![]() ![]() Corruption can exist anywhere at any time. However is it possible that an overzealous political officer might have his own views on how to run things? Its possible. If Isakovich had been captured, he would have been the one to get shot and not his men. Order 270 applies to people who were captured, not the people who rescued him. Were things blatantly over the top? Technically speaking, based on the specifics of 270, the scene with the rescue attempt was over the top for one reason. To me, these "Russian" (such a great thing about the anonymity of the Internet isn't it?) players do are convieniently looking past the heroic portrayal of the average soldier and officer in the game. ![]() I don't really know how to feel about the story, officially speaking. The fundamental difference was that the gains and loss of an induvidual was not that 'important' in comparison of a huge, far bigger picture, it's was the ideology, the greater cause that really mattered. While in eastern countries, perticulary Soviet countries, they join the fight mostly because of their ideology- 'the great fight for the motherland and the fight for a greater cause', and it was during most desperate time. It's more of a problem with the huge gap between eastern and western ideology, for example during WWII, in most western countries people join the military thinking it's more of a 'job', a 'profession', the cause was for themselves or the people directly around or related to them. The reason those Russian players complained was not because the game's story itself, but the fact that the story telling in this game completely ignored the big picture, giving viewers the manipulated illusion of 'that's how things always happened on the eastern front'. Please refrain from insulting and making personal attacks on people. I am sure that many of us can relate to that since it's not unsual for people to try to do the right thing but ending up getting screwed by people more powerful than them. I don't want to debate the historical accuracy of the game in this thread (maybe in a another one) but striclty judging the narrative of the game, it appeared clearly to me that it depicts regular soviet soldiers as true heroes sometimes led by cruel and incompetent leaders. The book was eventually published in the West when it was smugglled out of the USSR but Grossman died before that. Plus, it turns out that the story of the game was inspired by the story of Vassili Grossman who was a soivet war war correspondent for the Red Armyįunny thing is that Vassili Grossman also wrote a book about what he had witnessed during the war and the book was banned by Stalin and then Kroutchev. The interesting thing is that in the end "the bad guy" ie the major, representing soviet command saves the hero from excution to allow him to tell the story of these soviet heroes and then shot himself out of guilt for what he did. in the end, the hero wants to tell the story of these ordinary heroes he was proud to lead but he is instead put into a goulag by soviet command. in one of the last missions, they are deprived from command support and must lead a dangerous assault in a limited time otherwise they will be executed. the soldiers risks their lives rescuing the hero, only to be shot by a commanding officer because the did not follow orders A lot of people seem to view the game as depicting the Russian soldiers not as heroes but as war criminals and murderers.įrom what I have seen, the game makes a clear distinction between the heroism of soviet soliders and the debatable methods employed by their superiors. Having finished the campaign, I'd like to share my thoughts on that point. I noticed that there are a lot of complaints, especially from Russian players regarding the way the Red Army is depicted in the game. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |