Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
General Leang

Politics of Generals

Recommended Posts

I was wondering if others have opinions on the way Generals models our world and politics. For example, what are your thoughts on how the GLA are portrayed and the use of hijackers, suicide bombers and snipers that are based on Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups? Or some of the buzz words in Zero Hour...shock and awe, weapons of mass destruction and the MOAB? Capturing oil to raise money, which to be fair carries over from Red Alert? Or using video of George Bush, Tony Blair and Kofi Annan in the intro?

Share this post


Link to post

Well, as far as I am concerned, many Taiwanese players were extremely enraged (me being one of them) when the original Generals ad featured a picture of red guard patrolling with the caption reading something like "defeating the GLA will not be easy as a walk on Yang Ming Shan Park"...

Yang Ming Shan Park is on the outskirts of Taipei, Taiwan, so this indicates the Chinese Communists invaded the island and actually occupied it!

Share this post


Link to post

I understand what you are saying, althouigh not from the perspective of Yang Ming Shan Park. I had read how people were outraged with the first mission for China, when the GLA use suicide bombers and nuclear weapons during a parade in Beijing. This may be some justice for you with the impression of China invading Taiwon, but that is not the point. I gree that Generals is at times tasteless, not just for it's treatment of some of the more sensitive issues (terrorists, America portrayed as jingoistic such as the rocket soldier's lines) but the overall theme. I believe that for the most part Generals deserves all the attention it recieves for some of what it includes. Still, that is part of what makes the game fun for some, and I freely admit to constantly playing games where you fight terrorism and try hard to find Al Qaeda centred mods. Generals is no exception, whenever I want to vent my spleen over terrorism Generals is one of the best ways to do so, and it is a great game in any case.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah...The bomb in Tiananmen Square and blowing up the dam was pretty tasteless, but that kinda serves as a reminder that pure military might doesn't mean invincibility. Besides, Taiwan's government really considered blowing up the new dam as an act of retaliation if invaded.

 

I heard that EA actually removed one of the GLA missions that required gassing villagers and Islamic symbols.

Share this post


Link to post

China Ivading Taiwan - Not in a million Years.... China (thanks to the USA) are slowly turning Capitalist.

 

As for the USA - do you really think that they even give a damn about terrorists?

 

The reason they invaded Iraq was for oil... Saddam just came along with the deal, after they invaded baghdad they couldn't give a crap whether they caught Saddam or not, they secured the oil.. Why do you think during the first gulf war Saddam ordered his troops to burn all the oil??

 

But believe what you want to beleive, theres allways a conspiracy behind it..

Share this post


Link to post

Hence, the capturing of oil derricks to provide more funds. Play against Granger and listen out for him when you capture one. I don't know about whether or not America cares about terrorists, but that is neither here nor there in this thread. Certainly having the oil derricks could be a jab at America in Iraq. And the first mission in Baghdad, wishful thinking?

Share this post


Link to post
Certainly having the oil derricks could be a jab at America in Iraq. And the first mission in Baghdad, wishful thinking?

 

Well, that mission might be quite accurate. The problem isn't moving American heavy armor into the city and capture it, and that column of Crusader tanks was more than enough to do the job. The problem is controlling it, and that is not the objective of a RTS game.

Share this post


Link to post

There were terrorist attacks, and the GDI represents the UN or NATO. A crap explanation I know, but I read it in an article somewhere, I'll see if I can dig it out.

Share this post


Link to post

I like to listen to what the units in each team says when you use them,

its so damn funny and twisted, EA is using all the typical

stereotypes of the nationalities.

"We have BIG plans!" The chineese constructur proudly chants...

china always have big plans concidering that the country is so damn large

and all the big dams they are building IRLl and everything.

"Loaded with US quality" sounds like typical yankee jibberish to me

and fits very well into the American stereotype.Especially USA has

a lot of typical comments in this game, wich I find funny :) It's great

that the developers has some self distance.

GLA also has a lot of comments that reflects their society well,

like the soldiers talk about their greatness and that they will never give up

and so on.

Share this post


Link to post

Atleast they got a real English person to be the news reporter on ZH

 

Phew! :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Guest NEliteGeneral

Okay... For instance... "Better Red than dead? Red is the affectionate slang given to a Communist, and China may be making strides to leave it's old herritage that served it so well for the better half of a century, but there are still ties. So there's one politic point. And has anyone read the news? We're not getting the oil ladies and gentlemen... The measley $28 million a day, and remember folks... us americans talk on a scale of trillions of dollars, is going to the rebuilding of Iraq. Saddam was there for the Oil and to Control people. We have 5 times the volume of Oil in Iraq in Alaska alone... not to mention Texas and California... Please... give up the Right Wing Oil Speal. The fact is, that when Hitler started fitting 1,500 Jews a day into car ashtrays, there were no Oil Reserves involved. When Adid caused the deaths of hundereds of thousands in the 90's by hording food in Somalia, there was no Oil at stake. And what about Desert Storm? That was Saddam trying to agress over the boundries of his country. We pushed him back into his own country. Not Oil. So get the story straight... Oil and Gold... they are the the only substances that the world uses for economy. And EVERYONE uses them... China and the Middle East included... not just AMERICA. I'm sick of the Anti-American spout here. When we Landed on the beaches of Normandy, D-Day, It was not for Oil. It was for the righteous act of Human compassion, doing the right thing to save lives... The same thing we did in Korea, Vietnam, Africa, and Iraq. Afghanistan was retaliation for harboring the people responsible for 9/11, and as far as that goes, you have to be pretty low and cowardly to strike the civilians of a country that donates more international aide then the rest of the world combined. That's the politics of Generals...

