Sick of MovieBob Bashing Call of Duty?

KrabbiPatty

New member
Jan 16, 2008
131
0
0
Uh...yes, he's the villain. I said that.

How does that change, anything. No one denies he's the villain the fact is that you're making the argument he represents Occupy, and you SAID JUST THAT, literally. YOU said:

"CoD is owned by Activision, a company that is worth $130.9 Billion dollars according to its stock value and total shares. This is exactly the size company the occupy protestors are opposing.

...

Now, not too long after the SOPA incident, but definitely long enough after to have conceivably written a script involving it, CoD comes out with the villains being firmly connected to Occupy, with online protest being shown as the primary vehicle for the group's popularity."


Now, unless you want to retract something, YOU made the claim that Activision is directly lampooning Occupy. I, meanwhile, asked for your reasoning (you still refuse to give it, instead going off on tangents about what you perceive trailers to "mean" despite the fact I PRESENTED YOU with cases which disprove your theory) and then you went on to further speculate:

"99% basically calls forth the occupy movement specifically to mind in anyone who sees it. It is THEIR thing. Putting the '99%' into a spot in the first few seconds of the trailer is extremely significant."

No, it isn't, or more specifically YOU HAVE NOT SHOWN WHY.

I however presented several alternate explanations, including ties to the Militia movement, a previous game in production base don the TEA PARTY (i.e, Militia 2.0) and the fact the name has possible religious implications. YOU continue to dismiss this and respond by telling me that Raul Menendez is the villain...no shit Sherlock. TWIST ENDING! The villain is villainous!

Again I ask--present evidence that Activision is attacking Occupy, or retract the damn statement. You're either wrong, and purposely obfuscating the situation to keep from admitting this, or you're incapable of understanding these themes existed long before and will continue long after Occupy, or both. And either way I suspect you wouldn't give a damn if it wasn't the hated, dreaded Call of Duty.

So, AGAIN, put up or shut up...you say they're based on Occupy, where is the statement that confirms this? Because the populist bullshit Occupy says is INDISTINGUISHABLE from the populist that the Militia movement says, and they've been around longer, are ACTUAL terrorists, and more likely to call themselves "Fortress of God" (assuming the other website was correct in that translation) than Occupy.

I get the feeling you're purposefully bullshitting me to keep from simply admitting you're wrong.
 

galdon2004

New member
Mar 7, 2009
242
0
0
KrabbiPatty said:
Uh...yes, he's the villain. I said that.

How does that change, anything. No one denies he's the villain the fact is that you're making the argument he represents Occupy, and you SAID JUST THAT, literally. YOU said:

"CoD is owned by Activision, a company that is worth $130.9 Billion dollars according to its stock value and total shares. This is exactly the size company the occupy protestors are opposing.

...

Now, not too long after the SOPA incident, but definitely long enough after to have conceivably written a script involving it, CoD comes out with the villains being firmly connected to Occupy, with online protest being shown as the primary vehicle for the group's popularity."


Now, unless you want to retract something, YOU made the claim that Activision is directly lampooning Occupy. I, meanwhile, asked for your reasoning (you still refuse to give it, instead going off on tangents about what you perceive trailers to "mean" despite the fact I PRESENTED YOU with cases which disprove your theory) and then you went on to further speculate:

"99% basically calls forth the occupy movement specifically to mind in anyone who sees it. It is THEIR thing. Putting the '99%' into a spot in the first few seconds of the trailer is extremely significant."

No, it isn't, or more specifically YOU HAVE NOT SHOWN WHY.

I however presented several alternate explanations, including ties to the Militia movement, a previous game in production base don the TEA PARTY (i.e, Militia 2.0) and the fact the name has possible religious implications. YOU continue to dismiss this and respond by telling me that Raul Menendez is the villain...no shit Sherlock. TWIST ENDING! The villain is villainous!

Again I ask--present evidence that Activision is attacking Occupy, or retract the damn statement. You're either wrong, and purposely obfuscating the situation to keep from admitting this, or you're incapable of understanding these themes existed long before and will continue long after Occupy, or both. And either way I suspect you wouldn't give a damn if it wasn't the hated, dreaded Call of Duty.

So, AGAIN, put up or shut up...you say they're based on Occupy, where is the statement that confirms this? Because the populist bullshit Occupy says is INDISTINGUISHABLE from the populist that the Militia movement says, and they've been around longer, are ACTUAL terrorists, and more likely to call themselves "Fortress of God" (assuming the other website was correct in that translation) than Occupy.

I get the feeling you're purposefully bullshitting me to keep from simply admitting you're wrong.
You told me they do not dislike the occupy movement, I gave evidence that shows that they have plenty of motivation to possibly dislike them. I even finished with saying that its wrong regardless of if they are politically motivated in this, or doing it for shock value because people will recognize '99%' as the occupy movement and make a fuss over it.

I've backed up what I have claimed within reasonable estimation. My point is, framing a political protest group as part of the villain's front especially when that group is real and active is in very poor taste regardless of the motivation behind it.
 

worldruler8

New member
Aug 3, 2010
216
0
0
KrabbiPatty said:
Uh...yes, he's the villain. I said that.

How does that change, anything. No one denies he's the villain the fact is that you're making the argument he represents Occupy, and you SAID JUST THAT, literally. YOU said:

"CoD is owned by Activision, a company that is worth $130.9 Billion dollars according to its stock value and total shares. This is exactly the size company the occupy protestors are opposing.

...

Now, not too long after the SOPA incident, but definitely long enough after to have conceivably written a script involving it, CoD comes out with the villains being firmly connected to Occupy, with online protest being shown as the primary vehicle for the group's popularity."


Now, unless you want to retract something, YOU made the claim that Activision is directly lampooning Occupy. I, meanwhile, asked for your reasoning (you still refuse to give it, instead going off on tangents about what you perceive trailers to "mean" despite the fact I PRESENTED YOU with cases which disprove your theory) and then you went on to further speculate:

"99% basically calls forth the occupy movement specifically to mind in anyone who sees it. It is THEIR thing. Putting the '99%' into a spot in the first few seconds of the trailer is extremely significant."

No, it isn't, or more specifically YOU HAVE NOT SHOWN WHY.

I however presented several alternate explanations, including ties to the Militia movement, a previous game in production base don the TEA PARTY (i.e, Militia 2.0) and the fact the name has possible religious implications. YOU continue to dismiss this and respond by telling me that Raul Menendez is the villain...no shit Sherlock. TWIST ENDING! The villain is villainous!

Again I ask--present evidence that Activision is attacking Occupy, or retract the damn statement. You're either wrong, and purposely obfuscating the situation to keep from admitting this, or you're incapable of understanding these themes existed long before and will continue long after Occupy, or both. And either way I suspect you wouldn't give a damn if it wasn't the hated, dreaded Call of Duty.

So, AGAIN, put up or shut up...you say they're based on Occupy, where is the statement that confirms this? Because the populist bullshit Occupy says is INDISTINGUISHABLE from the populist that the Militia movement says, and they've been around longer, are ACTUAL terrorists, and more likely to call themselves "Fortress of God" (assuming the other website was correct in that translation) than Occupy.

I get the feeling you're purposefully bullshitting me to keep from simply admitting you're wrong.
think you have me confused with the other guy you were arguing with.

As for the occupy thing, you are aware that the Occupy movement is an international one, right? The fact that this guy is a Nicaraguan only makes that a more relevant point. Since the game is set in the near future (only 13 years), it would make sense to base the villain in a recent new phenomenon. The fact that he's related to Occupy (remember, he IS NOT american, so this is MOST DEFINITELY the occupy movement) doesn't mean that activision is attacking the occupy movement, but it certainly means they don't fully support it (after all, why have something you support be related to the villain?). Not saying Activision is against them movement, but they aren't for it. And, really, the fact that this is in the game is irrelevant to their opinions on them. Treyarch added it to be relevant to the present.

Also, I did a bit of research, Activision had no official choice on SOPA, but a simple google search shows that a lot of forums, from multiple games, I might add, shows, quite clearly, that they supported the bill. (I'd give you links, but just google "activision sopa" and you'll get results)

"Cordis Die" is Latin for "The Heart"
 

Chimpzy_v1legacy

Warning! Contains bananas!
Jun 21, 2009
4,789
1
0
worldruler8 said:
"Cordis Die" is Latin for "The Heart"
If I remember my Latin right, a more correct translation would be 'day of the heart', from 'cordis', the genetive of cor (heart) and 'die', the ablative of dies (day).

edit: might be wrong tough. It's been a long time since studying Latin.
 

worldruler8

New member
Aug 3, 2010
216
0
0
chimpzy said:
worldruler8 said:
"Cordis Die" is Latin for "The Heart"
If I remember my Latin right, a more correct translation would be 'day of the heart', from 'cordis', the genetive of cor (heart) and 'die', the ablative of dies (day).

edit: might be wrong tough. It's been a long time since studying Latin.
would explain why it kept giving me an odd translation. I did Opus Die, and I got "of work day", so I assumed "die" meant something more of a superfluous title then simply day. which makes the title "day of the heart" a bit...interesting? wonder what it entails?
 

