Why the Vietnam War never got the COD/BF Stimulus

[MushroomX]

VIETCONG for PC was a good game I thought.

However for a COD/BF, Vietnam was a new beast of warfare, guerrilla warfare: ambushes, hit-and-run attacks, booby traps, and enemies blending into jungle or villages. The Viet Cong and NVA avoided head-on fights, which means you don’t get the large, set-piece battles that make those games work.

 

[Lord Beasley]

1. Same reason no studio will touch Korea. Same reason the WW2 Pacific campaign never gets any serious traction. Romanticizing the Euro-centric is central to every portrayal.

2. How many places can they pretend they're winning without a PR backlash? The profit motive means mass appeal.

COD WAW and WW2

 

[Jonah]

1. Same reason no studio will touch Korea. Same reason the WW2 Pacific campaign never gets any serious traction. Romanticizing the Euro-centric is central to every portrayal.

2. How many places can they pretend they're winning without a PR backlash? The profit motive means mass appeal.

 

[Kurt off them percs]

Hell let loose just got that Vietnam upgrade

Hope consoles can get a good release date next year

 

[Address_Unknown]

America had sophisticated weaponry and was fighting farmers with cheap assault rifles, improvised and outdated explosives and traps.​

And didn't they still lose?
I'm asking as a non American, non American history knowing breh, 'cause the discourse I've heard or can atleast remember about the Vietnam war, that wasn't told by Americans, or atleast seemingly honest ones, was the fact that they were in the jungle, at odds with the weather, the ingenuity of the traps, with shyte weapons that swelled and became inaccurate while getting murked by farmers, hence the Goebells Propoganda back home (america) of them winning during a time when the general american public couldn't hear different on the news or some sort of reliable social media.​