Why did Vietnam games never really take off the way WW2 or modern war games did?

there used to be tons of vietnam games. they fell off because foliage and AI work like shit. either the foliage is so strong you are invisible or it's worthless. for multiplayer people just lowered graphics and did other shady shit

There was no heroism in Vietnam like there was in WW2. Also just the fact that you can only have the same platoon, hamburger hill and apocalypse now rip off level set in a jungle or rice patties so many times before it gets boring. Where as WW2 had different fronts with different locations and tactics even.

Americans only focus on WW2 because it's the only war they've won in 100 years

and even then they only won because of the Soviet Union willingness to sacrifice so many men

They peaked with Vietcong 1. No other Vietnam game has reached that level of literally panicking everytime you see a bush

Rising Storm 2 Vietnam is hands down the best vietnam game of all time. But if you want to play a good singleplayer vietnam game then Vietcong 1 is a must play.

Because they didn't win the war.

"vietnam war game" is its own genre. you cant make a bunch of the same genre games set in the same time period because it gets stale and stops selling. its really that simple. everyone in this thread thinking its american pride is just looking for a reason to be upset. the vietnam war style shooter game just fell out of fashion.

Attached: slug.jpg (278x360, 32.08K)

because of jungles
anyways, Rising Storm 2 exists

>What are some good Vietnam FPS's? Been having an itch lately for old military shooters
Vietcong is not only a great Vietnam FPS, but also probably the best pseudo-realistic FPS up to date all together.
It is old though.
And remember that your character has a flashlight. Check keybindings for it - I think it's L by default.
You'll thank me while you are in the tunnels later.

Sounds perfect for the trend of "chain of command is stupid and you've been tricked into bad things" games then

youtube.com/watch?v=MCyOX4QJq3E

Attached: area-88-600[1].jpg (600x440, 38.65K)

making dense jungle environments was and still is too demanding for games both in terms of work needed and performance
games like vietcong don't feel like vietnam becase the forest isn't thick enough

Area 88 was better than it had any right to be
youtube.com/watch?v=iFinnI6lRCs
youtube.com/watch?v=CTAeJX7qSXw&

Attached: area 88.jpg (800x450, 64.08K)

Hitman 1 did it

here's your "vietnam but murrica wins" game

Attached: NES-Contra.gif (300x263, 24.76K)

Lots of reasons, some already pointed out above:
>not as diverse a setting as WWII
>not heroic for the American side
>today's social climate would hyperfocus on race and label the game racist
>guerilla warfare is no fun to play except for autists

I would love a modern big budget Vietnam game but it's just not something these risk averse studios would ever touch.

youtube.com/watch?v=fuYL-keoGvU

As the other user said, Rising Storm 2 is probably the best. The SOG Prairie Fire DLC for Arma 3 is also fun as fuck if you've got a buddy to fly the Cobra with

>that guitar riff as he shoots him down
It's been 15 or so years since I've seen it, but now I hunger once more. Ending and the music was fucking stellar, too. Excellent taste, user.

>guerilla warfare is no fun to play
Far Cray 3 did pretty good

>Why did Vietnam games never really take off the way WW2 or modern war games did?
Because you play as the Empire with all the cool weapons and they're the guys fighting with scraps against impossible odds. The traditional protagonist roles are reversed but few people are willing to make a game about killing well armed Americans.
Honestly I am tired of trying to fit historical wars into video games while games set 10min into the future get the freedom to do anything. Give me an alternate history FPS game set in the late 50's early 60's where the Cold War goes hot and your fighting the Soviet Army at it's peak threat level.

Attached: US_Army_tanks_face_off_against_Soviet_tanks,_Berlin_1961.jpg (2000x1507, 632.29K)

boomers still seething that they lost the war.

based aesthetic tho
youtube.com/watch?v=ZrSxvka2xc0&t=34s

>guerilla warfare is no fun to play except for autists
Were you born retarded or was this a learned behavior?

