These days, most often when "free speech" comes up, it's in reference to someone actually just wanting free license to offend others in bad taste. This doesn't have anything to do with free speech, and if IW hides behind that, it would belittle that freedom by attempting to invoke it here.

i AM waiting for a game like this, but we can't even get the german SOLDIER side of the war so far, it was my idea for a simulator to include such, but you can then choose to follow the view of a nazi soldier or a normal german soldier and see the differences later in the war.

So tell me, why is it bad to kill unarmed virtual (go look what the word means) civilians ? so shooting armed virtual combatents is okay ? you have a threhold for killing ?

Do you guys get off killing dumb virtual armed combatants who are clearly no match for your skill being that they are scripted and can't think on the fly ?

They are all digits for me, and those i dont like or agree,(for me carmageddon was a pointless game so i avoided it), i simply dont buy it, but i dont have a hypocritical fit about it.

They aren't yelling fire in a crowded theater.

I don't mind a good bloody and sexy HBO TV show... just when it's on purpose and when it's not in every damn show week after week (true blood comes to my mind here) just to play on the SHOCK/provocative factor.

We already knows how war and terrorism could be, everybody have seens these horrible scenes on the TV news when for exemple a F117 targeted an underground mall garage full of civilians during the first war in Iraq, with burned and pink human parts of mens, womens and children all over the place...

We also saw many of these scenes in action movies, but what disturb me is that in a game, game developers go further: they makes us ACTORS not just passive watchers... I didn't like the Spectre level part in the first one not because of the level itself but because of the bad taste in the back of my mouth to hear that these C-130 operators actually ENJOYED so much to kill these guys on the ground... (I even wished someone on the ground to shut their mouth with a SAM or 2 just to show them that it wasn't just a game to kill people)

I heard that this scene will be optional, you can still be a passive watcher or to participate in the massacre... but still, this scene is one more step in a path that really cross the line between game and reality. What next to satisfy the most violent blood-thirsty of us all? I just don't like this path...

Sorry but I don't buy that explanation. This game is not out to intentionally offend someone. The game was made for game players who want to immerse themselves into the game.

If you are offended by the idea, don't buy the game. But to say that they should not be allowed is a violation of the rights granted to them by living in/being citizens of the US.

Dont worry, they are remaking splatterhouse, we got it covered, also from seeing many military videos from iraq ,the ac130 calls were not far off from what pilots and soldier talk, military professionalism my ass.

I didn't say they should'be be "allowed" to make that part of game. I am saying they *shouldn't* make it though. Big difference. No, I'm not buying it, they lost my money a long time ago after I bought COD4, but that decision is well cemented now.
If the intention was to drive home the storyline, they could have done a much better job of it by putting you in the victim's perspective. That would be horror. The way they have it here is gleeful. They didn't do this for the game, they didn't do this for the story. They did it for the hype and appeal, mainly with a younger crowd that doesn't know any better, who is their real audience.
I'll be amazed if there's no achievement associated with this. With any luck they managed to restrain themselves that much at least.

Blah.

Killing people in games is nothing new, seems like the usual suspects (I'm not refering to anyone at SimHQ) feel the need to whine and complain simply because graphics are getting more realistic.

Someone said "What's next, a rape simulator?". THAT I would have to take sides with the censormongers, were it to ever be made.

What's the difference? Twofold:

1. It's unprecedented (as far as I know).

2. There are times in life when killing is necessary, but there is NEVER a reason to commit rape.

Thats a poor analogy vularity. I cant think of any time where gunning down a bunch of civilians in an airport in necessary...

Also, they already have rape simulations. There are tons of creepy sex video games out there (mostly made by the Japanese)

I'm all for pushin' the limits, but the same effect could have been achieved through a non-interactive game sequence, much like the opening to CoD 4. The fact that your actively responsible for shooting civilians in the back as they flee, and in some cases, shooting the survivors as they attempt to crawl away or stop to help the wounded is obscene...

I think that any message the developers are attempting to communicate will be lost on it's attended audience, and instead it will serve only to those who enjoy and celebrate violence.