Game News Company of Heroes 2 gets Metacritic bombed by upset Russians

[Corporate_Jew_Master]

Having seen a stream of CoH2 singleplayer, I can say with certainty that

1.The game is shit.

2. Russkie butthurt is completely justified in this case.

Both sides treated their prisoners inhumanely. CoH 2 however paints the Wehrmacht as an army of noble knights who could do no wrong while the red army is a bunch of Saps as imagined by Cleve. If they wanted it to be objective they should've showed atrocities commited by both sides or just none at all. Tales of Valor had no such bullshit but the western front also had it's execution of prisoners by both sides and rookie American GIs fucking up royally. You never see any of that though.

But history is written by the victors so the germans and the russians will get pissed upon and the others will not. CoH 2 is a boring ass run of the mill rts anyway, nothing of real value is lost.

 

[Grinolf]

Usually the moral high ground comes from America's role in the world post WWII. Just look at the expectation that America would get involved in conflicts like Kosovo.

Thank you for supporting the worst stereotypes about USA. The Kosovo conflict was about a poor kosovars and oppressive serbs. Indeed, why ever pretend to understand one of the most complicated region on the earth, when you can paint black the one side, white the other and say "Fuck off" to international lawы, in that time thinking about himself as some Hero of Justise. And kosovars built such enlightened state after that with respect to culturial heritage of that country and where native serb population had nothing to fear.

And for example, when countries want to overthrow their repressive, militaristic regimes and install a democracy, do turn to Russia for help - or America?

They turned to SU help, when repressive, militaristic regimes were USA allies.

 

[baturinsky]

:patriot:

 

[evdk]

 

[Burning Bridges]

Those things happen in any conflict but America has never, in its entire history, had anything like Order 227.

..

Now if America had been invaded during WWII, sure, maybe things might've been different. But then you have the Gulags. About the closest thing America had were POW camps - but they were nowhere near the scale of Russia where "Petty crimes and jokes about the Soviet government and officials were punishable by imprisonment."

I'm inclined to agree that US had relative humane treatment of their own people and POWs. But if you look a bit under the carpet you find enough, for example:

Internment of US citizens during World War Two

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German-American_internment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_American_internment
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian-American_internment

How scientists secretly used US citizens as guinea pigs during the Cold War

http://www.whale.to/a/cantwell9.html

Allied war crimes during World War II

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_war_crimes_during_World_War_II

POW Fatality rates

Held by Axis powers

Chinese POWs held by Japan: 56 reported survivors at the end of the war[86]
U.S. and British Commonwealth POWs held by Germany: ~4%[85]
Soviet POWs held by Germany: 57.5%[70]
Western Allied POWs held by Japan: 27%[87] (Figures for Japan may be misleading though, as sources indicate that either 10,800[88] or 19,000[89] of 35,756 fatalities among Allied POW's were from "friendly fire" at sea when their transport ships were sunk. Nonetheless, the Geneva convention required the labeling of such craft as POW ships, which the Japanese neglected to do.)

Held by the Allies

German POWs in East European (not including the Soviet Union) hands 32.9%[70]
German soldiers held by Soviet Union: 15–33% (14.7% in The Dictators by Richard Overy, 35.8% in Ferguson)[70]
Japanese POWs held by Soviet Union: 10%[citation needed]
German POWs in British hands 0.03%[70]
German POWs in American hands 0.15%[70]
German POWs in French hands 2.58%[70]
Japanese POWs held by U.S.: relatively low, mainly suicides according to James D. Morrow.[90]
Japanese POWs in Chinese hands: 24%

Of course this also shows that treatment was better in the democratic countries, but I can also understand Russian notions that Soviet treatment of German POWs was still better than vice versa.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

Usually the moral high ground comes from America's role in the world post WWII. Just look at the expectation that America would get involved in conflicts like Kosovo.

Thank you for supporting the worst stereotypes about USA. The Kosovo conflict was about a poor kosovars and oppressive serbs.

When the UN gets involved, you're screwed when it comes to arguing the moral high ground:

On 23 September 1998 acting under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1199. This expressed 'grave concern' at reports reaching the Secretary General that over 230,000 persons had been displaced from their homes by 'the excessive and indiscriminate use of force by Serbian security forces and the Yugoslav Army',[116] demanding that all parties in Kosovo and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) cease hostilities and maintain a ceasefire.
[...]
At the same time, acts of violence by any party were condemned and acts of terrorism to further goals, and the Council reaffirmed that the status of Kosovo should include autonomy and self-administration.​

Any area "fighting for autonomy and self-administration" == freedom fighters, fighting for "righteous independence".

Indeed, why ever pretend to understand one of the most complicated region on the earth, when you can paint black the one side, white the other and say "Fuck off" to international lawы, in that time thinking about himself as some Hero of Justise. And kosovars built such enlightened state after that with respect to culturial heritage of that country and where native serb population had nothing to fear.

Was Serbia only fighting against insurgents and terrorists - or had it embarked on a deliberate campaign to displace citizens of a certain ethnicity?

The CIA was aware as early as last autumn of a plan, codenamed Operation Horseshoe, to kill or drive them out over several months. A village a day was the rate that Mr Miloševic calculated the West would wring its hands over without acting. In Priština, public records have been combed to identify precisely which homes, shops and businesses were Albanian-owned; Serb police and paramilitaries have emptied towns and villages neighbourhood by neighbourhood in a pattern that has been as unvaried as it has been ruthless. The packed trains, the snipers picking off those who strayed out of line on the forced marches to the borders: every detail points to the existence of a detailed blueprint, without which so many could not have been murdered or driven into exile within a fortnight. In this context, yesterday's reported sealing of the frontiers by Serb forces is a sinister development; there is no such thing as safety in Kosovo for a people marked for destruction solely because of their racial identity.​

No doubt these are all American lies, you know, like the holocaust.

Fighting terrorists is one thing, ethnically cleansing an area is entirely another.

But if we were to make a game about this incident, what do you think your options would be if you played as the Serbian side?

And for example, when countries want to overthrow their repressive, militaristic regimes and install a democracy, do turn to Russia for help - or America?

They turned to SU help, when repressive, militaristic regimes were USA allies.

So you're saying that when a regime wants to ethnically cleanse an area of their country, they turn to the Soviet Union? No doubt it's because of the SU's vast experience in such matters.

Those things happen in any conflict but America has never, in its entire history, had anything like Order 227.

..

Now if America had been invaded during WWII, sure, maybe things might've been different. But then you have the Gulags. About the closest thing America had were POW camps - but they were nowhere near the scale of Russia where "Petty crimes and jokes about the Soviet government and officials were punishable by imprisonment."

I'm inclined to agree that US had relative humane treatment of their own people and POWs. But if you look a bit under the carpet you find enough, for example:

Internment of US citizens during World War Two
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German-American_internment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_American_internment
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian-American_internment

If I made a game called "Japanese POW Camp Manager", I'd include options to:
- Randomly behead prisoners.
- Starve them.
- Forcibly relocate them in a manner that kills many of them.
- Use them as slave labour to build railways.

Now if I was making "American Internment Camp Manager", my options would be (from the information in those articles you linked):
- Require them to surrender hand cameras, short-wave radio receiving sets and radio transmitters.
- Make them register at their local post office.
- Exclude them from designated military areas.
- Force them to move their home to another suburb by creating exclusion zones.
- Freeze their assets, so that they can't relocate from the exclusion zones.
- Create "Assembly" and "Relocation Centers" and demand they report to them.
- Impose a curfew.
- Give them 'the intolerable stigma of being branded as enemy aliens'.
- Oh and when it was all over, there'd be no option for you to apologise for what you did!

It'd be a really, boring game.

I shouldn't need to mention "German POW Camp Manager" and what that would involve.

Now, someone here design "Russian Gulag Manager".

My point is, if everyone beheaded their POWs, it'd be a complete non-issue. But not everyone did. Only the Japanese did that, hence any game about it would surely mention it or even use it as a mechanic because games use tropes. Those "unique" things are what define the experience - or those tropes are what the game is built on, such as "American Special Forces operating without impunity all over the world for truth, justice and the American Way!". Because getting people to believe (and therefore buy) a game where American Special Forces are the evil criminals sent to wantonly kill civilians and rape and pillage would be a lot harder (except in Russia, obv).

So yes, a game about nuclear testing in America would likely include the option to use Guinea Pigs. The British used Australians for the same thing. There's even a (fictional) film about it - it's well known in popular culture here.

And Russia had Gulags, so of course they get mentioned. Nobody else had Gulags. Germany didn't have Gulags. The British didn't have Gulags. The Russians though? Gulags.

Who created an "Order 227"?

Who ordered "anyone strong enough to hold a rifle be sent to fight"? The Australians maybe?

Now who has stories of sending their soldiers into battle without enough rifles? Is there even one story of the Americans doing that, anywhere? The British? Germans? Japanese?

 

[Grinolf]

I don't like to call the other people idiots, right after I meet them. Especially, but not only, when they have position of administrator (or it is moderator?). But your post was quite retarded. Mostly that part:

So you're saying that when a regime wants to ethnically cleanse an area of their country, they turn to the Soviet Union? No doubt it's because of the SU's vast experience in such matters.

Your statement was, that anyone who fighting tyranny in their country would turn to USA for help, and not Russia. I replied, that when that tyranny was backed by USA themseves, turning to SU for help was a natural choise. It was pretty obvious point and in can't been wrongly interpretated.
You pull some words from your ass and put them into my mouth.

You also implied, that I denied holocaust here:

No doubt these are all American lies, you know, like the holocaust.

And I am sure, that I not said anything, that supported such implication in any of my post not only on that forum, but in all internet.

You also completely miss my point, so I didn't have much to answer, except:

Any area "fighting for autonomy and self-administration" == freedom fighters, fighting for "righteous independence".

Not, when that "freedom fighters" are terrorist organisation which had links to al-Qaeda, kidnapped and killed civilians, ethned cleansed them, was involved in arms, drugs and human organs trafficking. In my opinion, any citizen must be ashamed, when their state backed such guys, while knowing all that, but prefering to close their eyes.
Ang Lincoln on my side in that case, since he also fighted with some guys, who wanted "autonomy and self-administration".

Was Serbia only fighting against insurgents and terrorists - or had it embarked on a deliberate campaign to displace citizens of a certain ethnicity?

It wasn't serbians, who ethnic cleansed albanians. It was both serbians and albanians, who ethnic cleansed each other. USA not stop that, but only help one side with ethnic cleansing another. And it can be easily argued, that USA picked side, that was much worse.

And I also don't unrerstand part of your previous post:

Usually the moral high ground comes from America's role in the world post WWII. Just look at the expectation that America would get involved in conflicts like Rwanda.

Rwanda genocide was one of the situations, where intervention from the rest of the world was needed, but UN, and especially USA were too reluctant in dealing with that case. I doubt it is the part of USA history, of which americans can be proud.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

So you're saying that when a regime wants to ethnically cleanse an area of their country, they turn to the Soviet Union? No doubt it's because of the SU's vast experience in such matters.

Your statement was, that anyone who fighting tyranny in their country would turn to USA for help, and not Russia.

Having people "marked for destruction solely because of their racial identity" is not "fighting tyranny", it is tyranny.

I replied, that when that tyranny was backed by USA themseves, turning to SU for help was a natural choise. It was pretty obvious point and in can't been wrongly interpretated.

Yes, turning to the SU to help them ethnically cleanse areas of their Albanian population.

Let me again, quote what The Times of London reported:
- The CIA was aware as early as last autumn of a plan, codenamed Operation Horseshoe, to kill or drive them out over several months.
- A village a day was the rate that Mr Miloševic calculated the West would wring its hands over without acting.
- In Priština, public records have been combed to identify precisely which homes, shops and businesses were Albanian-owned;
- Serb police and paramilitaries have emptied towns and villages neighbourhood by neighbourhood in a pattern that has been as unvaried as it has been ruthless.
- The packed trains, the snipers picking off those who strayed out of line on the forced marches to the borders: every detail points to the existence of a detailed blueprint, without which so many could not have been murdered or driven into exile within a fortnight.
- In this context, yesterday's reported sealing of the frontiers by Serb forces is a sinister development;
- there is no such thing as safety in Kosovo for a people marked for destruction solely because of their racial identity.

If this is true, if this is what Miloševic was doing, then there's your tyranny; "oppressive or unjustly severe government on the part of any ruler."; "undue severity or harshness."

As I said, fighting terrorists is one thing, ethnically cleansing an area is entirely another.

Now this either is a pack of false lies spread by the Americans (ie: like some people believe the Holocaust to be), or it's true - in which case my original point is entirely justified. IE: That the world looks to America to "end tyranny".

Any area "fighting for autonomy and self-administration" == freedom fighters, fighting for "righteous independence".

Not, when that "freedom fighters" are terrorist organisation which had links to al-Qaeda, kidnapped and killed civilians, ethned cleansed them, was involved in arms, drugs and human organs trafficking. In my opinion, any citizen must be ashamed, when their state backed such guys, while knowing all that, but prefering to close their eyes.

All of those things happen in America, every single day. Kidnappings, murders, arms, drugs and human trafficking (not so sure about the organs). Including gangs who control areas based on their ethnic grouping (Mexican gangs, African-Americans, Italians...)

The Government doesn't send the tanks in to "shoot all the blacks" in an area as a response. If it did, that would be tyrannical; an excessive use - and an abuse - of power.

It wasn't serbians, who ethnic cleansed albanians. It was both serbians and albanians, who ethnic cleansed each other. USA not stop that, but only help one side with ethnic cleansing another.

