If they trained on Modern Warfare 2, then they most be like the worst terrorist to have ever lived :|
All Europeans are INSANE....Amnestic said:Russian MedisSuggests Modern Warfare 2 Trained TerroristsJumps The Shark.
Simply embarassing what kind of codswallop consistently continues to cruise through into people's TVs.
With the not insignificant difference that Die Hard 2 didn't open with John McClaine blowing up an airliner. MW2 puts you, the player... the hero, if you like... behind the gun, and it feels like a cop out that the ending of the level means you, the character, doesn't have to live with the consquences of your actions.SpiderJerusalem said:It's only as dumb as the person playing it wants it to be.
To me, it was pretty much a continuation of Michael Bay, Jerry Bruckheimer and John McTiernan films of the highest order. Consider the beginning of The Rock, with soldiers taking hostages in an American landmark, or any Die Hard movie (specifically part 2) where terrorists hold the lives of innocent passengers and civilians in their hands and in the worst cases do their worst to make sure the heroes are aware of the stakes.
(This may be my favourite misnaming ever!)No American
I've never quite been able to put my finger on why I find that level so distasteful. God knows I've played, and enjoyed, other more violent games - e.g. Postal 2, Saints Row 2, any number of GTAs. Possibly because the mayhem is an integral part of those games, whereas No Russian could be pulled - quite literally, given the skip option - and nothing would be lost. It feels cynical. Very cynical....was, as an opener to a clearly cinematic game, an eye opener as far as the stakes were involved. It wasn't pretty, it wasn't fun because it wasn't MEANT TO BE. The story needed a crime heinous enough to build a potential war on, an off-hand comment about something happening in some town wouldn't have been enough for people to actually care about what was happening - unless they were there in the first place with an attitude of "this is dumb, herp derp."
Red Dawn is, as you say, a cult classic, but that doesn't stop it being stupid, though it is an awesome example of 'better dead than red' paranoia.Also, considering that Red Dawn is considered a classic 80's actioner, your example is silly to say the least.
Except it isn't explored. Hold back and shoot noone or go nuts and kill 'em all - doesn't matter, because the bullet in the head at the end of the level kind of precludes further character development.SpiderJerusalem said:The character followed in the scene IS NOT the hero, he's an undercover agent (similar to the sequence in the first Modern Warfare that follows the soon to be executed prisoner), who's forced into a horrible situation while trying to stop even worse things from happening.
And you don't even have to pull the trigger once. Not a single time if you don't want to in the airport sequence. Which makes the scene even more chilling - being a person trying to do good and ending up losing your humanity in the process. It's something that's been explored in many, many undercover stories throughout the years.
I assure you this isn't a 'hissy fit.' I'm just observing that whilst almost everyone in this thread is coming out with the standard defence of video-games-do-not-cause-real-life-violence, when the point I'm trying to make is that MW2 set out to be controversial so why act surprised or defensive when it comes back on them?I can't help but laugh at the thought of you accepting something as juvenile and pointless as Saints Row and Postal 2 as fine, but then having a hissy fit over a scene in an action game about terrorism that at least tries to bring context and a why to the senselessness of that kind of violence in the first place.
No clearly this is all Red Dawns fault.danpascooch said:This is stupid, what we should ACTUALLY be blaming is the original Die Hard movie!