapbox rant.

This comment was edited on Dec 31, 2015, 01:06.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

15. Re: Op Ed Dec 30, 2015, 22:10 jdreyer
 
HorrorScope wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 18:23:
harlock wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 14:32:
war isnt nation vs nation.. its man vs man - thats why its such a fucking horror...

nobody understands shit until it happens to them and thats the problem - they are locked into their own little world, mistakenly imagining it to be the whole wide world out there - and everybody does this, confusing their own private bullshit for how "it really is" because they cant accept how insignificant they really are in the actual BIG scheme of things... every little personal thing has to be universally relevant - its just ass-backwards

Lot of truth in that. War is nation to nation and man to man imo. Yeah I'm pretty disgusted how too many people are ok with war as if it's a spectacle and if someone looks at you wrong... WAR!, especially when it isn't any of theirs. I honestly I'm hung up on why people want machine guns in their home and think that is an ideal world to live in and/or think the boogie man is coming to get them and then praise be to the God of Love, Jesus. Hmmm...
There was an interesting survey the other day. 65% of the people thought we needed boots on the ground to battle ISIS. However 65% of people said they had no interest personally in joining the military to ensure that the job got done.
 
Avatar 22024
 



The land in Minecraft is flat, Minecraft simulates the Earth, ergo the Earth is flat.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

14. Re: Op Ed Dec 30, 2015, 21:52 Scottish Martial Arts
 
harlock wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 14:32:
if you watch someone dying in agony, choking on their own blood, right in front of your face... its hard to call it "boring"


The title of the blog is rather facetious. They generally do pretty in depth reporting on military affairs, weapons acquisitions, and foreign policy as it pertains to military intervention and war. This short post -- usually they do several thousand word articles -- is rather lite fare in comparison.

That said, when you do anything in the military, there is a whole hell of a lot of "hurry up and wait", e.g. getting off the bus to the airfield as fast as possible to the beat of "Hur-RY UP! Hur-RY UP! Hurry the FUCK up!" and then... you sit on the tarmac for two and a half hours while the first chalk gets ferried to the AO and your alphanumerically higher platoon/company sits on its ass and waits for the CH-47s to come back.

Long stretches of boredom punctuated by moments of extreme stress/excitement? Sounds about right. Pulling 4 hours of security in the middle of the freezing night definitely falls under the category of long stretches of boredom, but then seeing trip flares go off and hearing the crack of blank rounds as the OPFOR starts probing your strong point definitely qualifies as a moment of extreme excitement. Same deal with that half-second when an artillery simulator goes off at night, and you get the brief moment where the flash of light precedes the BOOM which you don't only hear but feel; that stuff is exciting as hell, but the hours spent pulling security waiting for it to happen, and the hours spent digging your fighting position beforehand certainly fall into the "boring as fuck" category. Given that the Army's training motto was always "Train as you will fight", and given what other combat veterans have described to me, I don't have any reason to doubt that that's basically how it goes in Afghanistan too.

This comment was edited on Dec 30, 2015, 22:07.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

13. Re: Op Ed Dec 30, 2015, 20:42 Cutter
 
HorrorScope wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 18:23:
Lot of truth in that. War is nation to nation and man to man imo. Yeah I'm pretty disgusted how too many people are ok with war as if it's a spectacle and if someone looks at you wrong... WAR!, especially when it isn't any of theirs. I honestly I'm hung up on why people want machine guns in their home and think that is an ideal world to live in and/or think the boogie man is coming to get them and then praise be to the God of Love, Jesus. Hmmm...

That's why I've always had a problem with Nationalism and the whole Us vs. Them mentality. We're the same species inhabiting the same planet yet somehow it always so easily slides back into Us vs. Them. I honestly don't think our species is going to make it in the long run. There are just too many easily led, dumbfucks in the genepool.
 
Avatar 25394
 



"I've got an emo streak. It's part of what makes me so rad." - Rick Sanchez
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

12. Re: Op Ed Dec 30, 2015, 18:23 HorrorScope
 
harlock wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 14:32:
war isnt nation vs nation.. its man vs man - thats why its such a fucking horror...

nobody understands shit until it happens to them and thats the problem - they are locked into their own little world, mistakenly imagining it to be the whole wide world out there - and everybody does this, confusing their own private bullshit for how "it really is" because they cant accept how insignificant they really are in the actual BIG scheme of things... every little personal thing has to be universally relevant - its just ass-backwards

Lot of truth in that. War is nation to nation and man to man imo. Yeah I'm pretty disgusted how too many people are ok with war as if it's a spectacle and if someone looks at you wrong... WAR!, especially when it isn't any of theirs. I honestly I'm hung up on why people want machine guns in their home and think that is an ideal world to live in and/or think the boogie man is coming to get them and then praise be to the God of Love, Jesus. Hmmm...
 
