And how exactly do you know that this stat is even accurate either? Other than it shows a conclusion that is favorable to people who dislike Microsoft.
I find it rather interesting that the source for this figure is the same StatCounter that the same people cheering this figure about IE will claim is wildly inaccurate due to the fact that it shows Linux with like a 1 or 2% market share. But since in this case it shows something negative about Microsoft (IE market share, Windows XP vs Vista & 7 market share) it is taken as holy gospel truth. Hypocrisy. Isn't it grand?
So it's okay for you to wrap yourself in the flag to speak for the servicemen whose "freedoms" are being trampled by Gamestop *voluntarily* deciding not to sell a game ONLY in its AAFES outlets, out of deference to the families who expressed their objections to this game?
Really? This is the best trolling you can come up with as a response?
God forbid somebody have to order it from Amazon, or go to a Gamestop off base, right?
Why should they have to do that at all? Why should the actual customers have to be put out because of some crybaby?
You're an idiot. MoH is NOT the only game EA makes. These people might not be the market for MoH, but I'm sure that EA wouldn't mind selling them a copy of Madden, or Tiger Woods Golf, or any of the other dozens of popular games they sell.
I can pretty much assure you that the mother who started this and the head of the AAEFS and the heads of the other service branches are not and were never EA customers.
This entire issue can be boiled down to this statement: "EA has decided that making people happy who certainly buy numerous titles from them makes more financial sense than pissing off a sizable group of people and attracting negative publicity with a single title, where a 30-second find & replace will make everybody happy."
And yet you've provided no proof that these whiners are long-time customers and have bought even a single EA title or a single video game in their life.
As for answering your question about "Is it okay..." - apparently to the people raising the objection, it is PERFECTLY okay.
Thus proving that they are huge fucking idiots.
They seem satisfied that EA is changing the name, EA gets to continue selling its game, and the only thing that changes is some text that's displayed on a tv screen, which means that you are blowing this WAY out of proportion - the game is *identical,* with the exception of a single string changed from "Taliban" to "Opposition Forces"./quote>
How am I blowing this out of proportion? I wasn't the crybaby who started this whole thing to begin with.
If it's such a ridiculous change to argue for EA to make, isn't it also a ridiculous change to get upset about, and wrap in the cloak of "They're stealin our freedomz! And our jerbs!"?
No, I think it's perfectly acceptable to point out that people who try to use the corpses of soldiers to censor and ban games is a despicable act.
And they likely won't. And they also likely will avoid all future EA titles that they may have been inclined to purchase, too. And that hurts EA's bottom line much more than the 2 or 3 outraged nerds on slashdot who won't buy the game because they did this: s/Taliban/Opposition Forces/g, without having any real impact on the game play.
The only reason EA was going to be hurt by this was because these crybabies were going to get the game banned for sale on bases. These people who are whining were not potential customers for this game to begin with.
It's funny you should say that, because there are examples littered all throughout this thread where you're waxing poetic in fairly inflamed tones about how this is "a bunch of whiners whitewashing a name." Like this, from your post above:
I think you mean a bad example of a corporation being a pussy in face of a bunch of whiners? The fact of the matter is that you are still playing as the Taliban and all the models are exactly the same. All this is is a white-washing of the name.
It's funny how you only selectively quote my and ignore statements that I have made over and over again such as:
So it's okay to kill American soldiers while playing with the exact same characters that still are modeled after Taliban fighters but they just can't be called "The Taliban"?
Come on, answer the question and stop dodging it.
Sounds like you're a lot more upset about a name change than you'd like to admit.
Nope, you're just a poor mind reader. The only thing I'm upset at is people who use the flag and dead soldiers as a way to try to get things censored, economically sanctioned or as some sort of way to stifle opposition to their statements.
Or perhaps you'd like to retract the purple prose, and restate your position in a more reasonable tone?
Nope, I stand by all I say. These people are despicable.
You don't think tv shows are edited for censorship and content before being releaased to the public?
Where did I say anything of the sort? Do you normally attempt to put words in people's mouths as an argument tactic? The point of my statement was that instead of trying to get things censored that *gasp* you just ignore it and don't watch or buy the piece of entertainment that you disagree with. I know, it's a really radical idea.
It's supposed to hold sway over EA, who are profiting from their depiction of the ongoing war that has cost members of these families their lives.
