6 Days in Fallujah has the potential to be awesome, but im worried.

Discussions and chats related to Six Days in Fallujah.
User avatar
TacticalJunkie
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2021 10:21 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 23 times

6 Days in Fallujah has the potential to be awesome, but im worried.

6 Days in Fallujah features documentary footage and recorded interviews. It expresses itself to be taken seriously. So i will be taking it seriously hence why i'm making this post.

I would like to mention war photography and it serves my point so here me out here. A picture taken in a war inherently objectifies it, it places it as an object of study. A picture itself is devoid of the individual perspective of each of those in it. It is merely an image of something. What truly matters and gives it purpose is the caption under it, the explanation of what it depicts. A picture of a dead man is simply a showcase of human mortality. Who that man is, why he died, when it was, and where it was gives it meaning. If I'm staring at a picture of a dead man in a war then what purpose does it show other than to be thankful that I myself am not dead, or for me to contemplate my own philosophy. In other words, if I see a picture of a traumatized veteran or civilian, it shouldn't be about me, it should be about them. War photographers in Vietnam didn't do what they did because they want you to think about your mortality, they did it to change policy. To get you to think about the subjects in the photograph and how they feel. In order to do that, it must be de-objectified. The caption, and the story behind it does this. The journalist cannot be a passive observer, the journalist cannot take a picture for the sake of it, the journalist has to be emotionally involved or the photograph is simply meaningless and voyeuristic.

How does this relate to 6 Days in Fallujah? Just like photography it is affected by the medium and its inherent faults. To make a movie or this case a video game about war, inherently says there is something for the audience to enjoy about it or be entertained by. The act of romanticizing war is immediately done by the reason for its own existence. There has to be a point or it will fall victim to this. What is the statement the game wants to make? If war is hell, then the human aspect of it must be explored and that includes the perspectives of the belligerent, No one is excluded by the effects of war. If war is hell simply because of the violence then you're making a spectacle of violence for the sake of it. Showing dead men has never done anything, if it did then would never be war a long time ago. If it is to show heroic acts taken in war, then that states that there is something good to be found in war, that war creates heroes, that war allows people to become heroes. It glorifies war, by making the statement that there is glory to be found in war. If you do not wish to glorify war then you cannot remove the caption, you cannot remove why what is depicted is happening. Do you wish to be a game that allows the player to have their share of glory at the expense of those who lived through it, those that actually did those heroic acts. Do you wish to be a game that makes a spectacle of death and suffering, objectifying those who suffered because of it.

When making your cutscenes, don’t film them like a blockbuster movie with spectacle, quick cuts, explosions, gunfire, like the new trailer did. Make them like a War Journalist, perspective, meaning, and all.

6 Days in Fallujah has to say something. What is it which it wants to say? That war is bad but at least heroes are made from it? No, I know you don't want that. That we should remember who experienced it, remembering the toll it had on them, and what they had to go through. I know you want to talk about that, but If that is the case, they suffered for a reason. Why were the marines in Fallujah, why was America in Fallujah? Which will lead to why America was in Iraq. Which will inevitably lead to the validity of the war. 6 Days In Fallujah will have to decide what is the history it depicts, what is the facts of said history, and the conclusions that can be drawn from it. For example WMDs that could have existed, or WMDs that never were found. Many more questions like this (may not be exactly like this) will inevitably reveal itself, but you cannot turn your head. You can't run away from the political or ethical questions of the Iraq war, because the Iraq war itself was hopeless to run away from it.

I hope you don't run.
User avatar
aggimajera
Posts: 158
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2021 10:09 pm
Has thanked: 298 times
Been thanked: 336 times

Re: 6 Days in Fallujah has the potential to be awesome, but im worried.

That is the most well thought out and insightful post I have seen come out of these forums in a long time. These are the sort of posts that USED to be common here - but have fallen by the wayside to the gameplay tweaks and features. In a sense, you harken back to when faith in this game still existed.

You've nailed the fundamental problem I was blind to before - Six Days in Fallujah in its current form has already failed at its stated mission. The reason is exactly as you described: it is a first-person shooter game that turns a blind eye to context. It acts like it provides context but almost every statement from Highwire leadership has proven beyond any doubt the game does not intend to truly contextualize the combatants within Fallujah - because it does not wish to contextualize Fallujah within the Iraq War - and does not wish to contextualize the Iraq War with itself. Lies, propaganda, resources - all of it gives way to the simple story of the boot on the ground. Boots on the ground were forced to reckon with their role later, and many have lost their lives to PTSD, survivors guilt, shame, and regret. This game will fail to show why Fallujah even happened in the first place, and will fail to illustrate why such conflicted feelings arose within those who survived it.

It is also unable to generate true empathy by the gameplay loop alone, and I scoff when people here act like it does. It might have been able to do so had it been brave and attempted to tell the story of Fallujah from all sides. Given as how this game is made by Americans to sell the American perspective, it cannot. Iraqi civilians are to be included (supposedly), but I have serious reservations this game will take any approach to that angle that criticizes American actions there in any way. The bad lens will be, it must be, on the Insurgents - and this is despite numerous documented American war crimes against civilians. It must instead rely on the spectacle of battle itself to generate this empathy - and given the discord among the milsim community this game courted I believe in my heart it failed. Failed miserably. This game romanticizes war in a way Call of Duty and Battlefield cannot - it presents itself as truth and turned that into marketing to make people feel emboldened and somehow dignified in their participation. Look at the Youtube video titles touting this game as INTENSE and PTSD INDUCTING. For a product that touts empathy, it sure causes the belittlement of the real feelings that arose from Fallujah.

This game turned a real tragedy into yet another milsim piece wannabe soldiers will partake in. The best among them may find empathy for the US Marine who took part in the battle - but will ignore the context and suffering of everyone else involved. The average gamer will play and be like "damn, that was intense." The sickest among us will take it, run with it, and make Youtube content as I mentioned before. Each and every one of those results belittle and cheapen the true cost of Operation: Phantom Fury: the lives of everyone who was forced to endure it.

You are right to be worried - you are starting to see that the nature of this product is an oxymoron. It already has run.
User avatar
AmperCamper
Community Manager
Posts: 1126
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2021 5:02 pm
Has thanked: 1265 times
Been thanked: 2325 times
Contact:

Re: 6 Days in Fallujah has the potential to be awesome, but im worried.

Thanks for taking the time to draft this thread for us. We appreciate the conversation here, and I'd like to address a few things.

We suggest continuing this conversation after our November 7th release. We believe context is best accomplished through a mixture of interactive and non-interactive components, and we haven't really begun doing this in the co-op game. The single-player narrative campaign is the answer here.

However, keep in mind that this November 7th release will only have the first two story missions of the campaign. Obviously, we cannot provide all the context in just two missions. Actually, we can't provide all the context until we connect the dots at the end. These first two missions focus exclusively on the reasons why this battle happened in the first place and the tactics players will need to understand to be successful in the game.

So, November 7th will just be a start. But, you'll get some hints about where we are going.
User avatar
TacticalJunkie
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2021 10:21 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Re: 6 Days in Fallujah has the potential to be awesome, but im worried.

AmperCamper wrote: Fri Oct 11, 2024 11:57 am Thanks for taking the time to draft this thread for us. We appreciate the conversation here, and I'd like to address a few things.

We suggest continuing this conversation after our November 7th release. We believe context is best accomplished through a mixture of interactive and non-interactive components, and we haven't really begun doing this in the co-op game. The single-player narrative campaign is the answer here.

However, keep in mind that this November 7th release will only have the first two story missions of the campaign. Obviously, we cannot provide all the context in just two missions. Actually, we can't provide all the context until we connect the dots at the end. These first two missions focus exclusively on the reasons why this battle happened in the first place and the tactics players will need to understand to be successful in the game.

So, November 7th will just be a start. But, you'll get some hints about where we are going.

Thank you Amper.

Forgive me if i worded this wrongly! I should of worded it better so that it is clear that this is my opinion without playing the November 7th release of the two missions.

Hopefully it didn't sound accusatory.

Re-reading this i should stated that my post was influenced by me remembering the multiple times previous games like Medal of Honor VR, COD MW 2019, COD WW2, and how they wished to be taken seriously without doing anything to prove it. Not really anything you guys have done. I know peter walked back on previous statements, and that was a good thing which shows you guys care.

It was more of me expressing how serious this has to be taken. You guys are obviously well intentioned, but countless examples like Apocalypse Now, American Sniper, Saving Private Ryan, Lone Survivor, and Band of Brothers have faults that defeat their intentions. I don't want you guys to do the same, and I know you guys don't want to either.

