i know COD WAW is one of them where it has the best portrayal of the soviets, but the other COD games where you also get to play as the soviets/red army soldier like in the original COD (COD 2003) and in COD 2 - are they just as good? or at least, not as problematic as with the newer cod games?
because i refuse to play any game thatβs just pure crystallized american state propaganda and talks shit about the USSR. fuck off with that shit.
no, there isnt.
dont play games that glorify war honestly, not trying to grandstand you as I do and have done but COD is an american propoganda slopfest at best and just re-writes history at worst, like blaming Russia for the highway of death during the gulf war somehow. (insane)
β¦i know this.
hence why i said βnot as problematic as with the newer cod games? because i refuse to play any game thatβs just pure crystallized american state propaganda and talks shit about the USSRβ
because i know that after cod waw, it starts to dive deep into us propaganda territory.
i only made this post to know if the games with soviet campaigns (classic cod games like cod 2003 and cod 2) are good or not, since i havenβt picked them up yet but would still like to know beforehand, since thereβs no leftist reviewer out there.
jesus.
To answer your question, Call of Duty 2 is alright. Youβll run into some tropes here or there, but nothing egregious. Mainly stuff along the lines of your officer giving you potatoes to use for throwing practice instead of training grenades. The game is a simple, fun, arcade shooter.
Call of Duty 1 is much much worse and I would stay away from it, mainly because its very unpolished and not fun.
I pretty much had to give up shooting games in general as I got older, because it just felt so gross. Thereβs a few exceptions like Deep Rock Galactic, but even then I just donβt really enjoy my primary method of interaction with the world being shooting things anymore. Itβs gauche, and I think my love of them earlier in life contributed to my anger issues and lib regression from a youth of radical organizing.
What you are looking for is Call of Duty: World at War. You have two campaigns, one being American and focused on the Pacific, and the second being Soviet and focused on the Eastern Front.
From what I remember, there is very little, if any, historical revisionism or state department propaganda, so you wonβt run into something along the lines of the Soviets randomly committing war crimes to show how βbarbaricβ they are or other garbage similar to that. The American campaign also doesnβt just hype America up to be this unstoppable war machine that was single-handedly responsible for winning WW2.
Every so often Iβll go back and replay the game due to how incredibly cathartic they make mowing down droves of Nazis. Storming the Reichstag is definitely my favorite part by far from both campaigns. Just watching the Nazi Eagle get hit with a rocket before tumbling down from the rafters and crushing the SS men taking cover behind Hitlerβs podium is amazing. Not to mention the ending scene itself.
Well, there is still a little bit of βSoviet barbarismβ where they have either the player or Soviet NPCs kill surrending Germans, but at least the message is more along the lines of βwar is brutalβ rather then βRussia/communism badβ.
True, but thatβs not displayed as inherent to the Soviets or even unreasonable to a degree. The German brutality is talked about and displayed frequently, and the actions of the Soviets are displayed as a righteous anger in response to an invasion and suffering at the hands of an incredibly evil enemy. War is hell, and I feel that the game demonstrated the brutality of the conflict well. The US and Japan also shown engaging in that same brutality in the Pacific Campaign, so its not something unique to the Soviet missions.
Even then, moments like the one you talk about are rare, and preceded by a lot of context. For example, the scene where the group of SS soldiers attempt to surrender and you have the option to burn or shoot them, comes directly after an entire mission of that SS unit fighting savagely and repeatedly killing captured or surrendered Soviet troops, and then only surrendering because they attempted to escape into the metro system but were cut off and surrounded.
Or even the scene at the beginning of βTheir land, their bloodβ, where Rheznov gives you the option of shooting the Germans bleeding out on the floor, comes after those same Germans beat you, a captured soldier, senseless, and were preparing to execute you. Which they were only prevented in doing because of the Red Armyβs arrival.
woa alunya is back
I was very young when I played the earlier CODs, but I donβt really remember much political commentary on the eastern front missions. It was mostly for the set pieces and different equipment. And also getting called comrade a lot.
In one of them the first mission for the soviets you get ammo without a rifle and get shot if you go backwards
the first mission for the soviets you get ammo without a rifle
β¦? why?
get shot if you go backwards
i guess to prevent desertion from your comrades?
idk, i need more context (or i need to play the game) to understand this more clearly.
Itβs classic western propaganda about the USSR that every 2 men shared a rifle and that they shot up soldiers who surrendered or retreated, both are fake and donβt have any truth to them, I think this video mentions it
It has been a while since I watched anybody try the first Call of Duty, but there were several instances where the Soviets shot retreaters, and I vaguely remember the Soviet missions depicting the βhuman waveβ stereotype in a few scenes. Iβd have to watch a longplay to be sure. The Soviet missions were not nearly as angsty as Company of Heroes 2, but there were some irksome moments.
