Please Stop the War Games! Fine for Matthew Broderick, bad for 21st Century!

As I look over the games coming out in the next year or so; I wonder if I'm the only one that notices the very large number of games about war and about fighting in wars. I don't want to go to war, do you? I don't believe in killing people to make a political point, do you? Wars are often fought for reasons that no one is readily willing to admit or explain to the people who are fighting or the people who are paying. I'm not here to talk about my politics or some religious beliefs that I may or may not have.

What I am here to say, is that if you repeatedly play games where all your doing is killing people who look like adversaries that either historically or currently we are fighting. In games like Quake Wars or Halo you are just fighting the other, the aliens. No problem here, I know that psychologically this might be just as bad for us as playing a game where we are killing realistic looking people in a realistic setting. But it seems like there is a pretty fine line between action movie and war movie when it comes to video games.

In games like Halo or Quake Wars there is at least the ability to pretend that it is all a movie or science fiction novel. But in a game like Call of Duty or Medal of Honor there is really nothing separating the reality from the gamer's mind. Unlike games like Doom or Quake; I honestly believe that games where you are killing realistic enemies are much worse. There certainly seems that there is a much more direct connection between who we consider to be the enemy.

Worse than all of this however, is the absolute unimaginative blundering that is passing for a war game now a days. Call of Duty 3 was a rehash of Call of Duty 2 and Medal of Honor: Airbourne was a rehash of both COD 2 and 3. Minus the parachuting of course. Company of Heroes, while a well designed RTS could have just as easily been set in space or on some alien planet. Did WW2 really have an integral part in the gameplay of this game. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare is probably the most realistic and exciting FPS out there. It will be out in November and it looks to be the best thing since sliced bread. Problem is that the game's character models are, photorealistic. The enemies are supposed to be Russian but they look a lot like Middle Eastern people. I certainly couldn't comment on the story considering it hasn't been released yet; but the graphics really sell this game as real; maybe too real.

This certainly wouldn't be an issue if it wasn't coming out in a year of first person shooters and right before a second year that seems loaded with them as well. Besides this, there is no shortage of World War 2 games out there. Combining all of this together, it is really hard to stomach anything like Call of Duty, America's Army, Company of Heroes, Medal of Honor: Airborne, Hour of Victory, Medal of Honor: Heroes 2, and of course the upcoming Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway.
There is no doubt that games like: Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2, Rainbow Six Vegas, Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, and Counter Strike: Source are some of the best First Person Shooter titles the industry has ever seen.
The only problem with these games is the fact that are SO MANY OF THEM. The games have glutted the market. Ubisoft is one of the biggest developers and publishers of video games in the world. They could have certainly consolidated their efforts into one title and made the the best tactical first person shooter, ever. They chose rather to try and make two.

I'm certainly not asking anyone to give up their favorite game. Just think a little about what it is you are actually doing when you are playing them and why you are doing it. Is there some good story basis for why you are doing these things or is it just random killing in the warzone. Also, if you find the images or nationalities of the people you are shooting in these games disturbing; please contact the developers. Because this is the only way they are going to stop doing these kinds of games. Finally, PLEASE don't buy anymore WW2 games. Please let these die the death they so richly deserve. There is truly no reason to reinvent the wheel and there is truly no reason to recreate a game that was done perfectly by Call of Duty 2 and Company of Heroes.

Medal of Honor Airborne: Don't drop this behind my enemy lines!

Playing Medal of Honor Airborne from EA is like trying to play an original XBOX game with a faulty controller. The game has so many instances where the player feels as if something on their end just doesn't work.
The game is the typical WW2 shooter but some of the problems in the game are anything but typical. First off, why don't enemies die after you shoot them once? The game is supposed to be so realistic yet when some Italian nut case is running at you full speed and you fill them full of machine gun rounds they keep coming. The accuracy of all of the rifles except for the Springfield sniper rifle practically makes them unusable. Why did they include such poor weapons in the game? It may be realistic but it surely isn't fun.
There many instances in the game where enemies get stuck in walls and against things looking like some original XBOX budget title. Your allies in the game are like cows. They wonder all over the map; walking into gunfire, trying to bludgeon enemies head on who are holding machine guns. Never have the words canon fodder been so aptly assigned to units.
The actual parachuting in the game is such a small insignificant part of the game; it could have been called Medal of Honor #4 and no one would have been the wiser. You must parachute into the green smoke marked areas or enemies will kill you. That's pretty much it. So much for an open battlefield.
Why EA chose to have SO MANY units on screen at once when most are just canon fodder anyway are beyond me. There are hero units who seem to have a head on their shoulders and they need to be flanked to be killed. One more thing about the enemy units; the super melee attack with the rifle is definitely the worst thing I've EVER seen in a video game. Not only is it unrealistic, the attack is just frustrating to the player; especially when even after unloading a whole machine gun clip into an enemy they can still hit you once or twice.
On a minor note, the fact that there is no blood in this game makes things more comical than dramatic. When you shoot some guy with the shotgun and he flies back five feet and then bounces off the wall like a cartoon character makes you laugh. They might as well have made the enemies aliens for the amount of realism this game conveys.
I have to admit I only played about 2/3 of the way through the game because I just couldn't deal with the frustration anymore. Between the stupid allies and the inaccuracy of the weapons; I just gave up after being killed in a hale of gun fire. For the number of allies you have and their intelligence, they really could have lessened the number of enemy units in some of the areas. The developers seem more interested in punishing the player every chance they get, rather than rewarding the player for being the only effective unit on screen.
So pretty pinup girls no withstanding Medal of Honor Airborne is little more than a rental title and the fact that it follows a genre that is so packed full of games. Airborne makes no case for it's existence. 5/10 go play Call of Duty 2.