PATRIOTS will blow your mind.

Miscellaneous Current Events
1

Watch this trailer for an “upcoming” Rainbow Six game called PATRIOTS. A game about a U.S. based terror cell that is attempting to combat corporatism and a runaway U.S. government_…_

Intense, huh? The trailer on the official site has slightly different dialogue (mentioning bailouts that “you” took to the banker that is murdered at the end).

This trailer was used to recruit terrorists by a real life U.S. soldier based terror cell in Georgia. The soldiers that were involved in the real life terror plot are on trial and face the death penalty (obviously, for treason).

**

Here is another trailer with some envisioned, but not finalized, gameplay.

Yeah. I know. I’ve never seen or heard of a game like this. It is trying to pose impossible ethical decisions to the player by switching your perspective between civilians, terrorists, and the famed counter terrorist team Rainbow Six.

I have been waiting for this game since I was the first trailers and there is virtually no news or information about the game. But, today I read that the entire creative team was fired by the developer. My guess is that this was done as a response to the terror cell in the above mentioned article. (The guy at the beginning and end of the second trailer was one of those who were fired…or let go, replaced, etc..)

This is a bummer since the narrative of the game sounded spectacular. If the U.S. government asked Ubisoft to change the direction of the game I’ll be very disappointed as it is about the most interesting Rainbow Six game to date.

Freedom of speech and expression should protect controversial story lines in movies and games even if they inspire nuts out there (ahem, Batman).

Personally, I want to play this game in its controversial form. I am worried that the lack of new information, the real life “inspired by” terror plot, and the creative team being fired are all signs that the game has been / is being reworked to not include these controversial elements based on the fact that it has already been used as a device to help eventually overthrow the government…

How do you feel about this? Does/did the game look cool? Should the game be reworked voluntarily? Should the US government be allowed to demand or pressure developers (or publishers) to rework it?

2

Holy shit. You’re not kidding are you? Wow… Just wow… Must play.

3

And some still dare say that video games are not ‘art’.

4

Just to be sure… is the terrorist group socialist extremists or libertarian extremists?

5

You play as the US Government.

6

Rainbow Six is actually a UN based counter terror unit. And it sounds like the terrorists are a combination of right wing militia and occupy-motivated. I don’t think it is making as much of a partisan statment as you peopel are inferring.

Answer the questions at the bottom!

7

Obviously we don’t agree with the government regulating art and shit, what did you think we were gonna’ say? I’d be really interested to play the game of its original vision.

8

How do you feel about this?

How do I feel about what? The game looks awesome (I used to play the Rainbow Six Vegas games a lot)… also looks like it could be cool recruiting tool for the military, much like Call of Duty. Forget the story of the game, most players don’t pay attention to that shit (I think I’m the only person I know who doesn’t try to skip cutscenes), and they’ll just think that they’re stopping some douche form blowing up New York, and they get to play as American (or, “UN”) troops doing it, and have lots of fun, and use all cool technology.

As for the potential of the game getting canned? Happens a lot, the business fundamentals of the video game industry are not great, and years of poor budgeting are starting to catch up on major game developers and publishers. Costs have gone through the roof, and sales have been falling.

VG companies have rarely shied away from controversy, ie - the GTA, Manhunt, and CoD series. That shit means big money to them.

Does/did the game look cool?

Yeah, it looked cool. Not a drop of it was ingame, though, so we have no idea how the final product would have looked.

Should the game be reworked voluntarily?

If it makes good business sense, and the people involved want to, then yeah.

Should the US government be allowed to demand or pressure developers (or publishers) to rework it?

It’s a Canadian team of a French company. Outside of refusing to allow sale of the game in the US, there’s little that the Feds can do… and can the Feds even do that? Has the Federal Government yet claimed the power to restrict the sale of controverisal content?

9

I play games for the story too!

This is a good point, but as far as I know none of those games have sprouted a terror cell within the US military.

The 7 minute video that says “NOT ACTUAL GAME FOOTAGE” was being played. It is likely that that section wouldn’t be in the game as it is there, but that is playable footage. It is like an in studio demo.

You know movies that involve the US military have to submit their scripts to the DoD, right?

10

I didn’t know that, no.

Does that include videogames? Have you played the Modern Warfare series? I think the part where it turns out that the US General was using the US Military to assist the Russian Supernationalist uprising (or whatever the fuck was happening) and then you play as 2 British dudes that go in and basically kill about 400 US troops… would have raised a few eyebrows down at the DoD.

The problem, here, though, is that if this game does re-emerge, and it has been reworked to avoid controversy, we will never know if it was a voluntary decision made by Ubisoft, or if they were “forced to” by Government.

11

What does this suggest? That there are no anti-military films in Hollywood? There are tons.

12

It seems to be just violence-porn. Also sending many mixed signals.

Like that opposition to the state/corporations must be terrorism; or lead by a van guard. And that the US government is protecting us with awesome high tech weapons.

It is kind of criticizing government/corporations as well as the opposition. Probably to suggest that we need a more ‘reasonable’ state and economy. And that big government and anti-statists are equally bad. We need some middle ground, but in the mean time the government is justified in using Batman toys to destroy their enemies.

13

@ TronCat

I think Apocalypse Now and The Deer Hunter are two libertarian films, just in how they are rooted in their anti-war nature.

14

“Like that opposition to the state/corporations must be terrorism; or lead by a van guard. And that the US government is protecting us with awesome high tech weapons.”

Where did you get that, at least the corporations bit, from the trailer?

15

Well, it is an action games after all. Still, the narrative progression of the game is interesting in how it allows the player to move between perspectives on all sides, and questions their ethical thoughts. I hope the game (if it maintains its original vision) is not so black & white, but rather allows a grey area for players to decide for themselves.

It’s all about the context, and how the story plays out. I hope it is ambiguous.

You can’t say this game doesn’t have potential, though.

16

Where they break into the rich guy’s house, and threaten to knife his wife because he or his corporation made a lot of profits I’m assuming from a recent bailout.

Cut to him being strapped with a bomb to go to Time’s Square. Not sure how you would profit from taking a rich guy to Time’s Square to blow him up, but that is the assumption. People’s opposition to big corporate profits/state privileges and the state itself is also a war against everyone. So we must take it personally even if we are not involved in whatever nonsense these two groups were involved in.

I think it is trying to move the ‘war on terror’ towards the next set of hobgoblins: right-wing gunners, occupy wall street hippies, covert groups like Anonymous, and possibly various types of anarchists. Next they put them all in an axis of evil without much differentation between them. Then you have a whole narrative of decontextualized irrationality that we must expect from them. Like kidnapping people and such. But don’t worry, the government has high tech toys to stop them.

17

I would assume from the terrorist’s perspective that having the “rich guy” do it makes more sense considering their agenda. As for the ‘point’ behind that particular scenario, it’s not even a real part of the game, it’s just test footage. It could very well just be terrorism for the sake of it, and using a “rich guy” is sort of making a point.

I wouldn’t be surprised if you are correct. All I’m saying is that the premise has potential, and it would be very unfortunate if they didn’t make this more ambiguous, and thought-provoking.