Unvanquished is an open-source FPS game featuring team-based strategy and RTS elements, pitting humans against aliens in a futuristic setting.
https://forums.unvanquished.net/
kharnov wrote:Really? People have been complaining about the red plus sign in video games? Why?
I guess it would be related to the Geneva Convention and to the fact that shooting at people or vehicles marked with the red cross isn't usually proscribed or punished in computer games. It sounded like chris has some more specific articles, maybe he wants to share.
I think a green cross or a red heart would be much better than that medical rod.
The Rod of Aesculapius looks like a lot of tris,if it shouldn't look blocky, but could work as a sprite.
Maybe a syringe http://www.iconarchive.com/tag/syringe ?
Does this also apply to more fantasy oriented war games?
No, the ICRC is talking about video games that simulate real-war situations. It is not suggesting that this apply to games that portray more fictional scenarios such as medieval fantasy or futuristic wars in outer space.
Bold for emphasis. They're pissed off about the Red Cross logo in realistic modern-day military shooters, not fantasy or science fiction games like our own. Nobody, in their right mind, would think that a red plus sign in our game would have anything to do with the Red Cross, an organization that would likely no longer exist in its present form by the time our game takes place centuries from now in the far future, and on that note I think it would be absurd if people thought that shooting dretches and not offering them medical aid violated some law of armed conflict. There is absolutely nothing realistic about our game and at no point do we ever try to portray this as a realistic conflict. You do not face some sort of moral dilemma every time you kill something in Unvanquished. There are no refugee camps on any of our maps and neither humans nor aliens utilize child soldiers. Real-life wars are horrifying and produce some terrible things and I think that video games like the Call of Duty or Battlefield series can address that. Leave grangers out of the equation.
kharnov wrote:Does this also apply to more fantasy oriented war games?
No, the ICRC is talking about video games that simulate real-war situations. It is not suggesting that this apply to games that portray more fictional scenarios such as medieval fantasy or futuristic wars in outer space.
Bold for emphasis. They're pissed off about the Red Cross logo in realistic modern-day military shooters, not fantasy or science fiction games like our own. Nobody, in their right mind, would think that a red plus sign in our game would have anything to do with the Red Cross, an organization that would likely no longer exist in its present form by the time our game takes place centuries from now in the far future, and on that note I think it would be absurd if people thought that shooting dretches and not offering them medical aid violated some law of armed conflict. There is absolutely nothing realistic about our game and at no point do we ever try to portray this as a realistic conflict. You do not face some sort of moral dilemma every time you kill something in Unvanquished. There are no refugee camps on any of our maps and neither humans nor aliens utilize child soldiers. Real-life wars are horrifying and produce some terrible things and I think that video games like the Call of Duty or Battlefield series can address that. Leave grangers out of the equation.
I also think so. We are to sci fi for them.
OK, I decided to transfer the discussion into the public forum space so that poVoq can have a word, too. I hope we can quickly resolve this and get back to the modeling business.
Apparently anyting that is not both red and a cross or plus sign should work as a compromise. In particular a blue plus sign would be an option, so are heart symbols or other objects more directly connected to medical service as such. Is that OK for you, Chris?
Hey Chris, any chance we'll get this in by Sunday?
No, I put this on hold.
OK. December release target instead?