Konami departure "surprised" Fallujah dev

By Robert Purchese Published 29 April, 2009

Would "love the opportunity" to finish game.

Six Days in Fallujah developer Atomic Games was "surprised" by the recent departure of publisher Konami because of too much negative press.

"We were informed on Thursday night that Konami had decided to pull out of Six Days in Fallujah," Atomic boss Peter Tamte told GameSpot. "This caught us by surprise. Development of the game had been progressing very well and on schedule.

"We would very much like the opportunity to complete the game," he added.

Six Days in Fallujah recreates, with the help of US Marines and army intelligence, the intense Iraq War battle of Fallujah. Unsurprisingly, controversy has been rife, with numerous parties - including SAS hard-man Andy McNab - wading in.

The game - in development for PC, PS3 and Xbox 360 - is now left without a publisher.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (22) Latest comment 3 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Oh-Bollox #1 3 years ago

    Come on, make it! Even better if it comes out and it's wank.

  • Senate #2 3 years ago

    Is this one of those, 'we scared of Muslims?' issues.

  • kipper #3 3 years ago

    No, there's plenty of Christians too who think destroying 25% of all the buildings in a city to root out insurgents/resistance fighters was excessive and a war crime.
    Edited by 1 at 29/04/09 @ 12:30

  • ArcMonkey #4 3 years ago

    Finish it, Steam it! If its good, rub it in their faces!

  • kangarootoo #5 3 years ago

    "Six Days in Fallujah recreates, with the help of US Marines and army intelligence, the intense Iraq War battle of Fallujah"

    What happened to recreating something using the help of factual record?



    "Finish it, Steam it! If its good, rub it in their faces!"

    Yeah, because those of us who found this game objectionable will be WELL gutted if it turns out to FUN. Because that is what we REALLY consider to be most important. Because our view of the world is that blinkered and basic and self important isn't it..... muppet.

  • ArcMonkey #6 3 years ago

    You idiot kangarootoo. THEIR faces referred to KONAMI.




    ...muppet.

  • CASE #7 3 years ago

    How long after a war can you make a game about it?
    Edited by 1 at 29/04/09 @ 13:23

  • kangarootoo #8 3 years ago

    @ArcMonkey

    Shit

    :)


    Err, I'm still not sure if that is ok.

    Bear with my whilst I put my high horse in for a quick MOT.

  • kangarootoo #9 3 years ago

    @CASE

    If its a serious question, my answer might be "long enough that it cannot steer current events by distorting public opinion".

    And my limited knowledge of history would suggest that time period to be at least one full generation, so the majority of the populace have no strong personal stake in the depiction of events.


    First off, I should make clear I don't think this game should ba banned. I AM glad it got canned, but banning is not the position I am coming from.

    My concern with this game is that depiction of current or recent events is what forms current opinion, and current opinion is what forms current policy. I am genuinely worried that a portion of people would have their play of this game serve as their ONLY real source of information about the conflict, which in turn might allow them to form the opinion that "well it seemed ok then, so its probably ok if we do it again".

    Now it could of course be suggested that this game would be no less reliable than any major US news network, but that is a different (if equally valid) worry.

  • Oh-Bollox #10 3 years ago

    I can see the reviews now.

    "...oddly, the game doesn't tolerate civilian casualties..."

  • kangarootoo #11 3 years ago

    The thing for me that raised my eyebrow to its highest point was the assertion that, because the game was based on reports by marines on the ground, and because said marines did not report seeing civilian casualties, the game would not show the civlian casualties EVEN THOUGH it is known as fact that they existed.

    Now it is fine to state that you game is set in an alternate reality, which might even garner a disclaimer at the start to that effect. But in the next breath they would talk in terms of the game depicting a real life event. Pick a point of view and stick to it, warts and all, says I.

  • Grayvern #12 3 years ago

    Im sorry but considering all the films that have been made about Iraq, the sheer amount of television coverage, a game is in the terms of taste no different from this.

    I don't care that it got canned simply because I doubt it would be the intelligent game that it could have been, probably just another shooter. Call of duty 4 when the Americans lose and you character dies after a nuclear strike, is far more more striking than most preachy anti nuclear films that get made.

    Things being censored, even by proxy, is a dangerous road, the censorship of a title on shaky moral ground goes some way to legitamising all censorship.
    Edited by 3 at 29/04/09 @ 14:04

  • kangarootoo #13 3 years ago

    @Grayvern

    I might suggest that some of the TV programmes made about Iraq were in equally bad taste or equally misleading. And some were not.

    2 wrongs don't make a right, as some uppity self important internet poster might say ;)

  • schnide #14 3 years ago

    I've said it before and I'll say it again, if this game can be made right, it should be made.

    IF done right, it would be groundbreaking.

  • DoctorZoidberg #15 3 years ago

    Storm in a tea cup springs to mind.

    We've all seen films through the soldiers eyes, fictional and factual. What's the difference between watching a film and playing a game?

  • Oh-Bollox #16 3 years ago

    If it lets you actually kill civilians, I'm all for it. Realism is what it's all about, no?

  • collateral89 #17 3 years ago

    kipper is ace
    Edited by 1 at 29/04/09 @ 17:45

  • kipper #18 3 years ago

    j,taurus: I find your comment amazingly stupid on so many levels I'm not even sure where to start.

    It's best to think before you type, you know.

  • kangarootoo #19 3 years ago

    @DoctorZoidberg

    "We've all seen films through the soldiers eyes, fictional and factual. What's the difference between watching a film and playing a game?"

    Like I said, in some cases there is very little difference indeed. Each would be equally shit if done badly.

    That somebody somewhere once made a bias and misleading TV programme or film is neither here nor there.

  • kangarootoo #20 3 years ago

    "Would it be ok if Fallujah suddenly became an alternate Earth and Iraqi's were grubs? "

    What, as opposed to claims that it accurrately represents the actual conflict that took place?

    Ummm, yes then. The alternate grub filled universe would be much more preferable, as it would clearly be fiction and would be represented as such.

    And also,

    "shit happens"

    When has that EVER been anything other than a euphemism for "I want to dispute your point, but I don't know how". Is that really the sort of language to bring to a discussion about the depiction of real life war events in a video game. "Shit happens"? Wow, thats deep.

  • kipper #21 3 years ago

    @ Gungrave:

    U.S. MILITARY DEATHS (IRAQ): 4278
    U.S. MILITARY WOUNDED (IRAQ): 31215
    IRAQI CIVILIAN DEATHS: 151000
    'EXCESS' IRAQI DEATHS: 655000
    source [link url=http://www.michaelmoore. com
    ]http://www.michaelmoore. com
    [/link]

    "Shit happens", indeed. It is real, and some people do get offended by the idea of biased entertainment based on it.
    Perhaps you'd like to play a WWII game as the Germans slaughtering the Poles next?

  • JensonJet #22 3 years ago

    gungrave.. hahaha... I like it... deliberately lose. Good point.

    Not that I was actually interested in this game, nor had any issues about it, it's no surprised Konami dropped it out of fear of poor sales or a backlash against the company or it's other products. It's purely business and nothing to do with morals. Speaking of which it's an odd argument when people say it's too soon to bring out a game based on an actual event. What's difference does time make? As long as actual individuals identities aren't used, I don't know why people get on the high horse about this. If there should be any upset about the subject matter I would have thought the actual culprits behind the civilian deaths should receive the backlash... the governments who order their troops to engage in such blatant murder!