Dexter
Arcane
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2011
- Messages
- 15,655
Yeah, game looks a bit shit. On the other hand apparently it's a "side project" and they're working on some bigger release for 2017:Turret Section: The Game. They ain't even trying anymore, edgy theme and decent presentation is all they're got.
„IS Defense” is a game set in politically-fictional 2020 – where the expansion of ISIS went out of hand. They took over all of Northern Africa, spreading their genocidal understanding of the world’s order. Strongly armed, vast in numbers and prepared for everything, the Islamic State is launching the invasion upon Europe, over the entire Mediterranean Sea.
The player takes the role of NATO’s stationary machine-gun operator, deployed to defend the shores of Europe. His task is to blast as many of the invaders as possible, until his glorious death. To do so, he has NATO support forces, his Machinegun and Rocket Launcher at his disposal. During the progress of this heroic defense, he gets the opportunities to upgrade his gear, his body and army rank – which affects the efficiency of the called support.
This game is our small side-project and is our personal veto against what is happening in the Middle East nowadays. As well as an attempt at resurrecting a pretty dead genre of games like „Operation Wolf” or „Beach Head” – in a state of the art, modern adaptation.
Well we have entire genre compromised of single warcraft map.A whole game comprised entirely of turret sections? How progressive.
That's exactly the point (from the standpoint of people who would be offended by this).I take issue with the notion that this game is edgy or controversial. Compared to the jingoism and xenophobic paranoia of your typical Call of Duty game, the premise of this game almost seems grounded. Or is it controversial precisely because it hits too close to home?
The sad thing was that they eventually managed to publish a small multiplayer game called Breach later on, and it was shitty and broken. I think there may have been other reasons why nobody would publish Six Days in Fallujah...That's exactly the point (from the standpoint of people who would be offended by this).I take issue with the notion that this game is edgy or controversial. Compared to the jingoism and xenophobic paranoia of your typical Call of Duty game, the premise of this game almost seems grounded. Or is it controversial precisely because it hits too close to home?
Remember this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Days_in_Fallujah
The marines who actually served in a war wanted to create a game as a sort of virtual memoire of their experience and even when the game was finished no one would publish it.
Jingoistic military shooters are kosher=> you serve the Jew by invading muslim countries and bringing "democracy". Defending Europe from muslim hordes has a bit defferent vibe(especially in the context of current events)=>this is something a stormfag or a /pol/ poster could find appealing. It may look similar at first glance but SJWs look at every tiny detail and might find it more problematic than the hated but somewhat more tolerable classic dudebro americanism.I take issue with the notion that this game is edgy or controversial. Compared to the jingoism and xenophobic paranoia of your typical Call of Duty game, the premise of this game almost seems grounded. Or is it controversial precisely because it hits too close to home?
I take issue with the notion that this game is edgy or controversial. Compared to the jingoism and xenophobic paranoia of your typical Call of Duty game, the premise of this game almost seems grounded. Or is it controversial precisely because it hits too close to home?