posted on Oct, 5 2013 @ 11:43 PM
reply to post by Krazysh0t
This is my frist post on this board as I wasn't sure if there was a place for introdcutions so I figured I'd respond to this thread.
I completely agree with you that it's silly to have "War Crimes" trials in a video game. I personally grew up with mainly the Nintendo on up though
I did play some of the older machines from the late 70s forward.
In any case, even if someone did produce a game with consequences I could only see 2 scenarios where "War Crimes" being held against the player
could even remotely work.
1. As a badge of honor for the player for playing the most blood and guts form of gameplay possible.
2. Something that can be circumnavigated easily eith a few keycodes.
I know I said 2 but here's a 3'rd, very remotely unrealistic way it could work.
3. As an "Easter Egg" for the player to unlock to (See 1.) use as a badge of honor.
With any luck there would be an online board, on the PS3 it can be the Play Station network, that lists the "worst War Criminals" as a way of
rewarding the most brutal players with highest point score AND body count.
Anything else will likely be ignored.
In any case, from what I gathered from the OP, this isn't something that was discussed as a mandate to be enforced but a suggestion from the Red
Cross. I appreciate what they are trying to say with this idea and it's not stupid or somehow insideous. It is, however, aparent that most higher ups
in the Red Cross are NOT gamers. Still, credit to them for suggesting something, and as long as it's just an option in the game, it "Might" work.
Maybe one of the smaller video game companies could try implementing it as an option to their game in hopes of being the first ever to get the Red
Cross Red Seal of Approval For Video Games.
It'd be worth adding the option just to hit the news cycle and maybe treating this as a bit of a P.R. stunt.