3 Reasons why the Events in Homefront aren't Plausible

attackfighter said:
So why does USA suffer from oil crisis and not North Korea? NK already has fuel shortages without a crisis. And also the USA's hardware wouldn't suddenly become vulnerable because of civil upheaval. That makes no sense.
Click to expand...

Civil upheavel means that people are more focused on at home matters. You think people would really care what goes on in the Far East during what is essentially a large swathe of protests sweeping over the nation and countless things for media fodder?

attackfighter said:
Not to mention lots of Korean troops would have to be stationed in Japan and the other places they supposedly conquered.

And again - how is Korea getting it's oil? It has no domestic oil so it would be even more dependant on APEC than USA.

So Korea, the micro state with few people and no oil, is invading and occupying big bad USA. Makes no sense.
Click to expand...

Scandanavian troops were conscripted by the Germans during WWII, and while it is unlikely North Korea would do the same with the Japanese/SE Asians, it is still likely. Likewise, they could get their oil from Indonesia and Southeast asia, since the Japanese were importing oil from there during WWII.

attackfighter said:
It's ironic how the American wet dream is to be invaded by another country. They are a land of conquerors with only one wish: to one day be conquered themselves.

Although to be fair I find the premise of my country (Canada) being invaded quite appealing also. I think being ruled by the likes of Khan Timur Leng would do Canada some good... I don't get the whole guerilla warfare aspect though. Well I do get it, but I just find it very absurd. It's like the ultimate wish fulfillment fantasy of every drab, middle class,doughy suburban video game playing kid come to life. It's utterly convincing that these sheltered cosmopolitan types are capable of waging war to any effect. You see it repeated quite a bit in American media - the first example I'd give is... Red Dawn (forgot it's name for a sec). Something about Americans and their power trips:lol:
Click to expand...

Yes, cause since you are in Canada, you haven't had hero fantasies just like everyone else, I presume? Are you middle class Caucasian as well?

attackfighter said:
Well they gave Obama the peace prize, so it's only fitting that Kim Jong il gets it too...
Click to expand...

Please take your politically motivated discussion to OT, so you can be piled upon by everyone in there. That sort of talk has no place in a discussion about video games.
 
Tycho said:
Civil upheavel means that people are more focused on at home matters. You think people would really care what goes on in the Far East during what is essentially a large swathe of protests sweeping over the nation and countless things for media fodder?
Click to expand...

So because there are protests, the USA's nuclear silos are suddenly vulnerable to EMP attacks.

Scandanavian troops were conscripted by the Germans during WWII, and while it is unlikely North Korea would do the same with the Japanese/SE Asians, it is still likely. Likewise, they could get their oil from Indonesia and Southeast asia, since the Japanese were importing oil from there during WWII.
Click to expand...

So it's unlikely that they would conscript people from occupied countries, but it is also likely that they would conscript people from occupied countries. Furthermore they could import oil from depleted oil reserves because in the past those oil reserves weren't depleted.

Yes, cause since you are in Canada, you haven't had hero fantasies just like everyone else, I presume? Are you middle class Caucasian as well?

Please take your politically motivated discussion to OT, so you can be piled upon by everyone in there. That sort of talk has no place in a discussion about video games.
Click to expand...

So an off-hand comment is a politically motivated discussion and has no place in a video game discussion related to the aforementioned comment.
 
attackfighter said:
So because there are protests, the USA's nuclear silos are suddenly vulnerable to EMP attacks.



So it's unlikely that they would conscript people from occupied countries, but it is also likely that they would conscript people from occupied countries. Furthermore they could import oil from depleted oil reserves because in the past those oil reserves weren't depleted.



So an off-hand comment is a politically motivated discussion and has no place in a video game discussion related to the aforementioned comment.
Click to expand...

1. Never said their nuclear silos were offline, but it's painted in a very clear picture that the world is quite messed up in the timeline of Homefront. Detonating nuclear weapons means that World War III starts and ends with a worldwide holocaust, and if the message is still not clear, read about Mutually Assured Destruction. Korea is likely to have nukes as well, and both sides will destroy the other while dragging down any others who launch retaliatory and cautionary nuclear weapons as well.

