In Development: Rendition: Guantanamo

In Development: Rendition: Guantanamo

March 20, 2009

Aside from the use of two politically-loaded buzz words in its title, we don't know much about Rendition: Guantanamo.

There's only the trailer at left as well as a teaser e-mail from developer T-Enterprise:

This week we are happy to present the teaser trailer for our 3D console game Rendition: Guantanamo.


The release date for the game will be October 2009. The game is being programmed for XBox 360 and Game for Windows format.

 

Without giving too much away at this stage - the game is set in the year 2020. The detention facility Guantanamo Bay has been sold to Mercenaries who now charge Scientists to conduct their un-ethical experiments on living human beings.

 

You play someone who was "renditioned" to Guantanamo by the Mercenaries and is now being subjected to these experiments. No one knows you are here and no one cares. Until now! Someone has managed to slip you a message. You have a son...

UPDATE: T-Enterprise, based in Scotland, is on Twitter, if you're interested in watching for updated info on Rendition: Guantanamo.

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Re: In Development: Rendition: Guantanamo

Wow this looks terribad.

http://www.eliteownage.com/nice

Re: In Development: Rendition: Guantanamo

looks and sounds mega crappy.

Re: In Development: Rendition: Guantanamo

Xbox 360?  Not the original Xbox?  Really?

Cliché plot, check.
Horrendously-rendered trailer that doesn't even portray any animation, even in an in-game trailer?  Check.
Controversial buzzwords, check.

Looks like we're on our way to an über-crappy game.

Re: In Development: Rendition: Guantanamo

 Sounds like Halo 3!

*runs from the inevitable flaming*

/b

Re: In Development: Rendition: Guantanamo

Boo! This better be like, $12 when it comes out. Story sucks, Graphics/Music sucks, pretty sure the gameplay isn't going to blow anything out of the water.

Re: In Development: Rendition: Guantanamo

What Publisher on the planet would even touch this?  'Break out of Guantanamo and take revenge on your captors', are you kidding?  Oh right, but it's in 2020, so it's totally not trying to capitalize on the War in Iraq at all.

I highly doubt this will ever see the light of day.

Re: In Development: Rendition: Guantanamo

lol, it looks like an animation movie some high school student had to do for a project.  

http://www.eliteownage.com/nice

Re: In Development: Rendition: Guantanamo

Could this actually be an Xbox community game? The trailer, the graphics and their website don't look the slightest bit professional. The plot seems like Manhunt 2.

Re: In Development: Rendition: Guantanamo

Haha, I think this is funny. We all know what the story is about, even if the details have been changed to allow publication. I hope it gets published, we always talk about freedom of speech and what not but then a game like Rapelay comes along and those same people are shouting we should ban it, and won't somebody think of the children.

As a person of half-Irianian heritage, you don't see me getting up in arms about games like Call of Duty 4 or what not. I actually love that game. Freedom of speech means freedom of speech, even when we don't like what is being said.

Re: In Development: Rendition: Guantanamo

So...... Manhunt 2?

And when you think about it, this sounds more like a made for TV action flick.

I'm an attention whore. So visit my DevaintArt and feed my ego. Feed the whore. http://keaton2008.deviantart.com/

Re: In Development: Rendition: Guantanamo

If the main character's been imprisoned that long, chances are the son isn't his.

Re: In Development: Rendition: Guantanamo

This game might show things the US government won't be comfortable with, which means it will sell well with all the undue attention. the 25 to Life fiasco repeats.

Re: In Development: Rendition: Guantanamo

You didn't watch the trailer did you...

http://www.eliteownage.com/nice

Re: In Development: Rendition: Guantanamo

Oh wow, another european company bashing the U.S. for taking care of business in Iraq. We should drop propoganda implicating these european countries, and pull out. Let them deal with the shitstorm.

Suddam hussein : >1.5 million civilians slaughtered

Stalin : ?? million civilians slaughtered (Somewhere between hitler and Suddam, maybe.)

Hitler : >6 million civilians slaughtered

Other than China's undisclosed amount, which is not the result of a single person but a corrupt government, Suddam probably is the world's third most prolific killer-ever. Atilla the hun may get close, but it's extremely doubtful and I can't be bothered to check.

The fact is we had to fly all the way across the world because the european countries that should have been the most sensitive to a second holocaust (a lot of suddam's killings were because of religious differences) were sitting on their asses.

</justification>

<sympathizing>

The torture in Guantanamo is horrific and absolutely most stop. The chance that they could nab the wrong person is WAY too high. The only reason I'd authorize torture is if we captured the person with the bomb belt on, and they were being uncooperative. In which case, they were going to die anyway and they definitely have information on how to save lives.

Even then, the most invasive interrogation technique/torture beyond talking I would, if in charge, authorize is the cold room tactic, which strips them naked and sticks them in a featureless room cooled to 65-70 degrees F for days at a time until they talk. It's not pleasant to think about, but it doesn't have (as much/the) potential to cause permanent, life long trauma.

Re: In Development: Rendition: Guantanamo

This actually looks to be bad in a lulzy way. I'll be sure to buy it for the hell of it.

| XBOX LIVE GamerTag: Harry Miste | Steam ID: Harry Miste | PSN ID: HarryMiste |

Re: In Development: Rendition: Guantanamo

GamePolitics ShoutBox

Posted 02/09/10 at 03:26pm
Valdearg: @DS: Link!! LINK!
Posted 02/09/10 at 03:20pm
DarkSaber: Although, unsurprisingly, he's just being called an idiot alot and criticised for being as illegible as always.
Posted 02/09/10 at 03:18pm
DarkSaber: Oh good lord, I just found Zippy on The Escapist.
Posted 02/09/10 at 03:14pm
Valdearg: IE: Male body/Female Mind or Female Body/Male Mind.
Posted 02/09/10 at 03:13pm
Valdearg: @Zip: TG == Transgendered/Transsexual.
Posted 02/09/10 at 03:09pm
DarkSaber: Forget it Zippy, it's an abbreviation of a big word and so would be wasted on you
Posted 02/09/10 at 03:07pm
ZippyDSMlee: Vlag:....TG?
Posted 02/09/10 at 03:02pm
Valdearg: @DS: Im sure that's what they'd do if it wasn't legal to just tell Gays/TG's to "Screw off," just because they're who they are.
Posted 02/09/10 at 02:50pm
DarkSaber: Whoever told him/her/it that is dumb. They should have done like most companies and made-up some bullshit, yet legal, reason for it not getting the job.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:18pm
Valdearg: I do agree that it shouldn't be legal. That's for sure.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:16pm
Andrew Eisen: Shouldn't be. Spirit of anti-discrimination laws would seem to include sexual orientation (and eye color). Plus there's always equal protection and such. Never know until you try.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:14pm
Valdearg: @AE: Doubtful. Again, it's perfectly legal.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:10pm
Andrew Eisen: Should have sued (unless that wasn't an option given her financial situation or something). Might have won.
Posted 02/09/10 at 01:00pm
Valdearg: Story about a Male to Female TG who was expressly told she wouldn't be given a job because she was TG. Its not the main point of the story, but explicit, perfectly legal discrimination like this exists.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:53pm
Valdearg: Lol, I don't know. It may very well be legal to do so. Though that might able to fall under the "race" restriction, depending on how that point is argued.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:51pm
Valdearg: I don't think they do have any legal recourse. I'll have to dig around, but I seriously believe that if the law doesn't specifically mention Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity, they can still be discriminated against in those 29 states.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:51pm
Andrew Eisen: Eye color isn't covered either but I doubt it would be considered legal to refuse to hire people with green eyes.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:48pm
Andrew Eisen: My explanation is longer than the Shoutbox will allow. Suffice to say that while those who are discriminated against do have legal recourse, anti-discrimination law should specifically cite sexual orientation so that there’s no question about it.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:42pm
Valdearg: "There is no federal law that consistently protects LGBT individuals from employment discrimination; it remains legal in 29 states, and in 38 states to do so based on gender identity or expression." From the Human Rights Campaign.
Posted 02/09/10 at 12:40pm
Valdearg: @AE: Why don't you think I'm correct? I know Wiki could be flawed, but as far as it says, its up to date as of June 2009.
Login or register to post shouts