Think Modern Warfare 2 is already controversial?

[Internet Kraken]

Well to any gamer this will be fine.
in fact to any human being this should be fine.
people are way to touche' these days.
its a fucking game.
get the fuck over it.
sorry for my hash language however this is something i feel strongly about.
what is the human race coming to.
have we nothing better to do but start a controversy over some fucking pixels shooting some other fuckin pixels?

in the end anyone who is NOT a gamer may find it controversial. in fact this will be held above the head of "violent video games = violent people" argument.

however any twat who decides this is wrong is nothing but a mere idiot and should be shunned from society. get over it. god. some people can be such r-tards. >.>

I don't understand this logic.

Assuming this scene is a significant event in the game, then I can understand why they would put it in. It establishes how brutal and disgusting the big bad is. It forces the player out of there comfort zone to show them the horrors of war. You're supposed to get emotional. That's the only point I can see to the inclusion of such a horrific event.

But if it's just a game, and not meant to be taken seriously, then what would be the point of such a scene? If you're not supposed to get emotional over this, then I can't imagine why they would include this in the game. It would just be tasteless. I think the developers want us to treat it as more than just a game.

I'm not saying you shouldn't feel emotion, i'm merely saying its utter none-sense to make it into something controversial.

The only people that made this scene controversial is Infinity Ward. They know that one of the biggest fears in our current society is terrorism. They used that fear to create (what could potentially be) an incredibly powerful scene in the game. It's supposed to be controversial. If you think some people being offended by this is ridiculous then.....well you need to think from other peoples perspectives.

If this scene wasn't being controversial, it wouldn't have such a big impact.

 

[clixx13]

Brainless, I said it once and I'll say it again.

The world isn't black and white. Killing isn't killing. Killing a slave for dropping his tools is not the same as killing a mugger in self-defense. Killing a "lawful enemy combatant" as outlined in Geneva Conventions is not the same as killing unarmed civilians in an airport.

War and terrorism are not synonymous, furthermore. An act of war and an act of terrorism are not and will never be the same thing.

 

[clixx13]

Well to any gamer this will be fine.
in fact to any human being this should be fine.
people are way to touche' these days.
its a fucking game.
get the fuck over it.
sorry for my hash language however this is something i feel strongly about.
what is the human race coming to.
have we nothing better to do but start a controversy over some fucking pixels shooting some other fuckin pixels?

in the end anyone who is NOT a gamer may find it controversial. in fact this will be held above the head of "violent video games = violent people" argument.

however any twat who decides this is wrong is nothing but a mere idiot and should be shunned from society. get over it. god. some people can be such r-tards. >.>

People are too sensitive and think their beliefs hold more weight than your rights. After all if it offends them then they should never have to see it, even if it is THEIR choice to view and watch this event. But since the option is there for them to be offended clearly it has to just be removed so they have no option to be offended. See how it works? You get no rights because someone might be offended.

On topic for the game, war is brutal, and if you're going to play a game that depicts war and all the things that make it brutal, you might have to do somethings that you may find unethical. Maybe like the soldiers in reality that had to kill armed children?

No one said it had to be removed. You and brainless are the ones putting these words into everyone's mouths and you should really stop doing it.

 

[brainless906]

Brainless, I said it once and I'll say it again.

The world isn't black and white. Killing isn't killing. Killing a slave for dropping his tools is not the same as killing a mugger in self-defense. Killing a "lawful enemy combatant" as outlined in Geneva Conventions is not the same as killing unarmed civilians in an airport.

War and terrorism are not synonymous, furthermore. An act of war and an act of terrorism are not and will never be the same thing.

True, very true.

however how can somebody be disgusted by killin a civilian and not an enemy soldier?
its still killing.
you are taking a human life.
regardless of who it is.
if you so disgusted by one kind of killing and not the other then you must have some means of deciding its ok to kill.
my point being its STILL KILLING.
Either you Disturbed by killing or your not.
other killings being better then some killings? its still killing damn it.
you just dont seem to get it get it at all.


i suppose i'm being more philosophical then some people can handle.
no offence.

