Ok wow, now this is deep

>Yes player you were supposed to switch the game off and never complete it, it was legitimate choice
>That would be $59.99 btw
Truly a masterpiece of chutzpah.

>Buzzword buzzword buzz buzz buzz
Not an argument

Keep setting for another 10 years Any Forums

That's unironically what the devs wanted you to do. At the start of the game, your mission is to recon and get out at the first sign of hostility. Everything that happens after that is due to the protagonist (i.e. "You") making bad decisions and not part of your actual mission. So in order to play it correctly, you have to quit the game after the intro and uninstall.

The entire motivation that the modern military uses to keep itself afloat is that it's a) necessary for self-defence and b) an adventurous job where you risk your life and etc. and help people and make the world better.
It's been very effective propaganda to the point where military spending/policies are just seen as ipso facto necessary.
I would say that you're right in respect to how we treat the modern hero archetype, they are usually masculine men who serve a "greater cause" and use violence as a mean to defeat the bad people, but we often deliberately fail to go deeper than that.

Attached: 1633512650531.jpg (700x394, 25.07K)

>war bad!
Wow incredible any more nuggets of wisdom you wanna share?

You've already been proven wrong in countless of threads. Cope and seethe.

Because the kills are either cgi or practical effects. In a sense to kill for entertainment(industry) is make believe

NOOOOOOOO I WASN'T CAREFUL WHILE HUNTING MONSTERS!!!!

Attached: Cryjak.png (633x758, 15.69K)

It's only considered entertainment when it's for rightful reasons or the enemy is at least armed but when it's Postal, GTA (the killing hookers thing) or Hatred it's monstrous again even if legally not criminal. Also rape is taboo in videogames (almost always implied as opposed to shown, never glorified/justified and never the player gets to do it) while being less taboo irl than irl murder which is completely fine being in videogames as a core mechanic so entrenched that there is like one AAA game that isn't focused on it ever.

Crazy how this game is still triggering midwits a decade on. If only a Jap had made it, Any Forums could allow itself to enjoy it.

I'm tired of hearing people who didn't wanna commit war crimes whining about being forced to commit war crimes and then being finger wagged for committing war crimes.

I wanna hear the perspective of people who love committing war crimes, happily committed war crimes, and then were finger wagged for committing war crimes.

>there are mongoloids still cumming in their pants over a toddler-tier war commentary ten years later

Did the devs literally state this or is this some youtube analysis guys collectively inventing something that sounds profound?
You would have to be an extreme deontologist to the point of making Kant proud to think that the moral decisions you perform in a video game merits not playing the game.
I do think it's a very thoughtful dilemma, we often don't examine the act of using violence as a mean in movies which has made us so desensitized to something that most people in real life would simply never do or be horrified of.
In contrast, I can only remember the old GoW games having sex minigames which is odd because consensual sex is generally positive, funny how our society is selectively prude like that.

Yeah I enjoyed that part because white phosphorous is an interesting plot device, and large scale casualties aren't usually seen very much in games, but yeah I felt finger wagged but I didn't care since it's just a video game and I saw it as absolutely failing at trying to moralfag about war crimes. Then I finished it and went back to playing COD