1 2 3 4 Previous Next 121 Replies Latest reply: Oct 11, 2010 10:16 AM by BOOMxHEADSHOT21 Go to original post RSS
  • 10. Re: Fractions, Why USA only?(friendly fources)
    The Brits had nukes in Russia ?  Around Moscow even???

    Highly doubt it.  In fact I would say this is an all out act of war and I highly doubt Russia would ever let another country simply store nukes around it's capital city, considering the pride that Russian's have.

    If I'm wrong then please someone post a link to somewhere I could read about this because I would be very very interested if the claim is true.
  • 11. Re: Fractions, Why USA only?(friendly fources)

    Myth700 wrote:

     

    The Brits had nukes in Russia ?  Around Moscow even???

    Highly doubt it.  In fact I would say this is an all out act of war and I highly doubt Russia would ever let another country simply store nukes around it's capital city, considering the pride that Russian's have.

    If I'm wrong then please someone post a link to somewhere I could read about this because I would be very very interested if the claim is true.



    You're not wrong at all, the OP is. He clearly doesn't know much about the Cold and Vietnam wars.
  • 12. Re: Fractions, Why USA only?(friendly fources)
    namnelesspro
    IW sucks, everybody. They don´t do enything right.
  • 13. Re: Fractions, Why USA only?(friendly fources)
    adzogolonzo

    Kingy_Tom92 wrote:

     

    I know it sucks to have only American friendly forces, but tbh the British weren't that involved with Vietnam and the Cold war in general. Neither were the French much involved, they were at the beginning before war broke out in Vietnam, but they withdrew a few years before the war itself began.

    So to have British and French forces wouldn't be very accurate with regards to showing military forces involved.


    If you did some research on the involvement of the SAS and SBS you will find they were heavily involved.  The US was the medias front but the the British were fully involved.

    Do some homework and come back with the full story before making a comment where you have done zero research into it
  • 14. Re: Fractions, Why USA only?(friendly fources)
    adzogolonzo

    Myth700 wrote:

     

    The Brits had nukes in Russia ?  Around Moscow even???

    Highly doubt it.  In fact I would say this is an all out act of war and I highly doubt Russia would ever let another country simply store nukes around it's capital city, considering the pride that Russian's have.

    If I'm wrong then please someone post a link to somewhere I could read about this because I would be very very interested if the claim is true.


    I just read this recently, I'll try to get a link
  • 15. Re: Fractions, Why USA only?(friendly fources)
    copperburn

    SKILLSnKILLS wrote:

     

    o m g


    why is there only american forces in mp for friendly forces (that we know of)

    imo, there should be british, and french forces too.


    tryarch patriotism strikes again.

    british duringb the cold war where key.

    we had nukes in germany(incase they invaded them), and around mosco and other major citys around  just incase anythink kicked of.

    and french where in naaam man.


    THIS WHAT INFINITY WARD GOT RIGHT. DIFFRENT CULTURES.

    the SAS when it to nam(bread) under amrican and french forces, but commanded them selves.

    the shear ignorance of other forces during the cold war and viat nam out stands me.


    WHY IS THERE ONLY AMERICAN FRIENDLY FOURCES, WHEN NON-FRIENDLYS GET 3 DIFFRENT ONES?



    Have a British developer make a fps game and i am sure you would see many parts of the British army in there.  Wait...Coodmaster a British developer did make Operation Flash Point: Dragon Rising,  (one of the worst FPS ever).   Wait! wait! ...it was American forces in there too.  That should say a lot.  I know what it is saying to me, you might want to figure out what it is saying to you.
  • 16. Re: Fractions, Why USA only?(friendly fources)
    zman6776
    Let's not forget who was at war the entire time in WW 2, the Canadians and British. The americans only joined 'cause they got bombed, no offense Americans, but Canada and British are just as good as you guys. I think they should make CA/BR forces to
  • 17. Re: Fractions, Why USA only?(friendly fources)

    adzogolonzo wrote:

     

    Myth700 wrote:

     

    The Brits had nukes in Russia ?  Around Moscow even???

    Highly doubt it.  In fact I would say this is an all out act of war and I highly doubt Russia would ever let another country simply store nukes around it's capital city, considering the pride that Russian's have.

    If I'm wrong then please someone post a link to somewhere I could read about this because I would be very very interested if the claim is true.


    I just read this recently, I'll try to get a link



    Thank you mate appreciate it, would make for some interesting reading
  • 18. Re: Fractions, Why USA only?(friendly fources)
    CARTONOFSMOKES
    My only guess on why they didn't do this is because I would hate to be playing Multilayer as a french guy and all of a sudden when things started to get crazy my character would run away on its own. And not to mention if i was a British operative, my guy would just stop playing around 3:00 and pull out a cup of tea to drink..........
  • 19. Re: Fractions, Why USA only?(friendly fources)
    copperburn

    ZMAN6776 wrote:

     

    Let's not forget who was at war the entire time in WW 2, the Canadians and British. The americans only joined 'cause they got bombed, no offense Americans, but Canada and British are just as good as you guys. I think they should make CA/BR forces to



    Like i say.. Canada and Britian have game developers too. They will put Canadian and British forces in any fps they make and you will all be happy.
    It is simple why American forces are dominate fps even if the developer is not an American company. More shooting game on many ocassion are sold more in America than the whole of Europe combine. In the past there were more game console in the US than the whole continent of Europe, people in the US play video game more that the British or the Canadian. This is probably changing now as more countries are playing a lot more video games now and the ratio of people to console in those other countries grew. If you develop game and you want to make it big, then it would make a lot a sense to to put a US face in the form of their soldier in the game.  I don't think that they think that American forces are the only one that are good to be portrayed in a shooting video game, it is just a smart business decision. I for one would like to see developer from other countries make game with their soldier in them and if it is good i will buy it.
1 2 3 4 Previous Next