Harming Civilian Consequences
Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2021 7:55 pm
I am aware of Six Days' current perception and understand why you are making civilian casualties a "Game Over". Because of the fact these are real stories being told of Operation: Phantom Fury, the deaths of civilians at the hands of these particular Marines is most likely based on whether it happened or not in real life. If Six Days is to keep true to the good conduct of the Marines in question, then absolutely gloss over what I am writing next.
Harming civilians is a war crime. Plain and simple. If you do it by accident it can ruin your life and will haunt you forever. And if you do it on purpose, you deserve to spend the rest of your life in Leavenworth or worse. I'd like to begin my thought with that preface. I, in no way, shape, or form condone the harming of non-combatants.
It is a given fact that the war in Iraq led to the loss of civilian life, as is the case in all war. And it is true that a few of those civilians accidentally met their end at the rifle-barrels of terrified US Servicemen. Without passing judgement, and even with a twinge of understanding, those things were at a severely high risk of occurring and were an unfortunate reality. The deaths of innocent people is one of the worst and most regrettable aspects of a war, and a prime example of why it must be avoided at all costs.
All of this serves in relation to the idea of a civilian casualty in Six Days resulting in an immediate game over.
My question is this: has any thought been given towards the portrayal of civilian casualties in this game? Have any ideas arisen or even been considered past the idea of a "Game Over" screen to portray this terrible, nonfictional occurrence.
Some ideas I have that I considered alternatives that punish the action but don't end the game immediately.
"The Game Over Screen":
A game over as the result of shooting a civilian isn't a simple screen. It is the image of your own fire-team taking control of your firearm and restraining you to prevent you from doing anything else.
If you shoot a civilian:
1.) The game gives you one chance to continue forward with the mission, but you as a player must continue with a difficulty spike. The enemy will become more aggressive in their tactics because you hurt an innocent, and your aim (or perhaps reload speed) is stunted because of your own feelings crippling you. If you do it again, you will be given the game over.
or
2.) The game keeps track of your mission progress point-by-point. If you harm a civilian, you lose your previous checkpoint in the event you die. If you kill another civilian, you are given the game over screen and sent back 2 checkpoints.
I reiterate, my tips are mere suggestions and are not meant in any way to condone shooting non-combatants. They serve to punish the act, but do not immediately mean the end of the game.
I say all this as a mere forum poster. I am not on the development team and as such am to be considered a mere keyboard warrior. My words are those of an onlooker, and I understand if my statement and input are disregarded since I do not bear the brunt of any negative attention you receive. My suggestions are merely there to integrate a feature of war every other war game in the genre will not touch.
Harming civilians is a war crime. Plain and simple. If you do it by accident it can ruin your life and will haunt you forever. And if you do it on purpose, you deserve to spend the rest of your life in Leavenworth or worse. I'd like to begin my thought with that preface. I, in no way, shape, or form condone the harming of non-combatants.
It is a given fact that the war in Iraq led to the loss of civilian life, as is the case in all war. And it is true that a few of those civilians accidentally met their end at the rifle-barrels of terrified US Servicemen. Without passing judgement, and even with a twinge of understanding, those things were at a severely high risk of occurring and were an unfortunate reality. The deaths of innocent people is one of the worst and most regrettable aspects of a war, and a prime example of why it must be avoided at all costs.
All of this serves in relation to the idea of a civilian casualty in Six Days resulting in an immediate game over.
My question is this: has any thought been given towards the portrayal of civilian casualties in this game? Have any ideas arisen or even been considered past the idea of a "Game Over" screen to portray this terrible, nonfictional occurrence.
Some ideas I have that I considered alternatives that punish the action but don't end the game immediately.
"The Game Over Screen":
A game over as the result of shooting a civilian isn't a simple screen. It is the image of your own fire-team taking control of your firearm and restraining you to prevent you from doing anything else.
If you shoot a civilian:
1.) The game gives you one chance to continue forward with the mission, but you as a player must continue with a difficulty spike. The enemy will become more aggressive in their tactics because you hurt an innocent, and your aim (or perhaps reload speed) is stunted because of your own feelings crippling you. If you do it again, you will be given the game over.
or
2.) The game keeps track of your mission progress point-by-point. If you harm a civilian, you lose your previous checkpoint in the event you die. If you kill another civilian, you are given the game over screen and sent back 2 checkpoints.
I reiterate, my tips are mere suggestions and are not meant in any way to condone shooting non-combatants. They serve to punish the act, but do not immediately mean the end of the game.
I say all this as a mere forum poster. I am not on the development team and as such am to be considered a mere keyboard warrior. My words are those of an onlooker, and I understand if my statement and input are disregarded since I do not bear the brunt of any negative attention you receive. My suggestions are merely there to integrate a feature of war every other war game in the genre will not touch.