Modern Warfare 2

[prinnysquad]

The difference between this scene in a game and books/films, is that you're an active participant rather than a passive observer.

But... is playing this level really much better than seeing or hearing about the terrorist actions? I can totally see how IW think it could stimulate a stronger sense of purpose behind your mission. However, in the ign link, it says you have the choice to be active or not, which is a nice option, although it raises questions about the whole point of the level. Will not playing it reduce your involvement in the storyline? If you decide not to play or engage (whatever the option turns out to be), will your sense of the "atrocities of terrorism" not be as fully evoked as someone who has played it? If IW are totally convinced about it's narrative worth and emotional impact, should they need to include an opt out?

Just flinging out a few thoughts, still very undecided about this and will be until I play it I expect.

[spagmasterswift]

If you decide not to play or engage (whatever the option turns out to be), will your sense of the "atrocities of terrorism" not be as fully evoked as someone who has played it?

I'd say you'd have to be one sheltered soul if you need this scene to give you a sense of the "atrocities of terrorism"...

[MJ]

Spoilers

I actually thought the AC-130 was one of the most chilling, bleak representations of warfare I've experienced in a videogame, and it's stayed with me ever since.

I never thought of that level as anything other than a video game shooting sequence, but I found the bit

->Open Spoiler<-

after the nuke quite harrowing when you've got control of your character.

I thought the part in World at War when you're playing as the Russians near the end of the game and are told to

->Open Spoiler<-

kill the Germans that are trying to escape into the subway was pretty hard hitting. The way they are yanking at the closed gate and then drop their weapons before putting their hands up as they face you. I found that to be a tough choice for a game (if you don't shoot them your squad throws Molotovs at them and then your commander says something about them now suffering instead of a quick and painless death).

[Malc]

I think that Infinity Ward with the COD games have always had a huge respect for the subject they are dealing with (the best WW2 game was COD2 and they showed a huge respect for what the men and women went through). In COD4 you had the AC-130 level where you were shooting down enemies who stood no chance in surviving. Those events were always handled appropriately and in the best way a game could have done, it's just with this new scene in MW2 they are letting the immediate reactions of your players actions be presented to the player.

Any claims that it's not there to grab headlines and get extra press are very hard to swallow. You don't add something like this to a game and expect it to pass by with noone noticing.

Unless you're really naive. Do we think that they're genuinely naive?

I honestly don't think it was placed there to grab headlines and get extra press, it was placed there as a gameplay and storytelling device to strengthen your feelings towards the terrorists. Of course Infinity Ward and Activision knew the reactions that would come with it as they are not naive. But the chances of it being placed there purely to grab headlines and press is slim.

[jim g]

I think that Infinity Ward with the COD games have always had a huge respect for the subject they are dealing with (the best WW2 game was COD2 and they showed a huge respect for what the men and women went through). In COD4 you had the AC-130 level where you were shooting down enemies who stood no chance in surviving. Those events were always handled appropriately and in the best way a game could have done, it's just with this new scene in MW2 they are letting the immediate reactions of your players actions be presented to the player.



I honestly don't think it was placed there to grab headlines and get extra press, it was placed there as a gameplay and storytelling device to strengthen your feelings towards the terrorists. Of course Infinity Ward and Activision knew the reactions that would come with it as they are not naive. But the chances of it being placed there purely to grab headlines and press is slim.

well put sir!

Funny thing is, if, in a game, we call humans, 'zombies' then it is OK to mow them down, blow off heads, stab etc etc. I haven't seen the scene in MW2 yet, but have played many games that have potential 'shock' sections, but I watch movies and TV programmes that are equally shocking.

[spagmasterswift]

Zombies are trying to eat your brains...

[Eight Rooks]

So? I'm guessing his point is we already do hideous things in the name of virtual entertainment and think absolutely nothing of it, which I'd agree is a fair point to raise. I don't like the idea of 'but they were asking for it' and I don't believe "yeah but those things aren't reeeal" is a valid defence - I detest that line of argument, in fact. While I do sympathise with anyone asking "do IW really know what they're doing with this?" I firmly believe a lot of the reaction is simply people spluttering because they're having to wake up to the fact there are no 'lines', there is no 'thou shalt not show (x, y, z)...' and that their beloved hobby is not and never has been the land of Sega blue skies, rainbows and kittens they thought it was.

[spagmasterswift]

So you are the guy who would be trying to make friends with the zombies... there's always one...

[Matt]

Thinking about this, I just can't see how it's justified. This is just going to give the devs and game a bad media rep, and get all half brain idiots excited. The next time some lunatic does something in the US, it'll be blamed on this game. As someone who'd like to see games get more respect, this is not a good thing.

And I can't see how they done it for any other reason than shock value. It's very sad, IW don't need the publicity this will generate. They done some clever, cinematic sequences in CoD4; they can tell a pretty good story, and the nuke was very harrowing. This feels cheap.

Of course I've not played it, but seeing that vid, I don't want to. How about Acti sell me a version with that **** removed and charge a fiver less? Sounds like a plan to me.

[mr_woo]

I'm sorry to see that IW pussied out and made it optional, if they were going to do what they believe is important to the story they should have made the player carry out those actions and if they didn't like it then tough, they could switch off the game and walk away. If they're using it to make a point or believe in it strongly enough they should have had the conviction to follow it through completely instead of going 'oooh maybe they won't like that'

[Eight Rooks]

Thinking about this, I just can't see how it's justified. This is just going to give the devs and game a bad media rep, and get all half brain idiots excited. The next time some lunatic does something in the US, it'll be blamed on this game. As someone who'd like to see games get more respect, this is not a good thing.

The idea this is a valid reason to bar anything from being depicted in games horrifies me. And no, I'm not employing hyperbole; the gulf between what games could be in my head, and what they will become or worse, inevitably stay because of people in the industry thinking like this, actually fills me with horror.

Developers must stop thinking games must always be 'fun', or that - theoretically speaking - anything is taboo. Gamers, too. Don't like it? Don't play it. You think its depiction in a game, in context, is tasteless or insensitive or just plain shocking or whatever? By all means complain on the internet or through any other medium about it. But in my world you don't get to stop it happening. The idea there is some invisible rulebook setting out the differences between passive and interactive entertainment that needs to be worked out strikes me as ludicrous in many respects. If it can go in a film, a book or anything else it can go in a game, end of story.

I now await IW to treat the whole thing with the subtlety of dropping a hammer into a bucket, obviously.

[Dirty Sanchez]

I'm sorry to see that IW pussied out and made it optional, if they were going to do what they believe is important to the story they should have made the player carry out those actions and if they didn't like it then tough, they could switch off the game and walk away. If they're using it to make a point or believe in it strongly enough they should have had the conviction to follow it through completely instead of going 'oooh maybe they won't like that'

They have stuck a big package under the Xmas tree with 'Do Not Open' on it. If anythign it raises interest for the player, the dare I/daren't i scenario.

I approve, I think this is a developer enaging on a higher plane than just providing entertainment.

[neoboy259]

I personally think its a brave, exciting move by IW. I dont really know if its blatant media-baiting, the game hardly needs any more publicity does it? To me, its no different from watching 24 or what-have-you and getting the "bad guys' " point of view. Just because its interactive doesnt make it "worse".

The next time some lunatic does something in the US, it'll be blamed on this game. As someone who'd like to see games get more respect, this is not a good thing.

I think for games to get more respect, they need to be pushing boundaries giving people food for thought. I'm not saying this title/segment is the right way to do it, buts its a nod in the right direction personally.

[Matt]

"It happens in film so it's fine in a game" is overlooking the fact they're different mediums; one you view, the other your participate in and interact with. There is a huge gulf between the two mediums - one that should be put to good use imo, but that's a different topic.

Sorry if anyone thinks there should be no boundaries and games should be able to go and do whatever the devs like, I don't agree. There needs to be morality. It's for this same reason I have an issue with the bizarre Torture Porn films. When everyone accepts Anything Goes, I think it's a sad world.

I've been going through this a bit, and I just cannot see how IW hope to pull it off in any credible way and for it not to feel cheap. If they showed it, say you were viewing them through CCTV or whatever, I'd have no issues with it.

[Neon Ignition]

Could be worse... well, I have just been killing kids in Fairytale Fights