I'm glad your hearing me out, and I know its very easy for me to say what you should do and what you shouldn't because I'm not involved in the project. I do not know the difficulties that i may be overlooking or if you guys have already discussed similar topics internally and I'm just repeating what you guys already know. So forgive my ignorance if that is the case, its not my intention. I just wanted to selfishly satisfy myself just this once to get confirmation and ease my worries.


Also please don't mistake me for not being a fan of what the team is trying to pull off. I'm so excited for what the finished product could be like. I'm so glad there is people out there willing to make something like this. I believe that it is entirely possible to pull this off. Nothing can ever be perfect, but I think something like this can do more good then harm if done well. I believe that art has the power to do so! No matter even if the reach is small, its worth it!

Also my name is degenerate on the discord server! This game is really special, and I really would love to help in anyway I can when possible. So if anything needs volunteers on community related side of things let me know.
Last edited by TacticalJunkie on Fri Oct 11, 2024 2:37 pm, edited 18 times in total.
User avatar
TacticalJunkie
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2021 10:21 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Re: 6 Days in Fallujah has the potential to be awesome, but im worried.

aggimajera wrote: Thu Oct 10, 2024 5:09 pm That is the most well thought out and insightful post I have seen come out of these forums in a long time. These are the sort of posts that USED to be common here - but have fallen by the wayside to the gameplay tweaks and features. In a sense, you harken back to when faith in this game still existed.

You've nailed the fundamental problem I was blind to before - Six Days in Fallujah in its current form has already failed at its stated mission. The reason is exactly as you described: it is a first-person shooter game that turns a blind eye to context. It acts like it provides context but almost every statement from Highwire leadership has proven beyond any doubt the game does not intend to truly contextualize the combatants within Fallujah - because it does not wish to contextualize Fallujah within the Iraq War - and does not wish to contextualize the Iraq War with itself. Lies, propaganda, resources - all of it gives way to the simple story of the boot on the ground. Boots on the ground were forced to reckon with their role later, and many have lost their lives to PTSD, survivors guilt, shame, and regret. This game will fail to show why Fallujah even happened in the first place, and will fail to illustrate why such conflicted feelings arose within those who survived it.

It is also unable to generate true empathy by the gameplay loop alone, and I scoff when people here act like it does. It might have been able to do so had it been brave and attempted to tell the story of Fallujah from all sides. Given as how this game is made by Americans to sell the American perspective, it cannot. Iraqi civilians are to be included (supposedly), but I have serious reservations this game will take any approach to that angle that criticizes American actions there in any way. The bad lens will be, it must be, on the Insurgents - and this is despite numerous documented American war crimes against civilians. It must instead rely on the spectacle of battle itself to generate this empathy - and given the discord among the milsim community this game courted I believe in my heart it failed. Failed miserably. This game romanticizes war in a way Call of Duty and Battlefield cannot - it presents itself as truth and turned that into marketing to make people feel emboldened and somehow dignified in their participation. Look at the Youtube video titles touting this game as INTENSE and PTSD INDUCTING. For a product that touts empathy, it sure causes the belittlement of the real feelings that arose from Fallujah.

This game turned a real tragedy into yet another milsim piece wannabe soldiers will partake in. The best among them may find empathy for the US Marine who took part in the battle - but will ignore the context and suffering of everyone else involved. The average gamer will play and be like "damn, that was intense." The sickest among us will take it, run with it, and make Youtube content as I mentioned before. Each and every one of those results belittle and cheapen the true cost of Operation: Phantom Fury: the lives of everyone who was forced to endure it.

You are right to be worried - you are starting to see that the nature of this product is an oxymoron. It already has run.
You make valid points, but I also think there is points you make that aren't fair.

You cannot always control how the audience interprets your Art or internalizes it. Apocalypse now is a perfect example of this, with it's Ride of the Valkyries scene which is supposed to be complete chaos and absurdity to highlight the insanity of Kilgore, but on the other hand well you know that scene in Jarhead.

I also think that its entirely possible for it to succeed even without the insurgents being playable or interviewed, but that depends on how they show the controversies of the war, and the aftermath.

I also think the game should be given the benefit of the doubt until it is finished with its Story missions.

"This game romanticizes war in a way Call of Duty and Battlefield cannot - it presents itself as truth and turned that into marketing to make people feel emboldened and somehow dignified in their participation."

This isn't a fault of the game, it is the fault of story telling in general. We cannot hear stories, fiction or not fiction without placing themselves in it. We do it when we honor our veterans, we do it when we create war memorials, we do it when we remember their actions. We live vicariously through those we honor. Their victories are our victories and that is inherently selfish. However, without story telling we cannot reflect on the past, and we cannot learn from it. We need stories, and we need to tell the stories of those in history because it humanizes them. We should continue to tell stories despite this.

