Leaked Modern Warfare 2 Opening Will Be Controversial

Wolfy4226

New member
Sep 22, 2009
297
0
0
WanderFreak said:
It's a good thing no one else has ever made a game where you slaughter mass numbers of innocent people as a heartless terrorist.


That doesn't count.
No, that counts...Alex is specifically said to be a psychopath by one of the web of intrigues, and is basically a terrorist. (Hell, his "'No, their all dead...except me.'*Smile*" line should have told you that..)

The difference is that you aren't told Alex is a Psychopath directly. You need to search for it.

This is the opening of the game, something all you have to do is select new game to watch/play. o3o
 

Wolfy4226

New member
Sep 22, 2009
297
0
0
Frybird said:
UPDATE

This scene is now confirmed to be real, however, if you want to, you can skip the scene beforehand

http://www.vg247.com/2009/10/28/confirmed-leaked-mw2-civilians-vid-as-real-skippable-through-checkpoints/

"Showing the cold-bloodedness" sounds like a rather weak justification for adding so much shock value, but i am definitely relieved that the game gives you the choice if you actually want to play something like this.

However, i don't know yet if i want to play it...
Tell me...is it the Cold Blooded Violence against civilians that gets you, or is it the fact that you, the player, are the one causing it that is bothering you so much? o3o If this scene was in a movie, it wouldn't be causing such a big controversy already, IMO. o3o

Then again, if something like this gets to you, I'd hate to see you try and play Saints Row 2 or GTA. >_>
 

xscoot

New member
Sep 8, 2009
186
0
0
Frybird said:
Here's my opinion, for anyone who cares after 5 pages:


I played many so-called controversial Games, like Manhunt or the Columbine thing, and had no qualms with it...but this crosses a line for me.
Exactly. In other games, random murder means nothing. But in this game, people are actually opposed to it. Gamers that played the most violent games in the world are being challenged by this scene. It's absolutely genius, and really sends a message; we still have morality.

I'd post this under "Games as Art".
 

mrx19869

New member
Jun 17, 2009
502
0
0
sorry this could never be as bad as the terrorist using Microsoft office flight simulator to plan the 911 attacks...
 

Slayer_2

New member
Jul 28, 2008
2,475
0
0
Honestly, if you're a CIA agent and can shoot the terrorists in the back, I will have so much fun playing that level. If not, you could always not shoot anything and let the other guys do it. It's a game, the only people getting pissy over it will be Fox News and uneducated mothers.
 

CosmicCommander

Friendly Neighborhood Troll?
Apr 11, 2009
1,544
0
0
I am about to say an unprecedented thing here...

I actually object to this
I'll let that sink in for a minute.

Don't get me wrong, I don't want to stop the game shipping, but I'll probably not shoot anyone, I would be disgusted if I stooped down to any form of terrorism.
 

Low Key

New member
May 7, 2009
2,503
0
0
I'm not sure what to make of this yet. On one hand, killing innocent people is MW2 is no different from killing innocent people in GTA, Fable, or any other sandbox game. On the other, it seems they did this simply to BE controversial, as if to entice people to play it on shock alone and why they made it skippable.
 

WlknCntrdiction

New member
May 8, 2008
813
0
0
It's just a game tbh. Probably the most basic answer you could get, people are so sensitive over small things, the civilians you're "killing" are just polygons, really you shouldn't have any emotional attachment to them. Even in the most heart rending of game stories I'm aware that they're polygons, the story will surprise me but I won't feel any emotions towards it, it's stupid to really.
 

ae86gamer

New member
Mar 10, 2009
9,009
0
0
I found and update about this.

Apparently vg247.com [http://www.vg247.com/] received a statement from Activision, where they confirmed that the video was real.

Here's what they said:

Activision:

"Yes it is. The scene establishes the depth of evil and the cold bloodedness of a rogue Russian villain and his unit. By establishing that evil, it adds to the urgency of the player's mission to stop them."

"Players have the option of skipping over the scene. At the beginning of the game, there are two 'checkpoints' where the player is advised that some people may find an upcoming segment disturbing. These checkpoints can't be disabled.

"Modern Warfare 2 is a fantasy action game designed for intense, realistic game play that mirrors real life conflicts, much like epic, action movies. It is appropriately rated 18 for violent scenes, which means it is intended for those who are 18 and older."
Source [http://www.vg247.com/2009/10/28/confirmed-leaked-mw2-civilians-vid-as-real-skippable-through-checkpoints/]
 

soren7550

Overly Proud New Yorker
Dec 18, 2008
5,477
0
0
Can. Not. WAIT!!!

SPOILER!!
(is it possible that the guy who's shot at the end is Ghost?)
 

LazerLuger

New member
Mar 16, 2009
86
0
0
Just to spite you all, I'll be buying and supporting this game, playing through the airport mission, quite possibly choosing to gun down innocents. Why?

Specifically because it chooses to cross those boundaries. If games are going to get the same level of respect as other medium, it needs to be willing to tackle tough issues like how humans are cold-blooded, horrible creatures. I felt a shocked watching that footage, but the point is that I felt it. I have never felt serious emotion from a game in my life. It is said that good art can make you feel something, in which case MW2 delivered. Besides, it handled the event very tastefully. No booing of the villains or glorifying of their actions. They just walk in and do something horrific, a casual reminder that under all the cinematic action, we get a cold reminder that, as Yahtzee said, "People are shit". I hope this game is successful, because if we can maturely handle things in a game like this, maybe we can touch on other things that have only been accessed by movies and books. There's always the argument that games are just supposed to be fun. Maybe, but why is that limited just to games. You wouldn't call Schindler's List a "Fun" movie, but it's still very good. What I'm just wondering is, will video games ever be able to have their own "Schindler's List"?
 

Frybird

New member
Jan 7, 2008
1,632
0
0
Wolfy4226 said:
Frybird said:
UPDATE

This scene is now confirmed to be real, however, if you want to, you can skip the scene beforehand

http://www.vg247.com/2009/10/28/confirmed-leaked-mw2-civilians-vid-as-real-skippable-through-checkpoints/

"Showing the cold-bloodedness" sounds like a rather weak justification for adding so much shock value, but i am definitely relieved that the game gives you the choice if you actually want to play something like this.

However, i don't know yet if i want to play it...
Tell me...is it the Cold Blooded Violence against civilians that gets you, or is it the fact that you, the player, are the one causing it that is bothering you so much? o3o If this scene was in a movie, it wouldn't be causing such a big controversy already, IMO. o3o

Then again, if something like this gets to you, I'd hate to see you try and play Saints Row 2 or GTA. >_>
The First one, but it is more complicated than that.

For me, it is about a combination of many things, starting that i feel uncomfortable with the scene being very eager to recreate real-life terrorism (as opposed to the crazy antics of the Saints Row Games), with a focus letting your victims act realistically (actually something i already felt pretty dirty about some of the "Euphoria-Features" of GTA IV) and generally being dead serious (wich even GTA IV really wasn't)....in a game that is essentially a Michael Bay Movie (so there is no real purpose or message to that scene other than "Woah, look how evil they [you] are!!1").

My problem is that i cannot really abstract the senseless violence here. In...i dunno, a fantasy role playing game, i'd happily slaughter entire villages with fireballs and summoned skeletons for giggles. In Hitman, you could go on a killing spree and slaughter innocents along with the people you are supposed to kill (and are generally "Evil!!" anyways), but it's not the way i am supposed to play it, and the game will actually punish me for that (even if just very lightly).
In fact, if MW2 would show me scenes like this in a cutscene, i wouldn't mind much.

But when the game expects from me to perform a unironic and fairly believable act of terrorism, just to prove a point that is actually rendered moot by letting me partake in it, THEN it's just appalling for me and i just don't want to play something like that.

(And, once again, since the rest of the game probably amounts to just slightly more than a tough-guy-80ies-action-flick, the whole thing does not make sense to me)
 

Kuhly

New member
Oct 22, 2009
38
0
0
So as always the game industry answer to be more adult is to give the player a big gun and kill things. Wow where have I seen that before (sarcasm off). I'm siding with this is stupid crowed they could have made a better effort to present the scene. Like making you play a civilian trying to get away or a security guard trying feebly to protect people not give the player a big and kill shit.

Come on people this kids stuff why can't the game industry grow the fucking hell up.
 

John Funk

U.N. Owen Was Him?
Dec 20, 2005
20,364
0
0
bagodix said:
xscoot said:
I'd post this under "Games as Art".
LOL!!!!

It isn't "art," it just tries to realistically show what it's like when terrorists go on a shooting spree in a public place. It's not like we haven't seen this sort of thing before in movies. And despite the fact that this is more realistic than what's been done before, there also isn't anything new about the player killing civilians in video games.

This is yet another manufactured "controversy" about nothing, like Resident Evil 5's and Left 4 Dead 2's "racism" and Mass Effect's alien rape orgies and whatnot. Some journalist somewhere was Outraged and now the gaming press is playing into it because it generates traffic. I wonder what nonsense we will see when the next Outrage occurs?