The USA moved in and rounded up all the Serbians? Really?

Did America have a plan to "kill or drive them out over several months", did they have a rate such as "a village a day"? Did they comb public records to "identify precisely which homes, shops and businesses were Serbian-owned"? Did they "empty towns and villages neighbourhood by neighbourhood in a pattern that has been as unvaried as it has been ruthless"? Did they "pack trains" with "snipers picking off those who strayed out of line on the forced marches to the borders"?

No, really?

And I also don't understand part of your previous post:

Usually the moral high ground comes from America's role in the world post WWII. Just look at the expectation that America would get involved in conflicts like Rwanda.

Rwanda genocide was one of the situations, where intervention from the rest of the world was needed, but UN, and especially USA were too reluctant in dealing with that case. I doubt it is the part of USA history, of which americans can be proud.

That's actually, entirely the point.

Google something like "Why didn't America get involved in the Rwandan Genocide?" See how many results you get. Take a look at how deeply it's discussed.

Now Google something like "Why didn't the Soviet Union get involved in the Rwandan Genocide?". Find any results? For extra fun, replace Soviet Union with United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, France, Germany or any other country of your choice.

Then you'll understand what I meant: Just look at the expectation that America would get involved in conflicts like Rwanda, Kosovo, Libya.

 

[Burning Bridges]

Now if I was making "American Internment Camp Manager", my options would be (from the information in those articles you linked):
- Require them to surrender hand cameras, short-wave radio receiving sets and radio transmitters.
- Make them register at their local post office.
- Exclude them from designated military areas.
- Force them to move their home to another suburb by creating exclusion zones.
- Freeze their assets, so that they can't relocate from the exclusion zones.
- Create "Assembly" and "Relocation Centers" and demand they report to them.
- Impose a curfew.
- Give them 'the intolerable stigma of being branded as enemy aliens'.
- Oh and when it was all over, there'd be no option for you to apologise for what you did!

It'd be a really, boring game.

You or your familiy should apply for an internship in such a concentration camp relocation center, then you would not believe such bullshit

Also:

:patriot:

 

[Commissar Draco]

America fighting wars to fight FOR slavery:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Revolution

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican–American_War

Fighting for Natives Human Rightz:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trail_of_tears

Bringing FreeDOOM to Spanish Subjects:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine–American_War

Puting all Japs into happy concentration relocation camps:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_American_internment

Great VD.

 

[Grinolf]

Now Google something like "Why didn't the Soviet Union get involved in the Rwandan Genocide?". Find any results?

Please, say that you simply trolling. Or I need to mark you as retard, who didn't know what the hell he is talking about.

And yes, Soviet Union was really expected to meddle in the third world countries conflicts, when it (SU) actually existed. That was Cold War after all. And if it didn't help someone, who claimed infinite love for socialist ideals and fought against evil capitalist opressors or colonial masters, then it would really lose face on international stage. But I guess, damage in the eyes of SU citizens could be minimized due to censorship.

 

[Burning Bridges]

"Soviet Union"

Commissar Draco You don't have to dig that deep, afaik the last american war of aggression was in 2003.

For fun it also pays off to google "Panama invasion", or "Grenada invasion".

 

[Whisper]

So where is simulator in which Americans "clean out" vietnam peaceful villagers, just for lulz.

Or when we can play game where native Indian population is genocided and few who survive are put in reservation.

Or maybe we get honour to play game where only time Atomic weapon was used, droped on peaceful city (Hiroshima)? Again just for lulz.

 

[DakaSha]

So where is simulator in which Americans "clean out" vietnam peaceful villagers, just for lulz.

Or when we can play game where native Indian population is genocided and few who survive are put in reservation.

Or maybe we get honour to play game where only time Atomic weapon was used, droped on peaceful city (Hiroshima)? Again just for lulz.

When a Russian team makes it? Stop acting like its a global conspiricy

 

[Whisper]

It is not like most of western media are controlled by few corporations, isnt it? Corporations with their interest and agenda.


Need i tell what their interest is?

Hint: make USA as Champions of Civilized World, Bringers of Democrasy, Supporter of Freedom.

Make those who dont kiss USA ass (like canada, UK etc lackeys) in bad light.

 

[Whisper]

You can guess by photo's who are who.

Title is "Mass media and White house".

Pretty much coincedence there are so many ties (either married or is brother/sister), right?

 

[DakaSha]

Its not like most of western media are controlled by few corporations, isnt it? Corporations with their interest and agenda.

Yes. THQ and now Sega are using video games to turn the american youth against the now non existant soviet union.. because americans have been way to in love with that part of the world the past couple of decades

 

[DakaSha]

You can guess by photo's who are who.

Title is "Mass media and White house".

Pretty much coincedence there are so many ties (either married or is brother/sister), right?

Are any of these people employed by relic entertainment?

 

[Whisper]

Yes. THQ and now Sega are using video games to turn the american youth against the now non existant soviet union.. because americans have been way to in love with that part of the world the past couple of decades

Ask question: where Americans who were (except few) never visitors in soviet union, got their information from?


Hint: maybe from those "free" mass-media controlled by few powerful corporations?

 

[Whisper]

Are any of these people employed by relic entertainment?

No, this people are who are in charge of larger media corporations. Who - by coincidence alone - are linked to US government.

Of cause, said link does not influence in any way their objectivity.



Relic, who is owned by Sega, is just smaller fish.

 

[DakaSha]

It prob shouldnt come as a surprise to me that a (presumably) russian cant fathom people acting on thier own, without intervention from 'above'.

That isnt to say that westerners arent brainwashed by the media, but we still possess the ability to create b-quality, cliche filled bullshit on our own, without it being dictated by the evil corporations that have nothing better to do than to make a couple million vodka addicts look worse than they do on thier own.

Btw: the coh2 story, as terrible as it is, seems to actually be about authority corrupting the little guy... Not about russians being evil. As in: the lead character is a typical russian.. A good guy... But the higher ups are behind the atrocities as usual. Using the common man as a pawn. In short its against exactly what you are claiming.

This is the interpetation from my limited knowledge of the campaign story anyways. Not like im gonna play that shit

Even of it is blatantly anti russian, who gives a shit. Stop being a nationalist fuckhead twat

 

[Whisper]

It prob shouldnt come as a surprise to me that a (presumably) russian cant fathom people acting on thier own, without intervention from 'above'.

That isnt to say that westerners arent brainwashed by the media, but we still possess the ability to create b-quality, cliche filled bullshit on our own, without it being dictated by the evil corporations that have nothing better to do than to make a couple million vodka addicts look worse than they do on thier own.

Btw: the coh2 story, as terrible as it is, seems to actually be about authority corrupting the little guy... Not about russians being evil. As in: the lead character is a typical russian.. A good guy... But the higher ups are behind the atrocities as usual. Using the common man as a pawn. In short its against exactly what you are claiming.

This is the interpetation from my limited knowledge of the campaign story anyways. Not like im gonna play that shit

Even of it is blatantly anti russian, who gives a shit. Stop being a nationalist fuckhead twat

I dont think its good idea to portray soviet soldiers (most of whom didnt return from war) - as acting just for lulz - like burning their own cottages in villages with living soviet people inside (why, why would they do it? no reason was given). Or pressing button to destroy bridge with other soviet soldiers, while enemy was still far away - again no reason given by game, except that they did it for lulz.

 

[Whisper]

 

[DakaSha]

It prob shouldnt come as a surprise to me that a (presumably) russian cant fathom people acting on thier own, without intervention from 'above'.

That isnt to say that westerners arent brainwashed by the media, but we still possess the ability to create b-quality, cliche filled bullshit on our own, without it being dictated by the evil corporations that have nothing better to do than to make a couple million vodka addicts look worse than they do on thier own.

Btw: the coh2 story, as terrible as it is, seems to actually be about authority corrupting the little guy... Not about russians being evil. As in: the lead character is a typical russian.. A good guy... But the higher ups are behind the atrocities as usual. Using the common man as a pawn. In short its against exactly what you are claiming.

This is the interpetation from my limited knowledge of the campaign story anyways. Not like im gonna play that shit

Even of it is blatantly anti russian, who gives a shit. Stop being a nationalist fuckhead twat

I dont think its good idea to portray soviet soldiers (most of whom didnt return from war) - as acting just for lulz - like burning their own cottages in villages with living soviet people inside (why, why would they do it? no reason was given). Or pressing button to destroy bridge with other soviet soldiers, while enemy was still far away - again no reason given by game, except that they did it for lulz.

Because thats what dumbfucks who have been shot at for months do when given the ability to have a moment of power. And i dont know where you have been the past 30 years (russia?) but it is common knowledge and very very often shown, by our own media, the things that us soldiers did in vietnam.

YOU are denying soviet history. At least we have the balls to admit our horrendous atrocities. We fucking teach the shit you talked about ( hiroshima, vietnam etc) in fucking school for crying out loud. You're crying about a fucking video game. Whats wrong with you.

 

[Whisper]

Just look video i've posted.