KrabbiPatty

New member
Jan 16, 2008
131
0
0
worldruler8 said:
KrabbiPatty said:
Uh...yes, he's the villain. I said that.

How does that change, anything. No one denies he's the villain the fact is that you're making the argument he represents Occupy, and you SAID JUST THAT, literally. YOU said:

"CoD is owned by Activision, a company that is worth $130.9 Billion dollars according to its stock value and total shares. This is exactly the size company the occupy protestors are opposing.

...

Now, not too long after the SOPA incident, but definitely long enough after to have conceivably written a script involving it, CoD comes out with the villains being firmly connected to Occupy, with online protest being shown as the primary vehicle for the group's popularity."


Now, unless you want to retract something, YOU made the claim that Activision is directly lampooning Occupy. I, meanwhile, asked for your reasoning (you still refuse to give it, instead going off on tangents about what you perceive trailers to "mean" despite the fact I PRESENTED YOU with cases which disprove your theory) and then you went on to further speculate:

"99% basically calls forth the occupy movement specifically to mind in anyone who sees it. It is THEIR thing. Putting the '99%' into a spot in the first few seconds of the trailer is extremely significant."

No, it isn't, or more specifically YOU HAVE NOT SHOWN WHY.

I however presented several alternate explanations, including ties to the Militia movement, a previous game in production base don the TEA PARTY (i.e, Militia 2.0) and the fact the name has possible religious implications. YOU continue to dismiss this and respond by telling me that Raul Menendez is the villain...no shit Sherlock. TWIST ENDING! The villain is villainous!

Again I ask--present evidence that Activision is attacking Occupy, or retract the damn statement. You're either wrong, and purposely obfuscating the situation to keep from admitting this, or you're incapable of understanding these themes existed long before and will continue long after Occupy, or both. And either way I suspect you wouldn't give a damn if it wasn't the hated, dreaded Call of Duty.

So, AGAIN, put up or shut up...you say they're based on Occupy, where is the statement that confirms this? Because the populist bullshit Occupy says is INDISTINGUISHABLE from the populist that the Militia movement says, and they've been around longer, are ACTUAL terrorists, and more likely to call themselves "Fortress of God" (assuming the other website was correct in that translation) than Occupy.

I get the feeling you're purposefully bullshitting me to keep from simply admitting you're wrong.
think you have me confused with the other guy you were arguing with.

As for the occupy thing, you are aware that the Occupy movement is an international one, right? The fact that this guy is a Nicaraguan only makes that a more relevant point. Since the game is set in the near future (only 13 years), it would make sense to base the villain in a recent new phenomenon. The fact that he's related to Occupy (remember, he IS NOT american, so this is MOST DEFINITELY the occupy movement) doesn't mean that activision is attacking the occupy movement, but it certainly means they don't fully support it (after all, why have something you support be related to the villain?). Not saying Activision is against them movement, but they aren't for it. And, really, the fact that this is in the game is irrelevant to their opinions on them. Treyarch added it to be relevant to the present.

Also, I did a bit of research, Activision had no official choice on SOPA, but a simple google search shows that a lot of forums, from multiple games, I might add, shows, quite clearly, that they supported the bill. (I'd give you links, but just google "activision sopa" and you'll get results)

"Cordis Die" is Latin for "The Heart"
Yeah sorry, I did get you two mixed up because I had been going at it with him for a while, sorry.

Anyway, I see no reason to assume one way or the other how Activision or Treyarch feels about Occupy because they have SAID nothing about Occupy. They're referring to some guy in the future who is using populism as a smoke screen to kludge together a reason for his megalomaniacal quest for global conquest. By that logic, Superman the Animated Series is a critique of corporate America because Lex Luthor is a psychotic villain who HAPPENS to hide his bullshit behind corporate pursuits, the same way this guy hides his bullshit behind the fact he CLAIMS to be a populist.