So if these people don't like the game they don't have to buy or play it.
EA is doing the decent thing, and listening to their concerns, and trying to be sensitive to them.
By doing a completely worthless name change but still allowing people to play as the "Taliban" characters and continue to kill American soldiers in game?
Why do you care so much about a few bytes of text that is irrelevant to the actual game play?
Actually I'm not the one who cares about the irrelevant text. I'm the one who finds it absolutely amusing that the entire controversy and whining is about an irrelevant piece of text. So it's okay to kill American soldiers while playing with the exact same characters that still are modeled after Taliban fighters but they just can't be called "The Taliban"? That has to be the most asinine outrage I've ever heard.
And once again: If the people who are *directly* affected by this war are not allowed to express concerns about people profiting from depictions of it, what makes you think that EA (or anybody else) should give 2 hoots about the opinion of some random nut on/.?
They can express their concerns all they want. I will still point out that it's despicable to use the death of a love one as a vehicle to attempt to get games censored and as an excuse to ban the sale of the game on military bases. Secondly, EA should be caring about the opinions of the people who are actually going to be buying the game versus these whiners who were never going to buy it to begin with.
But that would make too much logical sense and we can't have that. Clearly the superior choice is to use the flag and the deaths of soldiers as a vehicle to censor and impose economic sanctions on people who make games they dislike.
True, but the problem is that the dissenting views from those within the military, such as yourself, get lost when you have, for example, the head of the AAEFS, heads of the various branches and these families attempting to wrap themselves in the flags and behind their "Support the troops" mantra as they to trying to paint the picture as if they are speaking for all those who serve when trying to further causes like this.
Considering it's the families of dead soldiers speaking out...
And? Why is this supposed to hold any sway over me? I'm sorry, but I don't really care. Doing something despicable but attempting to wrap yourself and your cause up in the flag and the death of a soldier doesn't make it such a thing less despicable. In fact, I would listen even less to someone who attempts to use the deaths of soldiers as a vehicle to impose censorship and economic sanctions on others.
I'd wager a bet that you don't have any loved ones in harm's way right now.
My reply to this got cut off so I'll post it again.
Actually I do. So what? They're fine with this game as well. Was there an actually substantive point you were trying to make or was this just a pathetic attempt at trying to paint me as some sort of "terrist sympathizer" or some such nonsense?
Everyone is going to do it anyway plus it is highly likely there will be a mod within days of release that makes the name change go back to Taliban so basically all this whining and the asinine name change will amount to all of squat.
I think he meant exactly what he wrote, and I agree with him.
Good for you. I'm sure you feel quite smug and happy about using the bodies of dead soldiers as a tool for censorship. Besides it's quite funny how a number of actual serving military personnel have been asked about this game and have had no issues with it while a bunch of people wrapping themselves up in the flag and dead soldiers are the most vocally against it. Funny, no?
While there are those (possibly yourself) who would probably play a game called "Escape from the World Trade Center" it would be in extremely bad taste for a company to make a game like this because of it being in poor taste.
If you find it in poor taste, then *gasp* don't buy or play the game. That is a better message to send to the developers than trying to get their game banned and censored.
I'd wager a bet that you don't have any loved ones in harm's way right now.
Corporate responsibility...there's nothing wrong with it and I'm glad to see EA showing good sense here.
But this makes absolutely zero substantive changes to the game. You can still play as the same "taliban" characters and you can still kill American soliders. This name change does absolutely nothing to change that. Not to mention how everyone playing the game is still going to refer to that side as the Taliban despite this change.
If it bothers you that they removed the name "Taliban" from the game menu, then go buy some white out and write it on your own TV screen.
Why should I have to? If you are so bothered by the game *gasp* just ignore it and don't buy it. I know, really crazy idea huh?
it's pure entertainment of a situation that is extremely serious for some
Then they can choose to avoid the game. It's no different to how if you don't like a certain TV show that instead of trying to get it banned that you just *gasp* turn the channel and ignore it.
By this logic, I shouldn't be allowed to refuse to sell multiplayer only games (i.e. TF2, WoW) in a little mom-n-pop store out where the only internet connection is dialup.
No, only by strawman logic would that follow from what I said. Maybe you should actually read what I said? There is nothing analogous about a private business refusing to sell a game and a government agency using economic sanctions against EA as a way to get this game censored.
