backtop


Print 69 comment(s) - last by SlyNine.. on Nov 16 at 2:06 PM


"Medal of Honor: Warfighter"  (Source: itechbook.net)
They all received letters of reprimand and a cut of half their pay for two months

Seven U.S. Navy SEAL members are in hot water for participating in the making of the video game, "Medal of Honor: Warfighter."

Video game developer Electronic Arts (EA) recently paid seven active and retired U.S. Navy SEALs to help in the creation of "Medal of Honor: Warfighter" in order to make it as realistic as possible.

However, the Navy wasn't too pleased with this move. It said that their participation was a violation of Article 92, which basically states that members of the Navy SEALs cannot disclose classified material to anyone. The Navy believes that these members provided classified information to EA for the making of the game, but it is unclear what this classified information was.

Now, the seven SEALs are facing punishment, according to the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD). DOD said that a non-judicial punishment hearing was carried out on November 7 where the seven SEALs faced administrative proceedings. An NSW investigation is now being conducted to see if more members of the Navy were involved.

The seven Navy SEALs consist of two Senior Chief Special Operators and five Chief Special Operators, which all received letters of reprimand and a cut of half their pay for two months.

According to EA, they were unaware of whether the seven Navy SEALs asked the DOD for permission to participate first.

Back in 2010, EA's "Medal of Honor" was banned from military PXs globally because of multiplayer Taliban characters.

Source: Polygon



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: No - UCMJ Article 92 isn't about classified
By Omega215D on 11/10/2012 12:15:27 AM , Rating: 2
Makes me wonder about the movie Act of Valor considering it stars active duty Navy SEALS. I never got a chance to see it and the reviews kinda put me off as well.


RE: No - UCMJ Article 92 isn't about classified
By Gondor on 11/10/2012 7:03:54 AM , Rating: 1
"Taliban" is plural of "talib". You cannot be "a taliban" ;-)


By foolsgambit11 on 11/10/2012 6:12:55 PM , Rating: 2
Taliban means "students". And silly Pashtuns, with their own pluralization... if you're going to borrow an Arabic word, at least borrow the Arabic plural Tullab....

I'm going to weigh in and say that Pashtu speakers are free to call the group Taliban with the "wrong" plural, and that English speakers are free to call a single member of the Taliban "a Taliban" with the wrong singular. Although "a Taliban" does sound weird to my ears.


RE: No - UCMJ Article 92 isn't about classified
By Jeffk464 on 11/11/2012 12:33:06 PM , Rating: 1
I agree it was a good movie so long as you aren't expecting something along the lines of a Steven Spielberg production. It was more along the budget/film expertise of a made for TV movie. Brian Suits(radio military expert guy) said its probably about the most authentic special ops movie ever made.


By Jeffk464 on 11/11/2012 12:34:15 PM , Rating: 2
PS - It does feel a lot like a modern first person shooter, but I think that's probably because some modern games are getting pretty authentic.


RE: No - UCMJ Article 92 isn't about classified
By fredgiblet on 11/10/2012 3:54:10 PM , Rating: 2
It was bsically made BY the Navy so they are fine. The acting is poor, but the movie is awesome, you should see it.


By FITCamaro on 11/11/2012 8:23:50 AM , Rating: 2
Yes they were given approval to make the movie.


"Young lady, in this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics!" -- Homer Simpson

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki