Konami Withdraws from Six Days in Fallujah
"After seeing the reaction to the videogame in the United States and hearing opinions sent through phone calls and e-mail, we decided several days ago not to sell it."
Six Days purported to be a documentary-style recreation of six days from the 2004 second battle of Fallujah in Iraq, seen through the eyes of a single US Marines squad.
"We had intended to convey the reality of the battles to players so that they could feel what it was like to be there," said Konami. Yet when we saw Six Days, our impression was that it was anything but realistic--players took bullets without breaking a sweat.
Six Days in Fallujah was scheduled for a 2010 release in the US on PC, Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. According to reports spotted by Joystiq, Konami was holding off on planning a European release until it saw how Atomic portrayed the battle.
One of the largest newspapers in Japan, The Asahi Shimbun is considered to be a legitimate and trustworthy source. It is not yet known whether Atomic Games will be able to seek another publisher. Shacknews has contacted Konami for more details.
-
Durajim
replySounds like it would have been an insult to all the real marines that helped make it what it is, a game where everyone takes 5 shots to body to fall over, and then ten of their buddies spawn around a corner.
I don't think the subject matter was ever a problem-
What? The subject matter was the entirety of the problem. If the developers had kept everything the same except set it in some "fictional" Middle east locale, there wouldn't have been a peep of controversy. It's been done many times before, such as with Call of Duty 4.
-
-
As much as I played and loved Rainbow 6, it was hardly the pinnacle of realism -- peek an eyeball around a corner and a tango can shoot you from 200 yards off after whipping a 180 at the speed of sound. The damage system seemed real enough, though (which is probably what you were talking about) :-)
-
-
* T O O S O O N ' D *
-
I don't think the subject matter was what killed it. I believe as they stated it was the fact that the description of the game was completely off. People were expecting it to be a realistic(ish) shooter that really tried to honor the soldiers and show the brutality of war. By making it more arcadish it not only showed them to be liars, but imo opinion dishonored those that they were claiming to honor. I felt really bad for the Soldier who talked at that meeting before they showed the gameplay, and then must have felt so stupid that it didn't match his description. It's got nothing to do with it being a good game, just a horrible marketing campaign.
-
agreed. its not a matter of gaming companies being submissive to public scrutiny. it was basically a hypocritical ad campaign. dont advertise a "realistic shooter" and then show the public Gears of War with a desert setting and a modern day military. thats just bad advertising. the same goes for any company and their product. but to utilize actual Marines who have actually been in combat, tell them of this realistic gaming experience as seen through their eyes, and warp it into just another everyday shooter is downright shitty. especially on such a sensitive topic. it could have been a great game, dont get me wrong. they just shouldn't have advertised it the way they did and then turn around and dish out something completely different and imo, insulting to the gamers AND Marines involved
-
-
-