Except that Wal-Mart is a private business while the AAEFS is a an agency of the DoD and thus is an agent of the government. There is a big difference between the two. To claim that this isn't government interference is nonsense.
However infuriating it may be to you that you can't authentically pretend to be terrorists who hate your country
How does this white-washing of the name stop anyone from still doing this? Everyone who is going to buy and play this game are still going to know that if they play the "opposing force" that it's really the Taliban. It's not as if by changing this name that no one is still going to know who those characters really are which is why this change is so asinine.
You mean except for how that general was going to get the game banned from all EA game stores on military bases? Saying that is not trying to force them into taking out the name is like saying that being held up at knife point isn't forcing someone to do something they don't want.
they are simply choosing not to offend the people who have expressed their concerns.
You mean people who were never the target audience of the game and weren't going to be buying or playing it? Yes, it's great that they are bowing to a bunch of whiners at the expense of the actual customers.
For a lot of people however this is much much too soon.
Then they neither have to buy or play the game. Why should the actual consumers of this product have to suffer through some stupid censorship because of a bunch of oversensitive babies? It is absolutely hilarious that people will use the military service of their dead love ones as a way to impose censorship on people.
in an effort to reduce the number of reminders that bring undue stress into the lives of families waiting for their loved ones to return.
Huh? None of these whiners were going to buy this game to begin with so how are they being put under undue stress because someone else is playing a game where you can play people labeled as the Taliban? These whiners need to get over themselves. Secondly, how does this reduce the reminders when pretty much everyone who is going to play this game is going to know that this white-washed "opposing force" IS really the Taliban since all the models, weapons, etc are all the same.
I think you mean a bad example of a corporation being a pussy in face of a bunch of whiners? The fact of the matter is that you are still playing as the Taliban and all the models are exactly the same. All this is is a white-washing of the name.
Slashdot Mirror
And how exactly do you know that this stat is even accurate either? Other than it shows a conclusion that is favorable to people who dislike Microsoft.
Companies can be right about some stats and wrong about others. Idiocy, isn't it grand?
Sure they could. Now outline your evidence that this stat is right but the ones about Linux are wrong.
I find it rather interesting that the source for this figure is the same StatCounter that the same people cheering this figure about IE will claim is wildly inaccurate due to the fact that it shows Linux with like a 1 or 2% market share. But since in this case it shows something negative about Microsoft (IE market share, Windows XP vs Vista & 7 market share) it is taken as holy gospel truth. Hypocrisy. Isn't it grand?
So it's okay for you to wrap yourself in the flag to speak for the servicemen whose "freedoms" are being trampled by Gamestop *voluntarily* deciding not to sell a game ONLY in its AAFES outlets, out of deference to the families who expressed their objections to this game?
Really? This is the best trolling you can come up with as a response?
God forbid somebody have to order it from Amazon, or go to a Gamestop off base, right?
Why should they have to do that at all? Why should the actual customers have to be put out because of some crybaby?
You're an idiot. MoH is NOT the only game EA makes. These people might not be the market for MoH, but I'm sure that EA wouldn't mind selling them a copy of Madden, or Tiger Woods Golf, or any of the other dozens of popular games they sell.
I can pretty much assure you that the mother who started this and the head of the AAEFS and the heads of the other service branches are not and were never EA customers.
This entire issue can be boiled down to this statement: "EA has decided that making people happy who certainly buy numerous titles from them makes more financial sense than pissing off a sizable group of people and attracting negative publicity with a single title, where a 30-second find & replace will make everybody happy."
And yet you've provided no proof that these whiners are long-time customers and have bought even a single EA title or a single video game in their life.
As for answering your question about "Is it okay..." - apparently to the people raising the objection, it is PERFECTLY okay.
Thus proving that they are huge fucking idiots.
They seem satisfied that EA is changing the name, EA gets to continue selling its game, and the only thing that changes is some text that's displayed on a tv screen, which means that you are blowing this WAY out of proportion - the game is *identical,* with the exception of a single string changed from "Taliban" to "Opposition Forces"./quote>
How am I blowing this out of proportion? I wasn't the crybaby who started this whole thing to begin with.
If it's such a ridiculous change to argue for EA to make, isn't it also a ridiculous change to get upset about, and wrap in the cloak of "They're stealin our freedomz! And our jerbs!"?