The best example and easiest one i can point out of how we do this is the questions and statements that pop into our head when we read or watch something about the actions of soldiers who did what society deems as heroic or the latter in times of war

"I like to think that I would chose to do the right thing as well"

"How could they do this? I wouldn't ever do this horrific act!"

How could you ever know truly know. Yet we feel enlightened about ourselves after we hear stories like these, at the expense of those who made those selfless decisions. In the case of those who committed evil acts, we do it to reassure ourselves and ignore our own capacity for evil.

Its something i think we all do, me included
User avatar
aggimajera
Posts: 158
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2021 10:09 pm
Has thanked: 298 times
Been thanked: 336 times

Re: 6 Days in Fallujah has the potential to be awesome, but im worried.

TacticalJunkie wrote: Fri Oct 11, 2024 1:51 pm
aggimajera wrote: Thu Oct 10, 2024 5:09 pm That is the most well thought out and insightful post I have seen come out of these forums in a long time. These are the sort of posts that USED to be common here - but have fallen by the wayside to the gameplay tweaks and features. In a sense, you harken back to when faith in this game still existed.

You've nailed the fundamental problem I was blind to before - Six Days in Fallujah in its current form has already failed at its stated mission. The reason is exactly as you described: it is a first-person shooter game that turns a blind eye to context. It acts like it provides context but almost every statement from Highwire leadership has proven beyond any doubt the game does not intend to truly contextualize the combatants within Fallujah - because it does not wish to contextualize Fallujah within the Iraq War - and does not wish to contextualize the Iraq War with itself. Lies, propaganda, resources - all of it gives way to the simple story of the boot on the ground. Boots on the ground were forced to reckon with their role later, and many have lost their lives to PTSD, survivors guilt, shame, and regret. This game will fail to show why Fallujah even happened in the first place, and will fail to illustrate why such conflicted feelings arose within those who survived it.

It is also unable to generate true empathy by the gameplay loop alone, and I scoff when people here act like it does. It might have been able to do so had it been brave and attempted to tell the story of Fallujah from all sides. Given as how this game is made by Americans to sell the American perspective, it cannot. Iraqi civilians are to be included (supposedly), but I have serious reservations this game will take any approach to that angle that criticizes American actions there in any way. The bad lens will be, it must be, on the Insurgents - and this is despite numerous documented American war crimes against civilians. It must instead rely on the spectacle of battle itself to generate this empathy - and given the discord among the milsim community this game courted I believe in my heart it failed. Failed miserably. This game romanticizes war in a way Call of Duty and Battlefield cannot - it presents itself as truth and turned that into marketing to make people feel emboldened and somehow dignified in their participation. Look at the Youtube video titles touting this game as INTENSE and PTSD INDUCTING. For a product that touts empathy, it sure causes the belittlement of the real feelings that arose from Fallujah.

This game turned a real tragedy into yet another milsim piece wannabe soldiers will partake in. The best among them may find empathy for the US Marine who took part in the battle - but will ignore the context and suffering of everyone else involved. The average gamer will play and be like "damn, that was intense." The sickest among us will take it, run with it, and make Youtube content as I mentioned before. Each and every one of those results belittle and cheapen the true cost of Operation: Phantom Fury: the lives of everyone who was forced to endure it.

You are right to be worried - you are starting to see that the nature of this product is an oxymoron. It already has run.
You make valid points, but I also think there is points you make that aren't fair.

You cannot always control how the audience interprets your Art or internalizes it. Apocalypse now is a perfect example of this, with it's Ride of the Valkyries scene which is supposed to be complete chaos and absurdity to highlight the insanity of Kilgore, but on the other hand well you know that scene in Jarhead.

I also think that its entirely possible for it to succeed even without the insurgents being playable or interviewed, but that depends on how they show the controversies of the war, and the aftermath.

I also think the game should be given the benefit of the doubt until it is finished with its Story missions.

"This game romanticizes war in a way Call of Duty and Battlefield cannot - it presents itself as truth and turned that into marketing to make people feel emboldened and somehow dignified in their participation."

This isn't a fault of the game, it is the fault of story telling in general. We cannot hear stories, fiction or not fiction without placing themselves in it. We do it when we honor our veterans, we do it when we create war memorials, we do it when we remember their actions. We live vicariously through those we honor. Their victories are our victories and that is inherently selfish. However, without story telling we cannot reflect on the past, and we cannot learn from it. We need stories, and we need to tell the stories of those in history because it humanizes them. We should continue to tell stories despite this.

The best example and easiest one i can point out of how we do this is the questions and statements that pop into our head when we read or watch something about the actions of soldiers who did what society deems as heroic or the latter in times of war

"I like to think that I would chose to do the right thing as well"

"How could they do this? I wouldn't ever do this horrific act!"

How could you ever know truly know. Yet we feel enlightened about ourselves after we hear stories like these, at the expense of those who made those selfless decisions. In the case of those who committed evil acts, we do it to reassure ourselves and ignore our own capacity for evil.

Its something i think we all do, me included
I guess we’ll need to wait and see. I see your points because I have thought them before. I used to be a big cheerleader for this game, but I feel the way I feel now through long periods of introspection and research. I feel I am not unfair in that regard because I truly understand what this games aims are - and realize it’s futility in its approach and execution.
User avatar
TacticalJunkie
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2021 10:21 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Re: 6 Days in Fallujah has the potential to be awesome, but im worried.

aggimajera wrote: Fri Oct 11, 2024 11:48 pm
TacticalJunkie wrote: Fri Oct 11, 2024 1:51 pm
aggimajera wrote: Thu Oct 10, 2024 5:09 pm That is the most well thought out and insightful post I have seen come out of these forums in a long time. These are the sort of posts that USED to be common here - but have fallen by the wayside to the gameplay tweaks and features. In a sense, you harken back to when faith in this game still existed.

You've nailed the fundamental problem I was blind to before - Six Days in Fallujah in its current form has already failed at its stated mission. The reason is exactly as you described: it is a first-person shooter game that turns a blind eye to context. It acts like it provides context but almost every statement from Highwire leadership has proven beyond any doubt the game does not intend to truly contextualize the combatants within Fallujah - because it does not wish to contextualize Fallujah within the Iraq War - and does not wish to contextualize the Iraq War with itself. Lies, propaganda, resources - all of it gives way to the simple story of the boot on the ground. Boots on the ground were forced to reckon with their role later, and many have lost their lives to PTSD, survivors guilt, shame, and regret. This game will fail to show why Fallujah even happened in the first place, and will fail to illustrate why such conflicted feelings arose within those who survived it.

It is also unable to generate true empathy by the gameplay loop alone, and I scoff when people here act like it does. It might have been able to do so had it been brave and attempted to tell the story of Fallujah from all sides. Given as how this game is made by Americans to sell the American perspective, it cannot. Iraqi civilians are to be included (supposedly), but I have serious reservations this game will take any approach to that angle that criticizes American actions there in any way. The bad lens will be, it must be, on the Insurgents - and this is despite numerous documented American war crimes against civilians. It must instead rely on the spectacle of battle itself to generate this empathy - and given the discord among the milsim community this game courted I believe in my heart it failed. Failed miserably. This game romanticizes war in a way Call of Duty and Battlefield cannot - it presents itself as truth and turned that into marketing to make people feel emboldened and somehow dignified in their participation. Look at the Youtube video titles touting this game as INTENSE and PTSD INDUCTING. For a product that touts empathy, it sure causes the belittlement of the real feelings that arose from Fallujah.

This game turned a real tragedy into yet another milsim piece wannabe soldiers will partake in. The best among them may find empathy for the US Marine who took part in the battle - but will ignore the context and suffering of everyone else involved. The average gamer will play and be like "damn, that was intense." The sickest among us will take it, run with it, and make Youtube content as I mentioned before. Each and every one of those results belittle and cheapen the true cost of Operation: Phantom Fury: the lives of everyone who was forced to endure it.

You are right to be worried - you are starting to see that the nature of this product is an oxymoron. It already has run.
You make valid points, but I also think there is points you make that aren't fair.

You cannot always control how the audience interprets your Art or internalizes it. Apocalypse now is a perfect example of this, with it's Ride of the Valkyries scene which is supposed to be complete chaos and absurdity to highlight the insanity of Kilgore, but on the other hand well you know that scene in Jarhead.

I also think that its entirely possible for it to succeed even without the insurgents being playable or interviewed, but that depends on how they show the controversies of the war, and the aftermath.

I also think the game should be given the benefit of the doubt until it is finished with its Story missions.

"This game romanticizes war in a way Call of Duty and Battlefield cannot - it presents itself as truth and turned that into marketing to make people feel emboldened and somehow dignified in their participation."

