236: Finding Meaning in Modern Warfare

atol

New member
Jan 16, 2009
297
0
0
Tiamat666 said:
5. A nuclear missile taking out the ISS
The chances of an ICBM heading for the US being anywhere near the ISS must be like winning the lottery twice. Anyway, the destructive potential of a nuclear detonation in space is very diminished, as most of the destruction is caused by the shock wave, which will not exist in space due to the vacuum. The only damage a warhead could do is "melt" the station with the plasma energy, take out it's systems or a direct hit.
The ISS would feel absolutely no effect from the nuke. It orbits an average 350km above the Earth, plus it was orbiting somewhere over Mexico. Even ignoring the fact that the nuclear shockwave would be nonexistent in space, the amount of force required to destroy the station would also obliterate the majority of North America, and would cause massive tidal waves and fallout that the entire world would feel for centuries. It'd make the Tsar bomb look like a firecracker.
 

atol

New member
Jan 16, 2009
297
0
0
CAW4 said:
Someone needs to learn what the saying 'It's a video game' means.
...
Unless someone put this disc in a Operation Flashpoint case, you can't expect it to be fully realistic. Once again, it's an arcade shooter.
So, basically, the illogical plot points being "easily disproved" is just "it's a video game, it's not supposed to make sense."
That's indeed some infallible logic.
 

Anomynous 167

New member
May 6, 2008
404
0
0
MrJohnson said:
To everyone defending the game: No, jumping around 4 different characters every half-level, and having two of them die is not cool or edgy. You don't need to top yourself in a sequel. Same thing with having a ridiculous action movie story.
MrJohnson... I just ask you this; How dare you spoil major plot points, you bastard?

Also, after reading the article, here is my main complaint
""We'd talk about that, but we'd keep tabling it." Modern Warfare 2 has been called 'the Citizen Kane of shooting people in the face,' but in the original Modern Warfare's final moments, you can't help but feel it's about more than just that. You have a bond with your team after all you've been through, and to see them executed while you lay there utterly helpless is gutting. You see the gun slide across to you, and it's cinematic and emotional - but most of all, it feels real.

"At the end of Call of Duty 4 you forget about the politics, you forget about whatever it's all about: It's just two guys on a bridge trying to kill each other.""
NICE JOB RUINING THE ENDING!
Some people haven't gotten that far, (Although the reason that I didn't get that far was because I only rented it for about a week).
Tiamat666 said:
CAW4 said:
Copying Yatzee doesn't make you look cool, it just shows how weak your argument really is, if you're just copying someone else's opinion, or can't come up with their own material for why it's bad.
*sigh*

I don't need a review to realize how over-the-top ridiculous some of MW2 story elements are. Let me give you some insight:

1. Russia launches surprise attack on US
This is the most ridiculous of the whole bunch. Do you have any idea how many merchant-, cruise-, and military ships travel the oceans these days? Not to mention airplanes and civilian satellites in orbit? The notion of a massive invasion going unnoticed is just as stupid as the existence of a single "kill switch" that disables the entire US survaillance system.
Again, I complain about some one ruining a major plot point, thanks alot ):

Also, I remember someone said something about the plot of Modern Warfare 2 falling apart following the Snow Mobile section...
Great, just great. You ruin ALL of the plot points that come right after the bit that I last finished.
 

Tiamat666

Level 80 Legendary Postlord
Dec 4, 2007
1,012
0
0
atol said:
CAW4 said:
Someone needs to learn what the saying 'It's a video game' means.
...
Unless someone put this disc in a Operation Flashpoint case, you can't expect it to be fully realistic. Once again, it's an arcade shooter.
So, basically, the illogical plot points being "easily disproved" is just "it's a video game, it's not supposed to make sense."
That's indeed some infallible logic.
Naturally. But what makes it all so stupid and annoying is that MW2 "pretends" to be realistic and plausible, only to then fuck you over with a cheap and ridiculous turn of events. I didn't complain about Doom or Half Life being unrealistic. But those two games are in an obvious Sci-Fi setting. In MW2 however you have realistic weapons, realistic countries, realistic armies and special forces, realistic vehicles and equipment, realistic cities and settings, a realistic war in Afghanistan, etc. And then suddenly Russia launches a surprise attack on the U.S. Oh my god! They are everywhere!!! And John Wayne is leading them on a flying horse! Tadaa! Tadaah!

What a huge let down.
 

atol

New member
Jan 16, 2009
297
0
0
Tiamat666 said:
Naturally. But what makes it all so stupid and annoying is that MW2 "pretends" to be realistic and plausible, only to then fuck you over with a cheap and ridiculous turn of events. I didn't complain about Doom or Half Life being unrealistic. But those two games are in an obvious Sci-Fi setting. In MW2 however you have realistic weapons, realistic countries, realistic armies and special forces, realistic vehicles and equipment, realistic cities and settings, a realistic war in Afghanistan, etc. And then suddenly Russia launches a surprise attack on the U.S. Oh my god! They are everywhere!!! And John Wayne is leading them on a flying horse! Tadaa! Tadaah!

What a huge let down.
Agreed. I still enjoyed the game, but I'll gladly hang anyone who defends the plot as being merely reasonable. There's nothing up MW2's skirt, nothing but painful stupidity. Anyone who doesn't see that not only knows nothing of decent plots, but knows nothing of modern warfare, too.
Yeah, don't worry, I preemptively punched myself in the face for you.
 

mattman106

New member
Aug 19, 2009
210
0
0
The Big Eye said:
RaZoR GoZ said:
Good article. Pity the game was so shit.
More like, good article, pity the game was the shit!

Ah, you people make it too easy...

I liked Modern Warfare 2, even its single-player mode, although I must admit the storyline did feel extremely rushed. You Escapist types are good people, but you're the only ones I've ever met who will gripe about being able to jump over a damn chasm in a damn snowmobile in a video game.

C'mon. Did Pac-Man have a believable storyline? Space Invaders? Diner Dash? Kane and Lynch: Dead Men?
And yet, are these not all games you have briefly considered playing at some point?

Slightly more off-topic, but in a different way: if Ghost truly is Gaz in the future, I would not be at all surprised if he's not dead this time, either. It could be a hilarious running gag: every installment, Ghost changes his name (maybe next time "Silent Rip?") and loses another part of his face.
But we gripe because there is no stylistic continuity between the games. The first was Die Hard the second is some Jean Claude Van Damme PoS when it comes to storylines.
 

_Nocturnal

New member
Nov 4, 2006
154
0
0
I really wish the article could have found a way to say the same thing but not spoil the game's ending.
I know it's quite popular and aged by now, but still.
 

YoUnG205

Ugh!...
Oct 13, 2009
884
0
0
I did not like the story in the second game it was just really hard to follow for me.
All I got was that Russia had invaded america.
The first one was far better but the online mode was better in the second than the first.
 

Zefar

New member
May 11, 2009
485
0
0
This article has quite a few good points on the story that just reeks of bad story telling.
http://www.gamesradar.com/f/modern-warfare-2s-glaring-plot-holes-exposed/a-20091120123332495077

Like the, "Price is able to launch a nuke" to then have it detonate at a certain point in the atmosphere.

I still don't get why Shepard is mad about the nuke in COD4.

The guys TRIED to find it and when they did, they tried to get OUT from there. How is this "Just stood there and watched"? They where also able to save USA from several nukes launched by the Russians too.

If I also got it right it was those Other Terrorist and not the Russians terrorist who activated the nuke in that desert country. So why would Russia vs America solve ANYTHING? :/

It just doesn't make any sense.

I like the part where you drive on a snow mobile and then need to jump a large gap. WHY ON EARTH WOULD THEY PUT IT THERE?
It's lethal to do those things, I doubt the snow mobile could handle such jump to begin with.
The weather changed pretty quick on that mission too.

Then we have that Russian friend who actually haven't bothered to change his type of clothing. Like a short arm shirt with the same pants. Color might be different but it's generally the same.

Still that he was within a minute away with his chopper in Favela is beyond retarded. To also be flying around in it and just say, "Yea sure, I can pick you up while I'm at it".

Where did he get the chopper anyway? It was also able to fire missiles. The country he is in just ain't going to just let him fly around in one.

For me COD4 story was much more believable than MW2.

Oh and for those who whined a bit about spoilers. This thread is about the story of MW2. What do you honestly expect to find in this thread? Seriously, if you enter a thread which will be about the story of MW2 you only got yourself to blame.
If you keep reading and then find out it's spoiled it's your fault because you where curious enough.
 

JourneyThroughHell

New member
Sep 21, 2009
5,010
0
0
Guys, I am pretty much a crazy MW2 fanboy but I really don't understand the people bashing its story or the people defending it.
For God's sake, it's an action game. The story doesn't really have to make sense. I am lazy to look but there are surely plotholes up the ass.
I can explain most of the plotholes like "Why did Sheppard get the chopper" or "Why was the guy just flying around in the Favela missions". IW did this so they could make a game. It could be 100% accurate but if they have to explain and change missions and cut out stuff, fuck that.

Also, on the topic of COD4 storyline, was that any good? It had little story with a ton of action movie stereotypes. And, honestly, that's how COD should be.
Modern Warfare was never about the story, it was about the moments, the scenes where you drop your jaw to the floor. I see all comments about MW2 pretending to being realistic. I didn't see that. I saw "The Rock" crossed with "Red Dawn". Realistic my ass.
Also, about that whole Russia invading America. I am Russian. I found that bit hilarious, just as I did Freedom Fighters and World In Conflict.
 

Jared

The British Paladin
Jul 14, 2009
5,630
0
0
spiritslayr said:
Lol, it does seem somewhat likely that ghost = gaz as I'm pretty sure they're voiced by the same person.
Yeah, I think its gotta be. Wouldnt be the same without Gaz XD
 

Kadayi

New member
Sep 6, 2007
21
0
0
CAW4 said:
Kadayi said:
CAW4 said:
Copying Yatzee doesn't make you look cool, it just shows how weak your argument really is, if you're just copying someone else's opinion, or can't come up with their own material for why it's bad.
Things that didn't make much sense to me.

1) Why on earth would a footsoldier get selected to become an undercover operative. Surely someone with a Russian Heritage and an undercover background would have been a better choice no?

2) What kind of terrorist leader knowingly puts himself in direct danger? The problem with No Russian from my perspective is the fact that it would only take 1 ying yang special forces with a sniper rifle to put a permanent end to Makarovs little scheme. Let alone the fact that there is no way that they'd have not been caught on camera, even if they did get away using the ambulance.

3) Shepard's motivation. That things go tits up and he's attempting to clean house is one thing, but what exactly was he trying to do before then?

If you've got logical answers that would be great.
And here's more easily countered arguments

1) The point is that he's going to die and get the U.S. implicated in the attack. It's all but said that for at least that part Makarov and Shepard are working together, since they both want a war against the U.S. but for different reasons; Makarov to simply kill Americans and Shepard to showcase the U.S. military's power.

2) Here's where 'it's a game' makes sense. Yes, it would probably be more realistic to simply let it be said that your character is working on Makarov's op, it plays more into a story perspective to show him as this evil civilian killing bastard. Who says he couldn't have had someone cut the feed for him, or have the Russian government suppress it, or as simple as when he's blowing away the guys running out of the security station, he put some rounds into the recording device as well as the security. The ambulance was simply to get out without a huge car chase.

3) And here's my problem with Escapists; they can't see a neon sign two feet in front of their faces. Remember the end of the game, when Shepard says "5 years ago, I lost 30000 men in the blink of an eye, and the world just fuckin' watched. Tomorrow, there will be no shortage of volunteers, no shortage of patriots. I know you understand." He's saying when the nuke went off in CoD4, none of the U.S. people cared about that little backwards nation being blown off, nor about the soldiers and Marines that died, so he wants to show the people of America that war is hell and we need people to fight in them by bringing the fight home. After Loose Ends he's simply trying to get rid of the evidence that Makarov has against him, and all the soldiers involved, so that the American people don't distrust their military leaders because of him.

P.S. Before people start going off against my comments in #2 (specificly "it's a game"), remember that, despite what some fanboys might say about its realism, the CoD series is, at its core, an arcade shooter. It's not a sim like Operation Flashpoint, and should be given leeway with the amount of realism in it. Anyone who doesn't take it as an arcade shooter has no right complaining about the game, if they can't be bothered to learn anything about it.

Makarov simply wants to kill Americans? Seems a little bit nebulous to me. I mean why exactly does Makarov want to kill Americans? What did they do? Bully him at school and steal his lunch money? See wanting to kill someone might be a desire, but it's not in itself a motivation. I want to see a motivation and you're not providing me with one. Sherpard wants to showcase the U.S Military power? So his grand plan is to go to war with Russia? Seriously? Why not instead use his elite special forces to crush the threat he's fighting in Afghanistan? Plenty of glory and no necessity to say, potentially kick off world war 3?

Also you don't get to cop out with 'we'll it's a game' as a counter argument I'm afraid. That's a clear a concession of defeat. You've argued that people have missed the point regarding the plot, yet when pressed you don't actually have a cohesive answer to the criticisms. The groping you make in your response to the issue of the airport surveillance demonstrates that in spades (as well as your telling omission in responding to the sniper aspect).
 

duchaked

New member
Dec 25, 2008
4,451
0
0
I had fun with it?

I mean, if I didn't, I'd probably be one who hates a lotta games then...and then I'd be one who'd spend all the time not gaming thinking about why I hate all those games, and then telling the Internet about it o_O

ah y'all are starting to make sense now...

but no, really
just have fun, guys (unless all this forum fighting is somehow fun)
and if you don't like it...stop thinking about it!
it's a great life style discipline, especially if you are in a real life/in person argument or coming out from one
 

Jack Baldwin

New member
Jan 11, 2010
7
0
0
All in all, I considered MW1's story much more epic and meaningful than MW2.

The entire flow and team-building in MW1 was awesome, switching from stealthy warfare to open-combat with the USA army. I loved it and the bad guys were not the typical bunch trying to conquer the world. The atomic bomb detonation and the sight afterwards just crushed my jaws. "Did this REALLY happen?" I was just sucked into the immersion so easily.

Also, the ending of MW1 was damn right epic. Seeing everyone die infront of me just enraged me and still being helpless. Shooting Zakhaev and his companions was the best shooting I've ever accomplished in any game. So much rage emptied with one single clip of a pistol.
 

maturin

New member
Jul 20, 2010
702
0
0
Ok who the fuck called Modern Warfare 2 the Citizen Kane of anything? I'll shoot them in the face.
 

MiracleOfSound

Fight like a Krogan
Jan 3, 2009
17,776
0
0
Tiamat666 said:
And the -heartbreaking-, impossible to disable music during the US levels was truly a test of willpower.
How could you ever want to turn off Hanz Zimmer?

I agree with all your points... thing is none of them bother me, I still found the game super fun. I enjoy the OTT silliness.
 

MiracleOfSound

Fight like a Krogan
Jan 3, 2009
17,776
0
0
JourneyThroughHell said:
Also, on the topic of COD4 storyline, was that any good? It had little story with a ton of action movie stereotypes. And, honestly, that's how COD should be.
Modern Warfare was never about the story, it was about the moments, the scenes where you drop your jaw to the floor. I see all comments about MW2 pretending to being realistic. I didn't see that. I saw "The Rock" crossed with "Red Dawn". Realistic my ass.
Also, about that whole Russia invading America. I am Russian. I found that bit hilarious, just as I did Freedom Fighters and World In Conflict.

GODDAMN YOU, JOURNEY! (loads up MW2 campaign for the 6th time)