{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
9/3/2013 5:23:28 PM
11
-
How so?
-
A war simulator?? Really? Why would you want to experience what it's like to be the president of a failing country that's about to get fully engulfed in full-blown thermonuclear warfare in the middle of peace time through the Second Cold War via failed application of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD)???
-
To see how the world might have ended? It's a bit artsy (which doesn't always appeal to everyone). My favorite moment in every game is when the territories start launching nukes. The whole screen lights up like a fireworks display. It's frightening and awe-inspiring at the same time. Anyway, besides the whole artsy side of the game, it's actually quite fun too. Look up a few gameplays online if you're curious.
-
That's a bit of speculation. I don't do strategy games anyway.
-
What's a bit of speculation?
-
The game. We can't really know how thermonuclear warfare would have panned out because we never tried it, unfortunately :(<
-
Exactly. The computer screen is based on all those speculative theories on how World War III might have panned out if it was fought in the 80s. It supposed to capture that feeling of how the world "might" have ended
-
That's both dumb and stupid and speculative.
-
It's definitely speculative, but I don't see how a supercomputer's predictions are dumb/stupid...
-
The game is not the other stuffs
-
Alright. You're entitled to your own opinion.