This is a non-issue. Yeah, it's nice that a war game is taking another step further in terms of realism (the first Modern Warfare already did some interesting things), but this "controversy" is bullshit.
I beg to differ. There was no "outrage" before this post was made, and this incident is very, very different from the ones you describe. This is not perceived racism or misrepresenting Mass Effect's sex scene as an "alien rape orgy," (which every gamer knew was a sham) this is putting people in the role of a terrorist massacring innocents. And if you read the thread, you would know that there are lots of people - gamers even - who feel uncomfortable with the idea.

There will be controversy and outrage from non-gamers (or even some gamers), and I assure you it won't be manufactured.

Kuhly said:
So as always the game industry answer to be more adult is to give the player a big gun and kill things. Wow where have I seen that before (sarcasm off). I'm siding with this is stupid crowed they could have made a better effort to present the scene. Like making you play a civilian trying to get away or a security guard trying feebly to protect people not give the player a big and kill shit.

Come on people this kids stuff why can't the game industry grow the fucking hell up.
You're completely missing the point.

Did you ever play Shadow of the Colossus? The game went out of its way to present your actions as evil. You were ambushing innocent creatures and slaughtering them, and the developers clearly intended to make gamers feel uncomfortable about what they were doing in order to evoke an emotional reaction.

This is the same thing. My guess is Infinity Ward chose to put the player as the terrorist so they would feel disgusted at what they were doing. If you play as a security guard, you don't see the carnage, or you become a standard FPS badass, picking off the terrorists who then don't come off as evil so much as incompetent. By making you gun down defenseless civilians, they get their point across perfectly.
 

Kajaho

New member
Oct 22, 2009
31
0
0
RABLE RABLE RABLE! DAHHHHH RABLE RABLE RABLE!!!!
DURR > HURR
RABLE RABLE RABLE!
 

ReverseEngineered

Raving Lunatic
Apr 30, 2008
444
0
0
I welcome this kind of footage, even if it's only a cutscene. You know why? Because we've been idealizing our own military for far too long.

Let's make a game about a young man growing up in Afghanistan. His mother was killed by rioting militants, his sister was raped by some random man who had the "right" to take advantage of her, and his father recently died trying to defend his country against Americans searching for Osama bin Laden. Now that he's of age, he decides to fight back against America for the damage it has caused him.

Tell me, is this any better or worse than the same view of an American soldier fighting unnamed Middle Eastern terrorists?

I know the media, the religious zealots, and the over-protective parents don't see it this way, but as a gamer, I do. It actually bothers me that I'm always playing the heroic American soldier whose genocide is justified because they are "the enemy". Why can't I play as the other side? Why are they somehow evil?

That's one of the things I liked best about CounterStrike. There was no story, no morale imperative, no obvious overtone that "we are right", it was just one group of people vs. another: terrorists vs. counter-terrorists. Each had their own weapons, their own reasons, and their own goals. It didn't matter to me which team I played, because I could always understand why one side would fight the other.

So why do we insist on pretending that the Americans are the good guys? It doesn't matter if it's WWI, WWII, or some imaginary WWIII -- it's always the Americans vs. the Russians, the Germans, or the unnamed Middle Easterners. Frankly, there are more people in the world than Americans. I'm a Canadian, and despite our integral part in WWI, WWII, and even America's fight with Afghanistan, you never see anything about the courageous Canadians who sacrificed their lives to fight somebody else's war. What about the poor Afghan people who were slaughtered because Bush was looking for some invisible spectre supposedly hiding in their country? What about the Jews and Germans alike who died trying to defend their country, even while it was being lead by a dictator who wanted them dead?

The world isn't black and white and there isn't always a right and wrong side. If parents and the media want to freak out about a single cutscene that shows the player acting as a Middle Eastern terrorist, maybe they should take a look at their own government and military, who are glorified as they terrorize millions of people in foreign countries.

If the whole purpose of this cutscene was to make the player "sick" to give them a motivation to kill the ragheads, then it's deplorable, not because it shows Middle Eastern people killing Americans, but because it's just another piece of propaganda to incite racial hatred.

If they think it's offensive to see footage of "terrorists" bombing an American airport, let's show them footage of Americans bombing Hiroshima, killing hundreds of thousands of people and permanently damaging millions more. Killing innocent civilians is always offensive, no matter whose side they are on.
 

duchaked

New member
Dec 25, 2008
4,451
0
0
T-Bone24 said:
The video is not working. But from what I read, I can only assume this will be blamed for "encouraging and training terrorists". I can see the headline now:

"NEW TERROR GAME ALLOWS YOUR CHILD TO MURDER AND TERRORISE"
if a girl beat her boyfriend to death with a video game case, they will probably start debating about the violence of video games rather than...I don't know, bipolar disorder, chronic disorder, anger management, teenage relationships...but no, blame video games lol