Be Excellent To Each Other

Yes, it's by Dan Whitehead. But I think this is actually a pretty good article on the issues around the play-in-Afghanistan Medal of Honour game. Some choice quotes:Quite a thoughtful essay, I felt.

Haven't read it yet, but I think Dan Whitehead is a good games journalist. I just completely disagree with his opinion on games. Completely. He likes exactly the opposite of things I like. He does his job properly, though.

I read some similar comments in TEH OFFISHUL EGGBOX RAG preview of the game, but they then just said, "but looks ace", so lost all the bananas.

Related point - is there any Actual Scientific Research suggesting that people are more affected by things in games than in films? Because surely that's the crux of whether "games aren't films" actually matters for this sort of thing.

I remember discussing on here the potential for trauma and/or sociopath-creation when graphics inevitably get to the photorealistic stage for FPS and such. Magnify that by "FPSes and such set in topical warzones". How long until Congolese Mass Rape Effect gets released?

It's a decent read, and a point we were discussing on here a while back so certainly relevant. Don't really have much to add other than the fact that I know a guy who spends most of his time in Helmand Province, and when he's not there, he spends his free time playing Modern Warfare 2. As do a lot of the soldiers according to him. Go figure.

Wow, I pretty much agree with everything Dan Whitehead said. That never happens. Very well put indeed.

I'm really, really uncomfortable with the new medal of honour. I thought CoD:WaW was objectionable enough (bar the excellent Nazi Zombies, bizarrely) and only bought that at the GF insistence.

I didn't think it was a particularly well written article. What was interesting was the article in the Big Issue about PTSD amongst veteran soldiers, interviewed was a bomb disposal guy. Harrowing stuff, although bog all to do with computer games.

Sort of, but the shooty bits are the best bits of most war films. And there are countless examples where much of that other stuff often seems a bit of a tacked on justification. Also it would be hella expensive to make a war film that consisted on nothing but shooty shooty.

Well this is about computer games, so the bar is very low.

It'll be after the Kinect add-on comes out.

I didn't know about the footage of executions thing. Now I'm glad I didn't play that game.

Yeah it was a shit game.

I disagree.

Meanwhile the realistic FPS is my least liked type of FPS.

I just like FPSs where you can alter your strategy a bit and take different approaches. The setting seems to have no bearing on whether or not I enjoy them. I like Halo frinstance but also Rainbow Six Vegas for similar reasons. I don't mind the pop-up shooting gallery types but I can only go through them once.

Why do you think he isn't a good games journalist? He's undeniably good at what he does. Probably the best writer on Eurogamer in my opinion. He just likes shit things and doesn't like good thing.

Surely that's a bit of a failing in a critic isn't it?

Well, not if "shit" just means "things Jonarob doesn't like".

Why Go Figure?

Im sure pro footballers play Fifa.

I think most of them play MW2.

No, Minecraft.

Zactly! He's a good games journalist, simple as that. He just has different tastes to me, so I rarely agree with what he has to say.

Because the entire point of the article and this thread is the fact that the new MoH game takes place in an ongoing conflict, and the issue is whether or not this and other similar shooters are a bit close to the bone or not. I was simply demonstrating that the people who actually get shot at on a daily basis in these conflicts are also the people playing the games about the conflicts, and this raises an interesting issue, for me at least. We're sat at home arguing for a bit of respect for people touched by war, when the people who are actually living it don't seem to give a shit. I think you knew that, though.

Seriously, I spend so much of my time on this forum responding to devil's advocate-type posts and "I understand the point you're trying to get across really, but I'm gonna call you on it anyway" posts, I feel like screaming.

This is what I mean, here:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... id=2142195

From now on, I'm just going to respond with "misconscrew".

I prefer "Whatever, dick" but whatever works for you

I would cite more stuff were it not for eurogamer being down, but the Braid review he did is one of the worst pieces I've read on that site, and by quite some way. He manages to fill an awful lot of words with very little content, and often can spend an entire review saying very little indeed.

Isn't that the very essence of New Games Journalism, though? Blame Gillen.

He generally actually managed to talk about stuff though. His review of Medieval:Total war was enough to turn me from "entirely not interested" to "I must buy this as soon as possible". From, you know, actually talking about the game.

The Braid review was a fair while ago, though. I'll admit, I didn't like him before, and I'd often moan about him on here with you chaps. But over the last year or two, I've noticed he's really finding his stride as a writer. He covers all of the right areas in his reviews and does them properly. Unfortunately, he's not funny, at all, and he has vastly different expectations and opinions of games than me generally, but I know that and I know how to take his reviews now. He did used to be a bit shit, though. Like Bramwell, who still is a bit shit in my opinion, he'd fill space with fancy words that really don't belong in a video game review instead of talking about the actual game.

I'm pretty sure Whitehead got himself a bit of a reputation for this on Eurogamer (as he has on here) and he got spanked a few times in the comments section and has subsequently upped his game. As I say, I didn't like his style before, but nowadays I find myself really trying to fault his reviews, and I just can't (other than opinion), and believe me I like finding faults.

Gillen spends most of his reviews talking about himself and his experience of the game, rather than the game itself, so I suppose there's an element of content there.

All the Whitehead reviews I've read have been decent enough. He's no John Walker, but then no one is.

RAMRaider is a DW fan, I believe, so make of that what you will.

Gillen isn't a games journalist and he isn't interested in it. He used it as a stepping stone to forward his comic book writing stuff. Fair play to him, but I never liked his journalism, and the sooner that nonsense is forgotten, the better.

edit: The NGJ nonsense I mean, I'm not completely writing off everything he ever did as nonsense!

Because he genuinely has improved! As above, he used to take some flak in the comments sections as pretty much the whole EG community would collectively groan when a Whitehead review was posted, so he completely changed his style and got rid of the bullshit. Now he's a good solid journalist. But as you say, no John Walker because he seems to lack a personality...

I think it's fair to say Gillen isn't interested in anything except Gillen. Even the comic book stuff is a vehicle for his narcissism rather than a desire to tell stories.

Point of clarification - I mean except John Walker, obviously.

This is true. Even on Twitter earlier today he was faux-cringing about something that had been posted on RPS that he wrote as a kid.

"Oh! It's horrible, something I did as a kid! Don't LOOK AT IT!" etc.

Dodged a "misconscrew" bullet there, Chris!

I knew you were online so I thought I'd make sure.

Oh snap!

I was tempted to weigh in with a "but it makes good business sense" argument, and my changed mind.

I don't think anyone is actually firing metal projectiles here, Jon. Don't be so ridiculous!

Clever!

As soon as I see Shitehead's name attached to an article, I stop reading.