No, I think it's perfectly acceptable to point out that people who try to use the corpses of soldiers to censor and ban games is a despicable act.
But this change doesn't stop you from playing as virtual Taliban fighters and kill Americans. That's why this change is so stupid.
And they likely won't. And they also likely will avoid all future EA titles that they may have been inclined to purchase, too. And that hurts EA's bottom line much more than the 2 or 3 outraged nerds on slashdot who won't buy the game because they did this: s/Taliban/Opposition Forces/g, without having any real impact on the game play.
The only reason EA was going to be hurt by this was because these crybabies were going to get the game banned for sale on bases. These people who are whining were not potential customers for this game to begin with.
It's funny you should say that, because there are examples littered all throughout this thread where you're waxing poetic in fairly inflamed tones about how this is "a bunch of whiners whitewashing a name." Like this, from your post above:
I think you mean a bad example of a corporation being a pussy in face of a bunch of whiners? The fact of the matter is that you are still playing as the Taliban and all the models are exactly the same. All this is is a white-washing of the name.
It's funny how you only selectively quote my and ignore statements that I have made over and over again such as:
So it's okay to kill American soldiers while playing with the exact same characters that still are modeled after Taliban fighters but they just can't be called "The Taliban"?
Come on, answer the question and stop dodging it.
Sounds like you're a lot more upset about a name change than you'd like to admit.
Nope, you're just a poor mind reader. The only thing I'm upset at is people who use the flag and dead soldiers as a way to try to get things censored, economically sanctioned or as some sort of way to stifle opposition to their statements.
Or perhaps you'd like to retract the purple prose, and restate your position in a more reasonable tone?
Nope, I stand by all I say. These people are despicable.
Yeah, clearly no one makes any money using Microsoft software. That's why everyone ditched Microsoft and moved to Linux back in 1995, right?
You don't think tv shows are edited for censorship and content before being releaased to the public?
Where did I say anything of the sort? Do you normally attempt to put words in people's mouths as an argument tactic? The point of my statement was that instead of trying to get things censored that *gasp* you just ignore it and don't watch or buy the piece of entertainment that you disagree with. I know, it's a really radical idea.
It's supposed to hold sway over EA, who are profiting from their depiction of the ongoing war that has cost members of these families their lives.
So if these people don't like the game they don't have to buy or play it.
EA is doing the decent thing, and listening to their concerns, and trying to be sensitive to them.
By doing a completely worthless name change but still allowing people to play as the "Taliban" characters and continue to kill American soldiers in game?
Why do you care so much about a few bytes of text that is irrelevant to the actual game play?
Actually I'm not the one who cares about the irrelevant text. I'm the one who finds it absolutely amusing that the entire controversy and whining is about an irrelevant piece of text. So it's okay to kill American soldiers while playing with the exact same characters that still are modeled after Taliban fighters but they just can't be called "The Taliban"? That has to be the most asinine outrage I've ever heard.
And once again: If the people who are *directly* affected by this war are not allowed to express concerns about people profiting from depictions of it, what makes you think that EA (or anybody else) should give 2 hoots about the opinion of some random nut on /.?
They can express their concerns all they want. I will still point out that it's despicable to use the death of a love one as a vehicle to attempt to get games censored and as an excuse to ban the sale of the game on military bases. Secondly, EA should be caring about the opinions of the people who are actually going to be buying the game versus these whiners who were never going to buy it to begin with.
But that would make too much logical sense and we can't have that. Clearly the superior choice is to use the flag and the deaths of soldiers as a vehicle to censor and impose economic sanctions on people who make games they dislike.
Take care when you say military outcry.
True, but the problem is that the dissenting views from those within the military, such as yourself, get lost when you have, for example, the head of the AAEFS, heads of the various branches and these families attempting to wrap themselves in the flags and behind their "Support the troops" mantra as they to trying to paint the picture as if they are speaking for all those who serve when trying to further causes like this.
Considering it's the families of dead soldiers speaking out...
And? Why is this supposed to hold any sway over me? I'm sorry, but I don't really care. Doing something despicable but attempting to wrap yourself and your cause up in the flag and the death of a soldier doesn't make it such a thing less despicable. In fact, I would listen even less to someone who attempts to use the deaths of soldiers as a vehicle to impose censorship and economic sanctions on others.
So then why are you so upset about the change again
Because it's despicable to wrap yourself in the flag and dead soldiers in an attempt to censor and impose economic sanctions on others?