Share this post


Link to post

The Americans couldn't care less about what happened in Europe beleive it or not, thats why they stayed out of the war for such a long time. The reasons for this are, what happens in Europe was nothing to do with them and if they did go in what were they going to get out of it.

 

The reason the Americans landed on the shores during D-Day was because the British secretley surrendered to the Americans, thats why the British today are the American lap-dogs... and if i remember rightly, one of the American generals during the end of WW2 Mentioned Britain as " Americas unsinkable battle ship" - This statement along with others concluded that Britain was now Americas property.....

 

Then NATO was formed... or North Americas Treaty Organisation

 

Oh and by the way, don't beleive everything you read in a news paper...

Share this post


Link to post
Okay... For instance... "Better Red than dead?

 

I know where you're coming from in terms of communism. As for my use of 'red', perhaps having a look at my sig will make things clearer.

 

And has anyone read the news?

 

Yes, every day. And the opinions of those who were for and against war on Iraq. Whether or not America was after Iraq's oil is something for another thread that I will open.

 

I'm sick of the Anti-American spout here

 

If that comes across from any digs EA may or may not have made at America in the game, then I apologise. However, as many faults as America and Bush may have, they are nothing compared to the Australian government and John Howard.

 

Gazdude, I'll open a thread in the General boards where people can talk about America, Iraq and World War Two all they like. I want to keep this thread on Generals if possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Rikaelus

I'm quite political (and even have my own political discussion site) and was blown away very early on in Generals. The intro itself was very warmonger'esque and the use of current politicians' faces was quite obvious. Then you have the screen where the US military is sitting there blowing away GLA forces, all the while being invulnerable.

 

In fact the GLA overall ticked me off. They obviously represent terrorist forces but are built up with tanks and hardware to put them on even ground w/ USA and China. This could easily mislead the ignorant to believe they're an enemy with strength enough to fight the US military straight on. I guess it's always easier to to justify war when you make your weak enemy look strong.

 

And then you have the Chinese being represented as having the most inept and disloyal forces imaginable. I mean come on... you're at war and you're going to put an entire tank division on a bridge at once without even security checking it? Please.

 

Anyway... that's my gripe.

Share this post


Link to post

Given that the game takes place in 2010, even though the enviroment is the same as today's world incidents such as September 11, the Bali bombings, the terrorist attack in Spain and similar incidents are probably a fading memory. So the human nature is to let things slide...are people as alert to the possibility of a terrorist attack today as they are immediately after September 11? Which is probably the reason why the bridge might have been overlooked. As for China being disloyal, ould you please explain this to me? The only disloyalty I have seen is when the GLA use Chinease forces.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Rikaelus
Given that the game takes place in 2010, even though the enviroment is the same as today's world incidents such as September 11, the Bali bombings, the terrorist attack in Spain and similar incidents are probably a fading memory. So the human nature is to let things slide...are people as alert to the possibility of a terrorist attack today as they are immediately after September 11? Which is probably the reason why the bridge might have been overlooked. As for China being disloyal, ould you please explain this to me? The only disloyalty I have seen is when the GLA use Chinease forces.

 

The game may take place in 2010, the opening clearly gives the impression that it's today -- "In modern times", the use of Bush's face, the timing of its release, etc.

 

And as for disloyalty, the GLA weren't just using Chinese equipment, a Chinese general had switched sides, I believe, with a lot of troops under his command.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes. Generals is obviously intended to play on today's world.

 

I think I remember one of the USA missions has a Chinease general defecting to the GLA. Or you might be thinking of General Leang, who uses the best forces from all three sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Rikaelus
Yes. Generals is obviously intended to play on today's world.

 

I think I remember one of the USA missions has a Chinease general defecting to the GLA. Or you might be thinking of General Leang, who uses the best forces from all three sides.

 

Yeah, the defection. Not familiar with the second time but then I haven't played the add-on if that's when that comes in.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, I remember it. In the expansion the first Chinease mission has you fighting GLA who are using stolen American technology. Not as bad as outright defection. Speaking of the expansion, if you have not read before then that plays even stronger on today's world. Everything from weapons of mass destruction to 'shock and awe' to the MOAB are featured in the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Emperor
I'll open a thread in the General boards where people can talk about America, Iraq and World War Two all they like. I want to keep this thread on Generals if possible.

 

Could you post the link?

Share this post


Link to post

Sure. I called it All About the Oil, because that is how some people feel about it. All I will say about Iraq is that I think we shouldn't put the soldiers at further risk, it's not a topic I really want to get into. The thread is in the General Discussion forums and the link's below.

 

http://forums.cncnz.com/viewtopic.php?t=1273

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Rikaelus

Honestly not sure if there's a rule about posting links to forums dedicated to different topics, and if so, sorry!

 

If you want to dive into political discussion, with plenty of Iraq talk, you can check out my site: http://www.politicalsoup.com

Share this post


Link to post

:x I'am angry when I see that America is so clear here. They always have the good ones, not like China who hacking to get money or GLA who use black market and cash bounty to get money for example. SOmetimes I feel that EA made America in Generals as a perfect nation.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×