Follow TV Tropes
As opposed to Black Ops which included it as a normal grenade.
The difference is that this game was supposed to emphasize "realism" or something, yet treated Willy Pete as a glorified smokescreen more like teargas. Willy Pete isn't like teargas.
The developers' justification was that the Willy Pete is only in the multiplayer, and they consider multiplayer to be more of a playground set apart from the singleplayer content. So Willy Pete didn't need to be realistic.
Also from IGN: Call of Duty: Modern Warfare Developer Addresses White Phosphorus Controversy
Edited by M84 on Sep 20th 2019 at 5:00:28 PM
Is it the complete opposite of how Spec Ops: The Line used white phosphorous?
In this game it's just another weapon. Its effects are more like a teargas grenade or something — there aren't even any specific burn animations for it.
The op-ed writer addressed Spec Ops use of Willy Pete. He approved of it since it showed how nasty the stuff is and the psychological impact using it can have.
A lot of the idiots who lost their shit over the article apparently didn't read it and assumed he was demanding the dreaded CENSORSHIP of Willy Pete from the game. That's not what he was arguing for at all though. All he wanted was for the game to be more realistic about its portrayal of Willy Pete.
Edited by M84 on Sep 20th 2019 at 5:07:49 PM
So basically, "fine if you want to use it - reflect that it's seriously fucking dangerous shit though". Reasonable point of view.
Pretty much. Which naturally attracted a lot of angry defensive gamers who lost their minds over even the slightest whiff of "censorship".
...This is why I stick with single-player games.
I mean, you get censorship handwringing dickheads in single player as well, but at least you don't have to interact with the community if you don't want to.
There's a tendency among certain gaming circles to think that they're tough and realistic for playing bloody FPS titles where you get to be mean, basically.
Gamers were a mistake. It is known.
Then again, to me extent it's just a particularly annoying extension of the tendency on the Internet for armchair generalship. I mean, I'm certainly in that boat - I even managed to get out of the national service back in ye olden days when I turned 18, so most of my exposure is secondhand, through friends, or through interviews I conducted back in 2014. note though that was with active personnel who had not yet been deployed and were still going through basic
I guess I'm just advocating for responsible armchair generalship.
Edited by math792d on Sep 20th 2019 at 12:20:22 PM
US drone strike killed 30 pine nut farm workers in Afghanistan.
I guess the question now is “was every appropriate step taken to prevent the possibility of civilian casualties?”
On the White Phosphorus article. The writers gripe about WP not being accurately depicted falls pretty damn flat given nothing else actually is and it is not a uniquely horrible weapon. Frankly, he overexaggerates to a gross degree and ignores just how horrible conventional weapons as a collective whole are. He pretty conveniently leaves out just what of a nasty mangled mess some of those real-life kill streaks counterparts leave behind nevermind how nasty even common infantry weapon wounds can be. Sorry but that article rings of artificially hollow sentiments.
Eagle: Wow, that is a serious cock-up. Was this a military strike or another fucked three-letter agency strike?
No idea, but Afghan NDS agents were apparently on the ground. The farm workers had supposedly paid off local IS-K fighters earlier to leave them alone during the harvest.
Trump deploying US troops to help defend Saudi Arabia and speed up weapons deliveries.
Eagle: Sounds like three letter agency cock up then.
Chief Wright eyes big changes to enlisted evals, re-enlistments and PT
So they're floating the idea of eliminating promotion testing for NCO grades as well now, like they just started doing for Senior NCO grades. Basically this means that all promotions will be based entirely on performance reports and decorations. The promotion tests are usually a two-step affair, with one test covering job-specific stuff, and another test covering more general Air Force knowledge.
Another interesting thing they talked about in there was the possibility in the future of allowing airmen to take the fitness tests as many times as they like as long as they get a passing score before the test comes due. If you pass the test, the clock resets for your next one, if you don't pass the test, it's considered "diagnostic" and you now know what you need to work on. I'm just curious how that would work with the limited number of testing slots since the fitness tests have to be monitored by the Fitness Assessment Cell staff.
I am not a fan of eliminating the promotion tests.
The US Army has "board babys" - soldiers who can look good at a promotion board but suck everywhere else. I saw way to many E5's who acted like it was high school again and they were the cool kids but got all defensive when actually asked to to do their jobs.
Fierce twitter war over the new Finnish Navy ships. Are they corvettes or frigates (size wise)? In fact, they're called corvettes because that's what they were designated as from the beginning of the project and as the specs changed, the classification didn't.
Nobody accepts the answer of "it doesn't matter and never has".
Edited by TerminusEst on Sep 22nd 2019 at 5:36:03 AM
I propose calling them Frigettes.
Pohjanmaa-class corvettes, now the size of frigates!
Aren't frigate sizes starting to bear down on what we used to call Destroyer size?
I suggest a middle ground: courgettes.
Yeah, the different categories of ships have always been a little fuzzy.
Usually a corvette is considered to be the smallest proper warship in the fleet. Frigates are sometimes smaller than destroyers and are usually used in an auxiliary or escort role, destroyers are larger and used as surface combatants or for fleet anti-air, and then cruisers are the largest proper warships in the fleet.
Of course, all of that is highly flexible.
For a while between WWII and 1975, the US Navy had a type of ship called "Frigate" which happened to fit into a size range that most other navies called "Cruiser" (it was between a Destroyer and a Cruiser in size, by US Navy reckoning). This caused all manner of confusion, naturally, and they later had to redo all the ship classifications to straighten it out.
What I'm saying is there is precedent to just calling the new ships "Battlecruisers" because there really isn't any authority on the matter.
I was introduced to the term "battlecruiser" through StarCraft so I didn't know it was an actual title for a ship class until much later.
Edited by dRoy on Sep 23rd 2019 at 12:15:03 AM
Community Showcase More
How well does it match the trope?