>today's social climate would hyperfocus on race and label the game racist
What is your argument that the American mass killing of Vietnamese *wasn't* by definition a genocide? Among being an imperialist war and an capitalist war it was also a race war, no matter what the initial intent of the burger commanders was.

maybe with the sentiment towards Russia now changing we could get an actual Red Dawn game

I think a Red Dawn scenario is now too far fetched even for fiction.

It's because it's a war the US lost and had shit justifications to fight it in the first place.

America has never lost a war

Because America lost the war.

I'm not saying race wasn't a factor, it always is when a war is fought between two sides that are different races. But race wasn't the REASON Vietnam happened. America didn't invade because they hate southeast Asians and really wanted to kill as many as possible.

I meant that the racial component of Vietnam requires tact and nuance to depict accurately, a tact and nuance that AAA studios have proven time and again is an alien concept to them. Western game journos would just wield the sledgehammer of "durr you shoot Asians in this game dat's racist!" because they have no concept of complexity. And fear of that backlash certainly factors into why a modern studio would never want to touch the subject.

(you)

>maybe we could get a red dawn game!
were mw2 and homefront not enough?

Much better setting than 20 hours of jungle.

Just wait till Mihoyo makes its mark in the fps market by releasing Chinese Call of Duty except its good where Americans are rapey fat bastards and you get $$ for killing marines and limited cosmetics for destroying their faggy helicopters with a pistol.

bro blops? only game that matters?

Attached: 597b5dea5bafe3070c0903e4[1].jpg (1080x1080, 291.92K)

because the burgers lost.

Attached: 1494361738594.png (500x403, 252.37K)

Americans lost thats why

Vietnam is France's failure

Because it wasn't some large scale mystical war where hundreds died on a beach to break back into Europe.

Vietnam was just battles with enemies that'd just retreat as soon as you'd return fire unless you fought the vastly underequipped and undertrained NVA.

Attached: 1642546160179.gif (480x360, 207.87K)

Ironically enough Russia is making the same mistake as the US did in Vietnam, right now in Ukraine. If they just pushed harder earlier on in the war they would have won easily and quickly.

I really want a game set in the 50's before all the Vietnam era gear came out.
The 50's is this brief period between WW2 and Vietnam where the US and Soviets are trying to transition out of their old gear to a new modern army but haven't quite figured out the optimal designs.
So you get weapons that are almost familiar but aren't like the M47 Tank, the M59 APC, the H-21 helicopter, the F3H Demon fighter jet and so on. I think that would be a pretty cool setting.

Attached: TTcI24l.jpg (1200x912, 321.22K)

only amerifarts care about vietnam war

Even the Desert war games are stupid now. It's nothing but propaganda that amounted to nothing.

Because you play as an Am*rican, in WW2 games you can play as a Soviet or a Brit.

They also did the same to other superpowers like China, Mongols, and France so US's defeat wasn't that exceptional. Vietnam is simply unconquerable

But Amerilards lost to 150 cm farmers

So, Korea?

Honestly a game in that setting would be pretty based.
>Logical campaign progression that could start out easy before becoming harder when the chinese join
>Lots of different nations participating
>Late WW2 gear that didn't saw much use in that conflict being used.

Games that don't have you shooting white people aren't needed.

>>/pol/

Kinda boring though. All those cool 50's weapons weren't used and the communist only got WW2 hand me downs. Again the point of my post is games set 10min into the future can do anything, in Korea they have to follow history.
I want more alternate history fiction in games. Why not instead write a campaign where the 50's cold war goes hot but not fully nuclear. Then you can do anything in regards to gear or how the war turns out.

Attached: ec94ca1db34e21182b2676eed030060b9e8e9e8b.jpg (1199x783, 169.04K)

>stupid jap propaganda
Ship wasn't kill by japs! Was fire and sunk when towed to port, crew evacuated!

Oh but also yes, lot's of late WW2 gear too of course.

It's not propaganda it's the truth

Attached: manchu.png (472x752, 662.55K)