I'd wager a bet that you don't have any loved ones in harm's way right now.
My reply to this got cut off so I'll post it again.
Actually I do. So what? They're fine with this game as well. Was there an actually substantive point you were trying to make or was this just a pathetic attempt at trying to paint me as some sort of "terrist sympathizer" or some such nonsense?
Everyone is going to do it anyway plus it is highly likely there will be a mod within days of release that makes the name change go back to Taliban so basically all this whining and the asinine name change will amount to all of squat.
I think he meant exactly what he wrote, and I agree with him.
Good for you. I'm sure you feel quite smug and happy about using the bodies of dead soldiers as a tool for censorship. Besides it's quite funny how a number of actual serving military personnel have been asked about this game and have had no issues with it while a bunch of people wrapping themselves up in the flag and dead soldiers are the most vocally against it. Funny, no?
While there are those (possibly yourself) who would probably play a game called "Escape from the World Trade Center" it would be in extremely bad taste for a company to make a game like this because of it being in poor taste.
If you find it in poor taste, then *gasp* don't buy or play the game. That is a better message to send to the developers than trying to get their game banned and censored.
I'd wager a bet that you don't have any loved ones in harm's way right now.
Corporate responsibility...there's nothing wrong with it and I'm glad to see EA showing good sense here.
But this makes absolutely zero substantive changes to the game. You can still play as the same "taliban" characters and you can still kill American soliders. This name change does absolutely nothing to change that. Not to mention how everyone playing the game is still going to refer to that side as the Taliban despite this change.
If it bothers you that they removed the name "Taliban" from the game menu, then go buy some white out and write it on your own TV screen.
Why should I have to? If you are so bothered by the game *gasp* just ignore it and don't buy it. I know, really crazy idea huh?
it's pure entertainment of a situation that is extremely serious for some
Then they can choose to avoid the game. It's no different to how if you don't like a certain TV show that instead of trying to get it banned that you just *gasp* turn the channel and ignore it.
By this logic, I shouldn't be allowed to refuse to sell multiplayer only games (i.e. TF2, WoW) in a little mom-n-pop store out where the only internet connection is dialup.
No, only by strawman logic would that follow from what I said. Maybe you should actually read what I said? There is nothing analogous about a private business refusing to sell a game and a government agency using economic sanctions against EA as a way to get this game censored.
Except that Wal-Mart is a private business while the AAEFS is a an agency of the DoD and thus is an agent of the government. There is a big difference between the two. To claim that this isn't government interference is nonsense.
No, it's the position of a bunch of whiners who are trying to use the deaths of soldiers as a way to censor others. It's extremely despicable.
However infuriating it may be to you that you can't authentically pretend to be terrorists who hate your country
How does this white-washing of the name stop anyone from still doing this? Everyone who is going to buy and play this game are still going to know that if they play the "opposing force" that it's really the Taliban. It's not as if by changing this name that no one is still going to know who those characters really are which is why this change is so asinine.
Nobody is forcing EA to take this out;
You mean except for how that general was going to get the game banned from all EA game stores on military bases? Saying that is not trying to force them into taking out the name is like saying that being held up at knife point isn't forcing someone to do something they don't want.
they are simply choosing not to offend the people who have expressed their concerns.
You mean people who were never the target audience of the game and weren't going to be buying or playing it? Yes, it's great that they are bowing to a bunch of whiners at the expense of the actual customers.
For a lot of people however this is much much too soon.
Then they neither have to buy or play the game. Why should the actual consumers of this product have to suffer through some stupid censorship because of a bunch of oversensitive babies? It is absolutely hilarious that people will use the military service of their dead love ones as a way to impose censorship on people.
in an effort to reduce the number of reminders that bring undue stress into the lives of families waiting for their loved ones to return.
Huh? None of these whiners were going to buy this game to begin with so how are they being put under undue stress because someone else is playing a game where you can play people labeled as the Taliban? These whiners need to get over themselves. Secondly, how does this reduce the reminders when pretty much everyone who is going to play this game is going to know that this white-washed "opposing force" IS really the Taliban since all the models, weapons, etc are all the same.
I think you mean a bad example of a corporation being a pussy in face of a bunch of whiners? The fact of the matter is that you are still playing as the Taliban and all the models are exactly the same. All this is is a white-washing of the name.