This isn't a fault of the game, it is the fault of story telling in general. We cannot hear stories, fiction or not fiction without placing themselves in it. We do it when we honor our veterans, we do it when we create war memorials, we do it when we remember their actions. We live vicariously through those we honor. Their victories are our victories and that is inherently selfish. However, without story telling we cannot reflect on the past, and we cannot learn from it. We need stories, and we need to tell the stories of those in history because it humanizes them. We should continue to tell stories despite this.

The best example and easiest one i can point out of how we do this is the questions and statements that pop into our head when we read or watch something about the actions of soldiers who did what society deems as heroic or the latter in times of war

"I like to think that I would chose to do the right thing as well"

"How could they do this? I wouldn't ever do this horrific act!"

How could you ever know truly know. Yet we feel enlightened about ourselves after we hear stories like these, at the expense of those who made those selfless decisions. In the case of those who committed evil acts, we do it to reassure ourselves and ignore our own capacity for evil.

Its something i think we all do, me included
I guess we’ll need to wait and see. I see your points because I have thought them before. I used to be a big cheerleader for this game, but I feel the way I feel now through long periods of introspection and research. I feel I am not unfair in that regard because I truly understand what this games aims are - and realize it’s futility in its approach and execution.
I suppose our introspections has just led us to different conclusions.
User avatar
Kean_1
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2021 11:15 am
Has thanked: 611 times
Been thanked: 415 times

Re: 6 Days in Fallujah has the potential to be awesome, but im worried.

Like many games, there will always be disagreement on how certain aspects are implemented, removed and/or finally executed but I haven't seen anything to make me doubt these folks are still committed to their vision. .....which certainly won't align with everyone in some way or another.

As an example, I recall early discussions here where a few were vehemently against any multiplayer including co-op. I guess they felt that would cheapen or trivialize the experience (a real deal-breaker in their eyes). I strongly disagreed then as I still do now and for the same reasons.

As mentioned, we still have yet to see the campaign and that is really where these stories will be told. ....but the fact remains that SDiF is still a game and aspects like gameplay features (and getting those right) are just as important. .....perhaps even more to some as that may be the biggest draw. Now, that doesn't mean the stories / message that the developers want to convey have taken a back seat. After all, the game is still in EA and missing a big chunk of it's final content.

....so, from what I've seen so far and the discussions we have had with the SDiF team, I'm not (personally) worried at all nor have I lost faith. Quite the opposite in fact.

I play with a group of older gamers like myself (which includes military vets) who are still looking forward to the release on PS5 next year. They can't keep asking me about it when we get online for our weekly gaming sessions (a bunch of older folks like myself). We all like what we've seen so far and are very excited to get our hands on it.
User avatar
TacticalJunkie
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2021 10:21 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Re: 6 Days in Fallujah has the potential to be awesome, but im worried.

The two missions were released and my worries have subsided for the most part. The only criticisms I have is the style the cinematics are in. I think the better option is similar to Generation Kill and A City of Life and Death. More handheld and grounded. Less slow motion and spectacle. The best way it can be done is that its like found footage, perspective from a war journalist. However a good middle ground is what i mentioned before. Its a lot more respectful, because it's less stylistic and Mainstream Hollywood inspired. The two PMCs murdered at the bridge are labeled as "military veterans" they should be referred to as PMCs or Blackwater Employees, that is what they were because of their occupation. The next criticism is the documentary segments, i wish there was less exaggerated dramatics. Comparisons for a better example imo would be Ken burns' documentary about Vietnam or Only the Dead by war journalist Micheal Ware.

That is a just a wishlist, and i understand that's very subjective.

However, I mentioned one thing that definitely needs to be corrected because its not appropriate.

the only thing that is very important to change imo is correcting the line "military veterans" and changing the line to "former military veterans, now working for Blackwater" or "Blackwater PMCs" because the War in Terror is notable for the use of PMCs, and also that's what their occupation was at the time and why they were in Iraq.

Not mentioning their occupation in the respective context, when it explains why they were there, is inappropriate for a documentary to do.

As always would be glad to here opinions and such.
User avatar
Kean_1
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2021 11:15 am
Has thanked: 611 times
Been thanked: 415 times

Re: 6 Days in Fallujah has the potential to be awesome, but im worried.

Regardless of your current occupation, after you honorably serve / retire, you're still a veteran. ....PMC mention aside.
Post Reply