Modern Warfare will have White Phosphorus. Thoughts?

FakeSympathy

Elite Member
Legacy
Jun 8, 2015
3,089
2,800
118
Country
US
Just so we are clear, I am talking about the upcoming MW reboot and not the original game

So for the past few days, more and more details about the game were revealed. One of the things revealed was the killstreak. Most of them were your typical UAV coverage, care package, airstrikes, etc. However, one that got everyone's attention was the white phosphorus.

For those of you who never played Spec Ops: The Line, or generally have no idea what white phosphorus is, here's a little lesson for you; WP munitions are gaseous chemical weapons made from....well, white phosphorus. As an incendiary weapon, white phosphorus is pyrophoric (self-igniting), burns fiercely and can ignite cloth, skin, fuel, ammunition, and other combustibles. The fire from WP CANNOT be extinguished with regular means, and copper salt is the best solution anyone has ever been able to come up with.

The physical injuries are horrifying to say the least. Imagine a gas that causes you to be lit on fire, and you have to let the chemical fire burn you until there is nothing left to burn, and there is no way to put it out until you get out of the gas range. And even then it continues to burn. You are guaranteed 2nd-degree burn at minimum, with holes where the chemical have melted through your skin. The smokes are dense, meaning it won't clear out anytime soon. As the game's dialog goes, breathing in WP could cause severe damage to your lungs. There also have been reports of survivors suffering psychological trauma from what they had witnessed

Multiple countries have agreed to place bans on the usage of such deadly incendiary weapons on civilians. However, the bans does not include usage against military personnel and some nations have refused on the agreement and continues to use on civilians to this day.

It is MW2's "No Russian" all over again, except it's the internet that's on fire this time. Some are arguing to boycott and condemn the game entirely for depiction of using WP as entertainment, while others don't really care or have argued since it's a killstreak, no one is forced to use it.

What are your thoughts and if you were planning on getting the game, does this deter from doing so?
 

Dreiko_v1legacy

New member
Aug 28, 2008
4,696
0
0
It has nukes already, doesn't it? That's way worse.


If it never had anything of the sort this might have been slightly noteworthy but even then to me it's hypocritical to mind one thing and not mind all the dozens of conventional guns and grenades and so on which also can be used to commit war crimes just as well.



But yeah, never was a fan of CoD so this changes nothing for me, not much into shooters. :p
 

Gordon_4_v1legacy

New member
Aug 22, 2010
2,577
0
0
I?m just imagining that scene from Dredd when he uses I?m petty sure this exact same thing on some of Ma-Ma?s thugs. It?s literally my only visual reference for the stuff.
 

Gergar12_v1legacy

New member
Aug 17, 2012
314
0
0
Don't like COD, won't play this game for other reasons.

As for WP, maybe an international agreement on it would help, but with the New Cold War 2 being fueled against China and Russia I doubt we could see an arms reduction agreement.

Maybe if Sanders or Warren became president we could stop using it.
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 4, 2014
9,651
2,173
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Don't really see an issue. What, people can kill each other in all sorts of grizzly ways in multiplayer, but suddenly WP crosses the line?
 

Silentpony_v1legacy

Alleged Feather-Rustler
Jun 5, 2013
6,760
0
0
Hawki said:
Don't really see an issue. What, people can kill each other in all sorts of grizzly ways in multiplayer, but suddenly WP crosses the line?
That's kinda where I'm at. I don't get the controversy here. War is war
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
sgy0003 said:
It is MW2's "No Russian" all over again, except it's the internet that's on fire this time.
Oof. Poor choice of words.

I always find it curious that people will look at games that in the real world wouold qualify as attrocities or war crimes, but that one thing comes along that somehow is too far.

For my part, I can't see myself caring.

But I haven't played a CoD in years, so I wasn't going to buy it anyway.
 

FakeSympathy

Elite Member
Legacy
Jun 8, 2015
3,089
2,800
118
Country
US
Just to clarify, I am not in support over the controversies. Players have been killing each other since COD4 Multiplayer dropped, and now it's an issue?

WTF
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Mar 15, 2008
14,330
1,515
118
I'm likely getting the game (not for multiplayer so I won't get it until it is nice and cheap because I love me some Single Player CoD and am super happy that's coming back) and this does not deter me in any way.

It's a video game. I find it so weird how we can do all this shit to each other in games but THIS is where the line gets drawn as too far? Especially considering Napalm has been a killstreak perk forever and I'm going to guess that burning to death in a blast of napalm likely wouldn't be that much more pleasant than burning to death in a blast of white phosphorus...
 
Jan 27, 2011
3,740
0
0
Gordon_4 said:
I?m just imagining that scene from Dredd when he uses I?m petty sure this exact same thing on some of Ma-Ma?s thugs. It?s literally my only visual reference for the stuff.
Yeah, it's pretty much that, only on a larger scale. I immediately correlated the two when I saw that scene as well.

In any case, Spec Ops The Line exists and shows us how completely monstrous the use of the stuff is. I'm kinda baffled that they're using it here considering how niche/taboo of a weapon it is and how viciously it was critiqued in SPTL.

...But hey, it's a video game, made by one of the biggest and least concerned about anything other than making fistfuls of cash publishers. They won't care, so why should we? Let's just treat it like the disposable cheetos fodder it is and move on.

I'm more upset that the stuff still sees use in the modern day. Seriously, it's the worst kind of being burned alive.
 
Nov 9, 2015
323
80
33
This controversy is dumb. Every Vietnam themed game has WP in it, including COD and Battlefield. WP was the igniter for napalm bombs. Go watch real life bombing footage and you can see the white trails clear as day.
 

BrawlMan

Lover of beat'em ups.
Legacy
Mar 10, 2016
26,975
11,301
118
Detroit, Michigan
Country
United States of America
Gender
Male
Don't give shit; people are bitching for the sake of bitching and thinking what they say matters.
 

Dirty Hipsters

This is how we praise the sun!
Legacy
Feb 7, 2011
7,926
2,287
118
Country
'Merica
Gender
3 children in a trench coat
Hawki said:
Don't really see an issue. What, people can kill each other in all sorts of grizzly ways in multiplayer, but suddenly WP crosses the line?
Pretty much this.

What exactly makes this worse than Napalm was in Cod Blops?
 

Worgen

Follower of the Glorious Sun Butt.
Legacy
Apr 1, 2009
14,481
3,436
118
Gender
Whatever, just wash your hands.
I don't see what makes it worse then napalm. You do plenty of things that would be considered war crimes in those games.
 

SckizoBoy

Ineptly Chaotic
Legacy
Jan 6, 2011
8,681
199
68
A Hermit's Cave
sgy0003 said:
It's no worse than anything else mankind has weaponised, but I do consider it in poor taste. WP's inclusion in SO:tL was to illicit a psychological response in the player that (while the reality of its occurrence is both unreasonable to expect and impossible to attain by the medium of a game) approaches, in whatever small way, that of military psychiatric casualties.

I feel it's inclusion in any CoD game would be simply for the sake of... here's a nifty weapon to go kill dem bads with.

It's a whole issue I have with military FPS's in general and I am admittedly greatly conflicted about it.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
18,675
3,588
118
sgy0003 said:
There also have been reports of survivors suffering psychological trauma from what they had witnessed...Multiple countries have agreed to place bans on the usage of such deadly incendiary weapons on civilians. However, the bans does not include usage against military personnel and some nations have refused on the agreement and continues to use on civilians to this day.
Well, yes, but the same applies to any deadly weapon. WP is also good for setting things other than people on fire, and gives you a cloud of hot white smoke.
 

Squilookle

New member
Nov 6, 2008
3,584
0
0
I mean, it's old hat now that Spec Ops already played that card, but otherwise it's not much different from all the other horrific modern weapons in COD that are deemed a crime to use against civilians.

As a player of Verdun, which has Chlorine and friggen Mustard Gas in it, I don't have any grounds to stand against WP in COD. Not that I would, either. If COD really wants people to second guess going off to war, this may end up being a pretty good tool to show that.
 

stroopwafel

Elite Member
Jul 16, 2013
3,031
357
88
It's fine by me. It's just a stupid game that has zero bearing in reality. In Spec Ops they atleast tried to be somewhat informative about it's horrific effects but that is probably too much to ask for CoD.