2. You know exactly what I mean about conscripted troops; there's not a giant likelihood of them recruiting millions from these occupied nations, but they can still do it if they want, nothing going to stop them.

3. Yes, I think that politics has no place in video games because a video game discussion is not a place to bring up your own political beliefs. So bringing it up offhandedly like that can be misconscrewed, but on the flipside, you might have brought it up to bring up your own political beliefs. I don't mind people voicing their views of that sort of nature, it's just that OT is better for it than the All Games section.
 
I think the major problem some people in this argument is having is that they are applying a double standard on the quality of video games compared to other forms of media. Let's say, for example, that Homefront was not a video game, but a novel. This novel is heavily promoted pre-release date as a highly realistic story that wants to portray an invasion of America. Also, let's imagine this book is also claimed by the publishing house that it will surpass Tom Clancy's current running series, and be a second weight against it. However, once you start reading it, it still has the same stupid plot.

Now, in this case, would you feel the dissatisfied customers are justified in their bashing of the stupid plot? Or would you instead say, "Are books supposed to realistic? Just put the plot to the back of your head and just appreciate the novel's use of literary elements and nice vocabulary". My guess is no, in this instance.

Then why is it different for a game? Why do you instantly dismiss video games as "not supposed to be realistic", yet a book is? Why can one media get away with crappy plot writing and no immersion whatsoever, while another media should be burned if they dare be lazy? I can't answer those questions for you. However, I can say that "Video games aren't supposed to be realistic" is not a legitimate argument on this particular discussion.
 
Mostly because video games are not usually used to tell stories of a high depth... they are there to get you interested in the gameplay and the design, and to have fun, while the story often plays a second fiddle. A book on the other hand, has it's story as the prime thing (only thing actually, can you play with a book?), and therefore does not have as much elbow room in plot stuff.
 
Tycho said:
1. Never said their nuclear silos were offline, but it's painted in a very clear picture that the world is quite messed up in the timeline of Homefront. Detonating nuclear weapons means that World War III starts and ends with a worldwide holocaust, and if the message is still not clear, read about Mutually Assured Destruction. Korea is likely to have nukes as well, and both sides will destroy the other while dragging down any others who launch retaliatory and cautionary nuclear weapons as well.

2. You know exactly what I mean about conscripted troops; there's not a giant likelihood of them recruiting millions from these occupied nations, but they can still do it if they want, nothing going to stop them.

3. Yes, I think that politics has no place in video games because a video game discussion is not a place to bring up your own political beliefs. So bringing it up offhandedly like that can be misconscrewed, but on the flipside, you might have brought it up to bring up your own political beliefs. I don't mind people voicing their views of that sort of nature, it's just that OT is better for it than the All Games section.
Click to expand...

So N. Korea isn't afraid of provoking nuclear war, but USA is... even if it's their only option. Okay.

As for N. Korea raising conscripts, supplies or any other sort of benefit from it's colonies. Considering the resources it takes to run a modern country and the resistance that those occupied colonies are likely to mount, they'd end being a net drain on North Korea.

South Korea consumes 2 million barrels of oil per day, Japan 6 million and while I'm not going to look up the statistics for each individual South East Asian colony, I'm guessing they'd total a few million barrels as well. Now considering that the domestic oil production of those countries is very small, that North Korea has (additional) sanctions placed on them and that Middle Eastern oil production is disrupted, it would be impossible for North Korea to obtain the amount of oil required to run their colonies. This massive disruption in oil supplies (along with other imports) would likely paralyze the economies of these occupied countries and further aggravate the tensions of occupation. This would result in massive rebellion to North Korea's rule and would require North Korea to maintain large garrisons in order to keep control of their colonies. Furthermore it would lead to passive resistance of various sorts, such as strikes and sabotage. Taken together (or even by themselves) these mean that North Korea's colonies would be a net drain in manpower and resources.

Logistics. Now lets also consider the logistics of North Korea's rule. We're talking about a country of 20-30 million attempting to administrate hundreds of millions of hostile people mostly not even bordering them, while in a cold war with basically every great power with the possible but unlikely exception of China. North Korea would not have the administrative capability to handle this, nor enough people or adequite means of transportation. They'd also be facing severe diplomatic repercussions and it's very likely that other nations would sink their ships or down their planes at will even if we assume no one formally intervenes (as according to the game's timeline). This would mean that North Korea would have it's hands full merely running their existing conquests and would have no reason or means to pursue further imperialism against USA.
 
I never said North Korea was unafraid of nuclear war, I was saying that it was unlikely that anyone would have detonated thermonuclear weapons in such a time that makes the Cold War look balmy by comparison. North Korea would not detonate nukes, as would the USA, because mutually assured destruction dictates that both sides would end up destroying the world.

And also, you assume that North Korea is going to be buddy with their conquered nations... unfortunately, real life has shown that it does not work like that. They would use fear tactics, secret police, informants, etc. and suppress the local population by any means necessary. Everybody has a bribery prices as well, you just have to have leverage over them.
 
attackfighter said:
Well okay you don't seem to know what anyone is talking about so no need to reply to you.
Click to expand...

Yes, because I most certainly was not bringing up points that battled your earlier points, and therefore I have no place in this discussion, that's it right? About how the events in Homefront were implausable, and I was playing Devil's Advocate and trying to see if there was any way to see if the events in Homefront were at leas plausible.

However, since they contradicted what you were thinking, you feel the need to try and fight me over it, and then choose to ignore when I keep bringing up points that are at least there for thought. Honestly, doing this right now is like bashing my head into a brick wall and trying to engage in a discussion with said wall about philosophical things, but at the end of the day, I'd probably get more out of the wall then you.

And no, this is not harassment, I brought up points many times, you chose to stop trying to pick a logical route through all of this and continue this discussion, so I honestly don't know what else to say to this.
 
attackfighter said:
Your points are illogical and often completely unrelated to anything I say.
Click to expand...

Illogical by way of trying to get real life examples on the table of things related to this (i.e., the whole nuclear detonation argument that took place), or by what? And how are they unrelated?
 
Tycho said:
Korea is likely to have nukes as well, and both sides will destroy the other while dragging down any others who launch retaliatory and cautionary nuclear weapons as well.
Click to expand...

This brings up an interesting question of how likely North Korea is to rapidly modernize not only its army, navy, airforce, logistical train, infrastructure, etc. but it also managed to build enough atomic bombs where MAD applies.

If the United States launched a strike against North Korea, who would launch against the US? I don't think Russia would risk it over North Korea neither would most of the other nuclear powers except, at very most, China. Especially with Korea suddenly becoming the global asshat.
 
I don't think Korea needs many bombs before MAD applies; maybe under a thousand, perhaps less, of heavy megatonnage, and targeting major population centers, would most likely be sufficient.
 
attackfighter said:
only a thousand... lol

currently they have enough material to make 8
Click to expand...

Oh why yes, because during the... twelve year period or so that they had, developing into an East Asian superpower, they would never have, you know, gotten more material to build more nukes. Cause that is way too outlandish, don't you agree? :eek:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Klaus Hergersheimer
Drugs and the US market
4 5 6
Replies
112
Views
5K
Hygro
Hygro
Lord Lakely
Filling in the gaps - Charting the optimal Civ Switches
5 6 7
Replies
132
Views
4K
untitledjuan
untitledjuan
Klaus Hergersheimer
That Other Jimmy Carter Topic
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
caketastydelish
caketastydelish
Jkchart
Modern Native American Civilizations (or, the Case for the Navajo)
2 3
Replies
40
Views
3K
j51
j51
I
Why have the Mughals never been in the game?
2 3
Replies
56
Views
7K
timmychompchomp
T
Back
Top Bottom