As for Cortis Die, I'm not entirely surprised it means something else, since "fortress of god" sounds a little too on the nose. That being said, Opus Die is, as far as I know, an organization associated with the religious right and the Militia movement has always been balls deep in that pool. This, combined with the fact that these people are NUKING A CITY in the E3 demo implies that at the very least they're disengenuous about "fighting for the people" and very likely closer to Timothy McVeigh than Michael Moore.

More so, and again, Occupy has gotten waaay too much cred in the media, especially amongst teenagers on the internet. No they're not an "international movement"--at best they're some first world white kids with a well-meaning but ill-formed agenda, and at worst they're basically just a distraction from people actually making a difference. The fact some people on twitter in Britain or Germany put a hashtag in their tweets, or stage a sit-in, doesn't mean that Occupy is any less the stereotypical shallow, "first world country problems", college campus bullshit you see every day on the internet. Meanwhile, actual people making an actual difference get no news at all because they aren't hip enough to encapsulate their views within a 140 character limit. Irony of ironies, Occupy's preferred method of "organizing" is only possible with the help of massive, juggernaut corporate douchebags like Facebook and Twitter.

And before any smartasses get the wrong idea, no, I'm not a conservative. I'm a liberal...an actual liberal, as in I take being called a "socialist" as a compliment. Which is why people like Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert co-opting the liberal title for their own petty, small-minded bullshit, or faux hippie sit-ins like Occupy getting all the good press, grates my fucking nerves. But if my teen years taught me anything, the popular cliques and their leaders always get the good press. #HighSchoolNeverEnds
 

worldruler8

New member
Aug 3, 2010
216
0
0
KrabbiPatty said:
Yeah sorry, I did get you two mixed up because I had been going at it with him for a while, sorry.

Anyway, I see no reason to assume one way or the other how Activision or Treyarch feels about Occupy because they have SAID nothing about Occupy. They're referring to some guy in the future who is using populism as a smoke screen to kludge together a reason for his megalomaniacal quest for global conquest. By that logic, Superman the Animated Series is a critique of corporate America because Lex Luthor is a psychotic villain who HAPPENS to hide his bullshit behind corporate pursuits, the same way this guy hides his bullshit behind the fact he CLAIMS to be a populist.

As for Cortis Die, I'm not entirely surprised it means something else, since "fortress of god" sounds a little too on the nose. That being said, Opus Die is, as far as I know, an organization associated with the religious right and the Militia movement has always been balls deep in that pool. This, combined with the fact that these people are NUKING A CITY in the E3 demo implies that at the very least they're disengenuous about "fighting for the people" and very likely closer to Timothy McVeigh than Michael Moore.

More so, and again, Occupy has gotten waaay too much cred in the media, especially amongst teenagers on the internet. No they're not an "international movement"--at best they're some first world white kids with a well-meaning but ill-formed agenda, and at worst they're basically just a distraction from people actually making a difference. The fact some people on twitter in Britain or Germany put a hashtag in their tweets, or stage a sit-in, doesn't mean that Occupy is any less the stereotypical shallow, "first world country problems", college campus bullshit you see every day on the internet. Meanwhile, actual people making an actual difference get no news at all because they aren't hip enough to encapsulate their views within a 140 character limit. Irony of ironies, Occupy's preferred method of "organizing" is only possible with the help of massive, juggernaut corporate douchebags like Facebook and Twitter.

And before any smartasses get the wrong idea, no, I'm not a conservative. I'm a liberal...an actual liberal, as in I take being called a "socialist" as a compliment. Which is why people like Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert co-opting the liberal title for their own petty, small-minded bullshit, or faux hippie sit-ins like Occupy getting all the good press, grates my fucking nerves. But if my teen years taught me anything, the popular cliques and their leaders always get the good press. #HighSchoolNeverEnds
I know I'm going to regret this, but I feel you still are off. I'll go paragraph by paragraph (ignoring the first, of course)

1. the phrase "the 99%" has become popularized by the Occupy movement. They might not be the only ones (for example, the military's families consider themselves the "1%", and the rest of America as "the 99%"), but if I say 99% to a random American, they will know I'm referring to the Occupy movement. Yes, the villain is most obviously using populism, but the Occupy movement is a very specific type of populism, being one that's very left-wing, and very people oriented. I know you might not agree that the 99% is about the Occupy Movement, I don't see what else they could refer to, as your points have ONLY been isolated incidents in the US, not Nicaragua (where the villain lives). He calls himself the "Messiah" because he's the leader the 99% needs, and Central America, as well as ALL of Latin America, is rather Catholic, so such religious symbolism is rather common. In Central America, there are also a lot of socialist countries, so, once again, this actually makes sense.

TL;DR It's about the Occupy movement. It couldn't be about anything else without being complete fiction

2. Cortis Die has nothing to do with Opus Dei, which is what you were trying to say. The very fact Cortis Die means "day of the heart" seems to not reference any specific religious denomination. I also couldn't find the video where the city was nuked. You'll have to find that for me. But I don't see how going from a far-left quasi communist villain who wants to conquer the world is in anyway related to Timonty McVeigh. He's not rebelling against the US, he's attacking it. Why? Because he wants power. He's not kicking down the tyrant. He IS the tyrant.

TL;DR This isn't a religious organization, and this isn't a grassroots movement. The 99% is a disguise, he isn't for the people.

3.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_movement
First line: "The Occupy movement is an international protest movement". Just because people are communicating via social media to communicate on a global scale does NOT mean this is an isolated event. While it certainly has lowered in popularity, and in many countries with high unemployment (such as Spain, with a whopping 25%), it is VERY relevant. You can think of it as ever you want, but it isn't simple white rich kids sitting on the campus smoking pot. This is much more complex then that.

TL;DR read the link.
 

ward0630

New member
Nov 25, 2009
48
0
0
I think he's trashing COD for what it represents, rather than what it is. What it is is shallow, explosive, incredibly brief and adrenaline fueled fun. Nothing particularly wrong with that. However, what it represents is the idea that a company can take 1 thing that was very successful and then keep reselling the product to people over and over again with no changes to the core gameplay and still rake in billions of dollars every year. That, to me, is disgusting, and COD deserves to be criticized for it.
 

Spartan448

New member
Apr 2, 2011
539
0
0
KrabbiPatty said:
More so, and again, Occupy has gotten waaay too much cred in the media, especially amongst teenagers on the internet. No they're not an "international movement"--at best they're some first world white kids with a well-meaning but ill-formed agenda, and at worst they're basically just a distraction from people actually making a difference. The fact some people on twitter in Britain or Germany put a hashtag in their tweets, or stage a sit-in, doesn't mean that Occupy is any less the stereotypical shallow, "first world country problems", college campus bullshit you see every day on the internet. Meanwhile, actual people making an actual difference get no news at all because they aren't hip enough to encapsulate their views within a 140 character limit. Irony of ironies, Occupy's preferred method of "organizing" is only possible with the help of massive, juggernaut corporate douchebags like Facebook and Twitter.

And before any smartasses get the wrong idea, no, I'm not a conservative. I'm a liberal...an actual liberal, as in I take being called a "socialist" as a compliment. Which is why people like Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert co-opting the liberal title for their own petty, small-minded bullshit, or faux hippie sit-ins like Occupy getting all the good press, grates my fucking nerves. But if my teen years taught me anything, the popular cliques and their leaders always get the good press. #HighSchoolNeverEnds
I'm sorry, but I find it very hard to take you seriously when you grossly missunderstand the Occupy movement, it's participants, and it's motives, and call out other people for "Bullshitting" you.

First and foremost, the Occupy movement is not just a bunch of first-world white kids. Your language here leads me to believe that you are not the most fond of White Americans. Contrary to your beliefs, the Occupy movement incorporates people from many different faiths and ethnicities. I even visited Zuccotti Park to conduct a few interviews for a school documentary. The majority of participants were not as you state, well-off College White kids, but were mostly African American or Asian, and did not claim to attend college.

Second, Occupy movements have cropped up in nations other than the US. Occupy lists ongoing operations all over the globe at their directory site (http://directory.occupy.net/), although I'm reasonably certain the one in Antartica is probably not real.

Third, Occupy has taken none of the press away from anyone making a difference today, and they are making quite a difference themselves. They certainly had police in Oakland worried thay they were facing a situation similar to that of the WTO protests in 1999, I believe.

Forth, Twitter is not actually a corporate juggernaught. It's not even traded on the open market, all of it's stock is private at this time. Also, at the time Occupy started up, Facebook had not yet gone public either. It and Twitter are also symbolic as being the organizational tool for movements in the Middle East that have, oh yeah, OVERTHROWN ENTIRE GOVERNMENTS.

Fifth, I am an ACTUAL Socialist (As in, I would LOVE to see the U.S. adopt early French Utopian Socialism), and you do not sound like someone who likes being called a Socialist.

Sixth, Stewart and Colbert are COMMEDIANS. Your point there has no relevance, as all you are doing is hating on things that are FUNNY. That even the people who are being made fun of find funny (Except maybe Fox News). That just makes you seem like the early Puritans. Who would probably be considered conservatives by today's standards.

Seventh, Occupy is not a "faux-hippie sit-in". There is no use of prohibited or contrabanned narcotics, and there is no music from bands from the 70's playing, and none of the remaining Beatles have made an appearance yet.

Ninth, my teen years taught me that no-one really cares about the popular cliques unless they're getting things done, in which case they're hated for doing bad things and adored for doing good. My teen years also taught me to always charge interest when you loan money to someone, even your friends, otherwise you'll never get it back.

Eleventh, I hope that your ice cream falls on your car's dashbord.
 

DioWallachia

New member
Sep 9, 2011
1,546
0
0
Just a thought, doesnt matter what the new CoD message is going to be, i am sure that they will change the game in the last minute with preplaned gameplay and cutscenes DEPENDING of who wins the election and pain THOSE people as the real bad guys all along in the game, resposibles for the 1% or whatever, to make us believe that the makers of CoD knew the truth all along and some bullshit like that.
 

Madgamer13

New member
Sep 20, 2010
116
0
0
Greets!

I didn't read any of this thread at all, ha-ha!

Whoever this MovieJoe guy is, I completely kinda-agree with whatever it is he said. I too love my Call of Battlefield 3: Modern FutureFare Brown Ops 3 Episode 3 Scene 3. I also enjoy paying new game price for DLC that changes the colour of the explosion at the end of CoB. It was totally worth it.

Did I succeed in blending into this blatantly hot inferno?

Also, what is the connection between this 'occupy' movement I hear nothing about and MovieBoB? How does 'occupy' relate to gaming? How does Tea and Party relate to eachother when Tea is not involved?

So many questions, so many answers.
 

DioWallachia

New member
Sep 9, 2011
1,546
0
0
Tony said:
I play Call of Duty for the story.
That its.....nice.

And while you are here, why dont you tell us about the plots of all the Call of Duty games, to see if being topical actually makes sense or a point during the context of the games?

After all, if they have been doing this all along, then it would make sense for people here to debate what could possibly be the point of having Oliver,the 99% AND the fact that the game is going to be released AFTER the election, to be related to the new game.

And now, my thoughts on the...priorities of the fellows that follow Bob. Specificaly the OP:
With ALL the bias that Bob has been giving around by NOT doing the research in the Metroid Other M, Mass Effect Retake, and the fact that he fails to notice certain aspects of the behind the scenes with "Tropes Vs Women in Videogames"....only with his comments on CoD is your ONLY PROBLEM with him? you kinda need to refocus your your priorities.



 

DioWallachia

New member
Sep 9, 2011
1,546
0
0
Tony said:
DioWallachia said:
Tony said:
I play Call of Duty for the story.
That its.....nice.

And while you are here, why dont you tell us about the plots of all the Call of Duty games, to see if being topical actually makes sense or a point during the context of the games?

After all, if they have been doing this all along, then it would make sense for people here to debate what could possibly be the point of having Oliver,the 99% AND the fact that the game is going to be released AFTER the election, to be related to the new game.
Americans win. That has been the story of every Call of Duty game and particularly, I like it. I actually like the plot for Modern Warfare 1,2, and 3.
So.....there is no political message? or if there is, its so pathetic that it is not worth noticing? Trying to be fair here, could it be that it was building up for something or that it was too subtle
 

DioWallachia

New member
Sep 9, 2011
1,546
0
0
Tony said:
Suki_ said:
Tony said:
Americans win. That has been the story of every Call of Duty game and particularly, I like it. I actually like the plot for Modern Warfare 1,2, and 3.
I havnt finished MW3 yet but hasnt the plot of these games so far been America fucks everything up and relies on other people to fix everything?
It's happy forever after for America in almost every Call of Duty. Even though from CoD Mw to Mw3, you mainly play as a British task force e.e
So i supose that the next game will be something like: "the 1% is a cover for the REAL ENEMY of MERRYCUN, THE FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER!! The USA will declare war against this evil god in the name of FREEDUME AND FOR GREAT JUSTICE!!!"

or just moar Middle Easterns. Dont fix what isnt broken isnt it?