Avatar 17232
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

11. Re: Op Ed Dec 30, 2015, 16:58 eRe4s3r
 
Also made it crash 10 times more likely.. at least if you added that mod mid-game ,)  
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

10. Re: Op Ed Dec 30, 2015, 16:42 SlimRam
 
Cutter wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 15:28:
Creston wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 10:29:
Honestly, while I like the ultra-grim tone in the Witcher 3, I wish there was more visible of the war between Nilfgaard and the North. Not necessarily mass battles or anything, but at least skirmishes here and there, contested territory, etc.

It almost feels as if you've come into the area during a time of cease-fire.

Agreed. One thing I really like in FO4 so far are how you regularly come across random groups battling each other - particularly after the BoS shows up. The first really good one was I heard a shitload of gunfire and explosions in the distance so hurried on to see what was happening and it was this large firefight between the BoS and a group of Super Mutants at one of the listening arrays complete with Vertibird in on the action. You see people fighting raiders, beasties, etc. Makes the world feel more alive.

The same was true about Skyrim. I remember playing it and thinking,"Where the HELL is this civil war everyone keeps talking about?" Then a mod named Warzones was released and then you actually fought in small battles across the country, made the game 10 times better IMO.
 
Avatar 57335
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

9. Re: Op Ed Dec 30, 2015, 15:33 Cutter
 
Ageiesm is a problem everywhere and it's been happening in the rest of the working world a lot longer, so welcome to the party. There are laws against it but they don't mean anything because it's a civil matter and no one has the time and money to waste suing someone for discrimination when even if you win you don't stand to gain anything.

 
Avatar 25394
 



"I've got an emo streak. It's part of what makes me so rad." - Rick Sanchez
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

8. Re: Op Ed Dec 30, 2015, 15:28 Cutter
 
Creston wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 10:29:
Honestly, while I like the ultra-grim tone in the Witcher 3, I wish there was more visible of the war between Nilfgaard and the North. Not necessarily mass battles or anything, but at least skirmishes here and there, contested territory, etc.

It almost feels as if you've come into the area during a time of cease-fire.

Agreed. One thing I really like in FO4 so far are how you regularly come across random groups battling each other - particularly after the BoS shows up. The first really good one was I heard a shitload of gunfire and explosions in the distance so hurried on to see what was happening and it was this large firefight between the BoS and a group of Super Mutants at one of the listening arrays complete with Vertibird in on the action. You see people fighting raiders, beasties, etc. Makes the world feel more alive.

 
Avatar 25394
 



"I've got an emo streak. It's part of what makes me so rad." - Rick Sanchez
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

7. Re: Op Ed Dec 30, 2015, 14:32 harlock
 
Scottish Martial Arts wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 13:23:
harlock wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 10:31:
what a jackass... who clearly hasnt been to war himself

a true hero to armchair jackasses everywhere, im sure

Was there anything which he described that didn't sound authentic?

if you watch someone dying in agony, choking on their own blood, right in front of your face... its hard to call it "boring"

i get it - i understand the sentiment.. but its just more of the same kind of ubiquitous sociopathy that is somehow just accepted as the baseline mainstream... or straight up rewarded, as in the burgeoning corporatocracy

war isnt nation vs nation.. its man vs man - thats why its such a fucking horror...

nobody understands shit until it happens to them and thats the problem - they are locked into their own little world, mistakenly imagining it to be the whole wide world out there - and everybody does this, confusing their own private bullshit for how "it really is" because they cant accept how insignificant they really are in the actual BIG scheme of things... every little personal thing has to be universally relevant - its just ass-backwards

boredom is a LUXURY.. a bored soldier is on the way to being a dead soldier
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

6. Re: Op Ed Dec 30, 2015, 13:36 Wolfox
 
harlock wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 12:52:
Wolfox wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 12:47:
harlock wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 10:31:
what a jackass... who clearly hasnt been to war himself

Uh... have you?

yeh but what do you care?

I don't. Carry on.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 

5. Re: Op Ed Dec 30, 2015, 13:23 Scottish Martial Arts
 
harlock wrote on Dec 30, 2015, 10:31:
what a jackass... who clearly hasnt been to war himself

a true hero to armchair jackasses everywhere, im sure

Was there anything which he described that didn't sound authentic?

My dad was a career Army officer and combat veteran, and while I was briefly in the Army, a medical problem resulted in an early end to my career before I got anywhere close to a combat deployment. So without having seen war itself, I've been around a lot of men who have, both those who liked being in combat (at least aspects of it), like my father, and those whose spirit was utterly broken by it, like a TAC officer of mine, who, when I first met him, had just returned from deployment to New Orleans after Katrina, and had just returned from Iraq before that, and who, on describing the bodies floating in the flood waters of Katrina, said "I've seen enough of fucking death" with a tone that was as grave and as mournful and as spiritless as I have ever heard in my life.

What the author, who may or may not be a veteran -- there's no biographical information about him on the site -- describes of The Witcher 3 certainly lines up with everything I ever heard combat veterans describe to me.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >