Crysis 2 Writer Calls Modern Warfare 2 a Disappointment

[D_987]

I find both Modern Warfare games to be highly enjoyable and fun to play.

While CoD4 DID have the better, more realistic storyline, I think people are a little too quick to dismiss MW2's story.

Yes, the story was unrealistic, and yes, it was a little confusing. But here's the thing. It's unrealistic in an over-the-top kind of way. Watch any of the...what is it, 22 now?...James Bond films, and you'll realise that over-the-top action entertainment has been around for a long time.
Yes, it's unrealistic...but it's FUN! And for that, I accept MW2's story for what it is.

As for the confusion, I'll admit that it took me about 3 plays through the campaign to understand the story, and even now I'm still a little confused over some points. But here's the point...sometimes a plot is not meant to give you all the answers. Use the squishy thing in your head called a brain and TRY to figure things out for yourself!
I think IW should actually be credited for giving us a plotline that did not spoon-feed us all the answers! The plot had a sense of mystery to it, and the core of a good mystery story is simple: you're not supposed to know all the answers until the end (or at least until the massive plot twist).

Ok, seriously...

What are you talking about - how can you possibly reference a mindless, over-the-top action film and compare it with MW2, then, in the same post try to claim the story was confusing because you were meant to figure it out yourself...

The whole point of an action-film is that they are mindless. You can't have a complex story and an action-film because the pairings don't mix - the action diverts from the story and vice-versa. You choose to delude yourself if you must ("I'll admit that it took me about 3 plays through the campaign to understand the story, and even now I'm still a little confused over some points.") but that's not good storytelling - fact.

You don't let the player make up the story in an interactive video-game - that's what books do well, moves to an extent (cliffhangers) but video-games? In the second instalment of a massive franchise?

They clearly just messed up the storyline...

So while MW2's story IS unrealistic, and IS over-the-top, do not be too quick to associate UNREALISTIC with INADEQUATE.

Nobody ever said that not being realistic was bad...just that the storyline and the way it was told was abysmal...

 

[Lucifron]

I fully agree with the man; MW2's story was a disjointed mess. Not that I would call Crysis story at all inspiring either for that matter, but perhaps the author is not to be blamed for that bland piece of crap?

 

[-Drifter-]

As the story went, I thought it was actually quite good - sure it was short and whatnot, bad it was dramatic, had lots of action and stuff, etc etc. I don't care if its implausible - its a videogame for Pete sake, it doesn't have to be plausible! Would Monty Python (possibly the least plausible thing of all time) be considered bad writing?

Monty Python is an over-the-top comedy, not a "realistic" shooter.

Spoiler: PS:

If this has already been said, sorry, but I wasn't going to read through five pages of comments to find out.

 

[Chipperz]

Seeing as I think I was the only person in the world who got the story of Modern Warfare 2, I'm gonna have to say I found it good.

Better than Crysis, which was hilarious.

 

[hansari]

One has to accept that even in the realm of video games, there are people who refuse to turn their brains off, who have to (over-)analyse everything. That makes them neither better nor worse than those who can just not disregard those "couple of plot holes". But they will feel insulted and disappointed by a daft story.

With respect to the first ModernWarfare, the over-analyzing and expectations of playing another great single player campaign was a given. I don't over-analyze Gears of War though. Considering it never had cohesion, their is nothing to expect.

ModernWarfare 2 though...so disappointing. How is it that both games have the same writer?

Seeing as I think I was the only person in the world who got the story of Modern Warfare 2, I'm gonna have to say I found it good.

Enlighten us, oh sage of the Escapist.

- Plausibly explain how the Ultranationalists obtain leadership of Russia at the start of the game?

Weren't they just a fringe group before in MW1? Militant in nature, it makes sense they would be running around and find support from some people in the South, what with all the tension there is among the former Soviet states and Russia.

The idea of them taking over though is ludicrous. The best real-world example here would be Hamas. But Hamas, despite being terrorist, is base in a wildly unstable region. Being militant is favorable, as is the fact that when the bombs stop dropping, they funnel cash in to start rebuilding. This analogy can't fit with the Ultranationalists though as the instability is collected down in the South, where the population is modest compared to the other urban cities.

With respect to MW1, the idea of a pro-western middle eastern president (possibly corrupt) being overthrown by the military...I don't even need to dig up examples do I?

 

[Otterpoet]

MW2 is just another example of the Michael Bay syndrome currently corrupting the entertainment industry... surround an incoherent storyline with enough explosions and you can make money off the impressionable masses. It's a glitzy rail-shooter... but it's still crap.

 

[Tom Goldman]

The world doesn't seem to have the same opinion as Morgan, or care as much, considering how people have already played Modern Warfare 2 for 200,000 years [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/99811-Modern-Warfare-2-Players-Log-200-000-Gameplay-Years] on Xbox Live alone up to this point.

Irrelevant statistic ftw. I don't think the multiplayer really says much of what people think of the story, sorry Tom. I guess you wanted to shoehorn that stat in there somewhere, huh?

I know people who have prestiged multiple times and have never even started the story.

Yeah, you guys are right. Well, at least I can admit when I fail.

 

[Brad Shepard]

The first game dident have much of a story either

This guy has nukes

You go stop him

Nuke goes off

You go after said guy

Endgame

Airplane

Cut and dry to me.

 

[dehawaiiansupaman]

Its already been said but the story truly was just a Michael Bay movie. Big set pieces, lots of explosions, and zero story. I was pissed after beating it just because I'm not a big multiplayer guy and the first Modern warfare had such a good (and some what plausible) story. the second was just a tangled mess that was more confusing than entertaining. I know Shepard wanted to become a war hero and somehow bolster support for the military but the whole idea was pretty flimsy. The point with Russia disabling every security network in the US by looking at the hard drive of a crashed satellite was also pretty weak as well.

Also how the hell did Russia get to the East Coast? Wouldn't they have to pass through Europe? Or even if they went over the Arctic they would probably be detected by Canada. How did they invade the US with such a massive force without half the Western world noticing? Hell they would have been spiked by NATO systems as soon as they left Russia.

It didn't help it was barely four hours long.

 

[XelaisPWN]

Not only is this man completely correct about the single player, but with the removal of dedicated servers, the multiplayer sucked too.

What an overrated game...

 

[The Critic]

I have no problem with "Unrealistic" Stories, but I do have problems with incoherent, disjointed, plot-hole-riddled Stories.

Guess which catergory MW2 falls into.

 

[Varun Garuda Maharaj]

what the hell does he know?

 

[nightwolf667]

what the hell does he know?

I think the part where he's a critically acclaimed Science Fiction author who won the Phillip K. Dick award and has several novels published means that he knows a thing or two about plot development and character creation.