 

[Snotnarok]

Well to any gamer this will be fine.
in fact to any human being this should be fine.
people are way to touche' these days.
its a fucking game.
get the fuck over it.
sorry for my hash language however this is something i feel strongly about.
what is the human race coming to.
have we nothing better to do but start a controversy over some fucking pixels shooting some other fuckin pixels?

in the end anyone who is NOT a gamer may find it controversial. in fact this will be held above the head of "violent video games = violent people" argument.

however any twat who decides this is wrong is nothing but a mere idiot and should be shunned from society. get over it. god. some people can be such r-tards. >.>

People are too sensitive and think their beliefs hold more weight than your rights. After all if it offends them then they should never have to see it, even if it is THEIR choice to view and watch this event. But since the option is there for them to be offended clearly it has to just be removed so they have no option to be offended. See how it works? You get no rights because someone might be offended.

On topic for the game, war is brutal, and if you're going to play a game that depicts war and all the things that make it brutal, you might have to do somethings that you may find unethical. Maybe like the soldiers in reality that had to kill armed children?

No one said it had to be removed. You and brainless are the ones putting these words into everyone's mouths and you should really stop doing it.

I'm not sure what you're talking about, I wasn't putting words in anyone's mouth that's what you're doing here. Feel free to disagree with me but I'm saying that people getting offended is idiotic when it's their option to play to begin with. If that's something you disagree with then fine it's your right but I think my post was on topic since it's about controversy.

 

[clixx13]

"you must have some means of deciding its ok to kill."

There are means of deciding it's okay to kill. I can feel happiness for a women who barely escaped death by killing her violent spouse during his fit of rage. I am justified by being glad that she killed him. His aim for killing her was rage, jealousy, whatever. Her aim for killing him was the preservation of her own life at the cost of his. I believe this taking of life is justified. It is still killing but context applies everywhere. You aren't being philosophical, you're being unrealistic.

 

[clixx13]

Snotnarok, you absolutely did say that.

"But since the option is there for them to be offended clearly it HAS TO JUST BE REMOVED so they have no option to be offended. See how it works? You get no rights because someone might be offended."

 

[brainless906]

If it's a non-interactive cutscene, fine.

But if they force me to kill innocents as a terrorist, that's way too far for me. Sorry, I find that disgusting, even though it's not real.

Im very confused by this....
you are very ok with killing an enemy Soldier...but not a civilian?
Now dont get me wrong, there IS a differance...HOWEVER you find it Disgusting?
...killing is killing...either way..now since you seem to have decided it matters not that they are pixels i'm going to take this in the most realistic sense i can.

you find killing a civilian Disgusting but not the "bad-guy" equally as disgusting?
hmm, you logic is flawed based PURELY on the fact that from the terrorist's point of view the other people are the bad guys...so it should be ok in you little world....

I.E. its not ok to kill somebody from American army but its perfectly legitimate to kill a nazi correct? its still killing. moraly an killing is wrong...but suddenly its differant is it? you right nazi's dont have families...beliefs...emotions...yes?

my point being EITHER WAY YOU KILLING SOMEBODY! if just killing Innocent people is you problem then there is more of a problem then you think.

i.e. you are completely willing to point a gun and shoot a man simply because he's labeled bad guy?


you may not enjoy killing a civilian as a terrorist however you find it fine as the hero of the story?

like i've said MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY games allow you to kill innocent civilians as the HERO but suddenly your the badguy and its wrong?

utter non-sense.

Okay, firstly, there is no "logic" to this. It's a feeling, it's just how this makes me feel. I don't logically evaluate my feelings, they just happen.

Yes, many games have let you kill innocent people before, but NO game has put you in the specific role of a terrorist, given you a gun and a helpless target, and said "Kill him in the name of terrorism".

Of course I don't mind killing the "bad guys" as you say, simply because they're bad. They've done something to wrong me, and they're trying to kill me. Also, I'm completely desensitized to killing enemies in games, to the point where I don't even think about it. Who thinks about killing a Nazi? No one. Sure he's got a family, but he's a dirty Jew-killer and he's trying to kill me.

You know when people ask the question "Do you believe there are acceptable circumstances for murder?" Many people would say killing is wrong, but under specific circumstances, it is OK, like in self-defense. Same with this. I think killing is fine in games, like every other person that isn't Jack Thompson, but under these specific circumstances, it disgusts me.

How would you like a game where you play as the Nazis? Maybe you're the manager of a concentration camp, and you can use the Wii Remote for executions! It's in bad taste, and I feel nauseous just thinking about it. In essence, this is the same thing, killing innocents for no reason.

Finally, this is a big step for gaming. Never before has a game done something this controversial, and with such realism. Everyone is shocked at this news. Forgive me if my gut reaction does not mach yours.

I don't care if you think my opinion and feelings are "utter nonsense". If you can't see why this would possibly upset anyone in the slightest, or that people have differing opinions than you, than your username really does describe you well.

ok first of i'm merely posting [bold] MY OPINION [/bold]

i.e. your argument is equally as retarded as you say mine is.

I dont know why everyone assumes that if your on the internet and you argue a point then you are officially an idiot because your care not for others opinions.

In fact realize you have an opinion, i in fact also realize you have every right in the world to have said opinion, more or less i respect you for your opinion.

However it makes it significantly harder to respect you opinion when you turn around and imply that I have no right to put my opinion next to yours.

if you're going to simply put "aaaah, its my opinion so its un-arguable" at the end and call it a victory then just stay out of the argument in the first place.

because what you are saying, and what is quite true is all argument is Moot.
useless.
and it is.
because opinions are not only based on facts but there are the combination of facts and our own feelings so regardless of what each person says it wont matter to us.

again,
i know you have an opinion,
i respect it,
however i would enjoy if you would respect mine.
That is not to say not to argue it, however it simply means dont take your opinion and decide i dont deserve it.

 

[Internet Kraken]

Brainless, I said it once and I'll say it again.

The world isn't black and white. Killing isn't killing. Killing a slave for dropping his tools is not the same as killing a mugger in self-defense. Killing a "lawful enemy combatant" as outlined in Geneva Conventions is not the same as killing unarmed civilians in an airport.

War and terrorism are not synonymous, furthermore. An act of war and an act of terrorism are not and will never be the same thing.

True, very true.

however how can somebody be disgusted by killin a civilian and not an enemy soldier?
its still killing.
you are taking a human life.
regardless of who it is.
if you so disgusted by one kind of killing and not the other then you must have some means of deciding its ok to kill.
my point being its STILL KILLING.
Either you Disturbed by killing or your not.
other killings being better then some killings? its still killing damn it.
you just dont seem to get it get it at all.


i suppose i'm being more philosophical then some people can handle.
no offence.

You're not really being philosophical. You're simply overlooking some of the most basic human qualities. Mainly, the ability to perceive something as a threat.

Yes, an enemy soldier could have a family, friends, and just be another innocent caught up in the cruel war machine. But it's hard to sympathize with such a person when they are trying to kill you. Now take the same person, but have them be of no threat to your survival. Suddenly it's a lot easier to sympathize with them, since your not looking at them as a killer.

A civilian isn't a threat to you. The civilians are running and screaming, trying to escape from you. An enemy soldier will try to gun you down. People find it easier to sympathize with the harmless citizen rather than the deadly soldier, for obvious reasons.

Oh, and would it kill you to use proper sentence structure? It's hard to read your posts sometimes.

 

[ma55ter_fett]

Both of the links in the OT have removed there videos.

I have seen the video somewhere else however. And what I can say is that it shows that the Mocern Warfare series really are a new ip, as the developer has said. They seem to be willing to take on bigger issues of morality.

I wasn't going to buy the game before, simply because I didn't really get into the first modern warfare, and also I don't have sixty bucks to drop on it.

I will rent it though, and look forward to playing it through once.

 

[Doctor Glocktor]

None of those videos work.

Would someone PLEASE link a youtube version or something that is actually watchable? Please?

 

[brainless906]

Brainless, I said it once and I'll say it again.

The world isn't black and white. Killing isn't killing. Killing a slave for dropping his tools is not the same as killing a mugger in self-defense. Killing a "lawful enemy combatant" as outlined in Geneva Conventions is not the same as killing unarmed civilians in an airport.

War and terrorism are not synonymous, furthermore. An act of war and an act of terrorism are not and will never be the same thing.

True, very true.

however how can somebody be disgusted by killin a civilian and not an enemy soldier?
its still killing.
you are taking a human life.
regardless of who it is.
if you so disgusted by one kind of killing and not the other then you must have some means of deciding its ok to kill.
my point being its STILL KILLING.
Either you Disturbed by killing or your not.
other killings being better then some killings? its still killing damn it.
you just dont seem to get it get it at all.


i suppose i'm being more philosophical then some people can handle.
no offence.

You're not really being philosophical. You're simply overlooking some of the most basic human qualities. Mainly, the ability to perceive something as a threat.

Yes, an enemy soldier could have a family, friends, and just be another innocent caught up in the cruel war machine. But it's hard to sympathize with such a person when they are trying to kill you. Now take the same person, but have them be of no threat to your survival. Suddenly it's a lot easier to sympathize with them, since your not looking at them as a killer.

A civilian isn't a threat to you. The civilians are running and screaming, trying to escape from you. An enemy soldier will try to gun you down. People find it easier to sympathize with the harmless citizen rather than the deadly soldier, for obvious reasons.

Oh, and would it kill you to use proper sentence structure? It's hard to read your posts sometimes.

I would have to argue, Killing is killing is killing is killing.
I dont understand how one can decide its ok to kill one person and not another.
simply because we perceive one a threat?
what if one is provoked? so you saying if we provoke these civilians and they attack us then we can kill with no remorse? the difference between killing two people is merely if one armed or not?

its a thing of morals i'm trying to bring out here.
is it OK to kill anyone?
well sure if they have a gun and are shooting at you right?
how does that make it right? oooh i get it!
because HE'S doing something wrong that means WE can do something wrong and it doesnt matter!
From a moral standpoint that is an idiotic argument.

And the thing i dont enjoy about controversy is, well hell if you dont like it then shut up and dont play it. dont make it a huge ass deal for everybody who doesnt mind it.

 

[brainless906]

If it's a non-interactive cutscene, fine.

But if they force me to kill innocents as a terrorist, that's way too far for me. Sorry, I find that disgusting, even though it's not real.

Im very confused by this....
you are very ok with killing an enemy Soldier...but not a civilian?
Now dont get me wrong, there IS a differance...HOWEVER you find it Disgusting?
...killing is killing...either way..now since you seem to have decided it matters not that they are pixels i'm going to take this in the most realistic sense i can.

you find killing a civilian Disgusting but not the "bad-guy" equally as disgusting?
hmm, you logic is flawed based PURELY on the fact that from the terrorist's point of view the other people are the bad guys...so it should be ok in you little world....

I.E. its not ok to kill somebody from American army but its perfectly legitimate to kill a nazi correct? its still killing. moraly an killing is wrong...but suddenly its differant is it? you right nazi's dont have families...beliefs...emotions...yes?

my point being EITHER WAY YOU KILLING SOMEBODY! if just killing Innocent people is you problem then there is more of a problem then you think.

i.e. you are completely willing to point a gun and shoot a man simply because he's labeled bad guy?


you may not enjoy killing a civilian as a terrorist however you find it fine as the hero of the story?

like i've said MANY MANY MANY MANY MANY games allow you to kill innocent civilians as the HERO but suddenly your the badguy and its wrong?

utter non-sense.

Okay, firstly, there is no "logic" to this. It's a feeling, it's just how this makes me feel. I don't logically evaluate my feelings, they just happen.

Yes, many games have let you kill innocent people before, but NO game has put you in the specific role of a terrorist, given you a gun and a helpless target, and said "Kill him in the name of terrorism".

Of course I don't mind killing the "bad guys" as you say, simply because they're bad. They've done something to wrong me, and they're trying to kill me. Also, I'm completely desensitized to killing enemies in games, to the point where I don't even think about it. Who thinks about killing a Nazi? No one. Sure he's got a family, but he's a dirty Jew-killer and he's trying to kill me.

You know when people ask the question "Do you believe there are acceptable circumstances for murder?" Many people would say killing is wrong, but under specific circumstances, it is OK, like in self-defense. Same with this. I think killing is fine in games, like every other person that isn't Jack Thompson, but under these specific circumstances, it disgusts me.

How would you like a game where you play as the Nazis? Maybe you're the manager of a concentration camp, and you can use the Wii Remote for executions! It's in bad taste, and I feel nauseous just thinking about it. In essence, this is the same thing, killing innocents for no reason.

Finally, this is a big step for gaming. Never before has a game done something this controversial, and with such realism. Everyone is shocked at this news. Forgive me if my gut reaction does not mach yours.

I don't care if you think my opinion and feelings are "utter nonsense". If you can't see why this would possibly upset anyone in the slightest, or that people have differing opinions than you, than your username really does describe you well.

ok first of i'm merely posting [bold] MY OPINION [/bold]

i.e. your argument is equally as retarded as you say mine is.

I dont know why everyone assumes that if your on the internet and you argue a point then you are officially an idiot because your care not for others opinions.

In fact realize you have an opinion, i in fact also realize you have every right in the world to have said opinion, more or less i respect you for your opinion.

However it makes it significantly harder to respect you opinion when you turn around and imply that I have no right to put my opinion next to yours.

if you're going to simply put "aaaah, its my opinion so its un-arguable" at the end and call it a victory then just stay out of the argument in the first place.

because what you are saying, and what is quite true is all argument is Moot.
useless.
and it is.
because opinions are not only based on facts but there are the combination of facts and our own feelings so regardless of what each person says it wont matter to us.

again,
i know you have an opinion,
i respect it,
however i would enjoy if you would respect mine.
That is not to say not to argue it, however it simply means dont take your opinion and decide i dont deserve it.

Let me say that I try to be very respecful when I argue. Look at my other comments, and at the end, I almost always say "but I respect your opinion and you personally". And I would have done the same at the end of my post, if you had not added "utter nonsense" at the end of yours.

That showed me that you didn't value my opinion at all, no matter what you say you were thinking. I'll admit I was hostile during my argument, but it wouldn't have been this way if you hadn't added those two nasty words at the end. That just set me off.

You have every right to "put your opinion next to mine". As childish as this may sound, "you started it".

Perhaps we got off on the wrong foot. Let me say that I respect your opinion, and you have said that you respect mine. Perhaps we should agree to disagree.

hmm, sorry i suppose that did come of as quite harsh.
That was not my intention, i do in fact respect you opinion.
again sorry for any misunderstandings.

 

[JimmerDunda]

From rumors going around this are NOT terrorists but CIA operatives in a RUSSIAN airport. In the trailer you can see a similar scene but with a soviet flag in the airport.

But these are just rumors.

 

[Internet Kraken]

Brainless, I said it once and I'll say it again.

The world isn't black and white. Killing isn't killing. Killing a slave for dropping his tools is not the same as killing a mugger in self-defense. Killing a "lawful enemy combatant" as outlined in Geneva Conventions is not the same as killing unarmed civilians in an airport.

War and terrorism are not synonymous, furthermore. An act of war and an act of terrorism are not and will never be the same thing.

True, very true.

however how can somebody be disgusted by killin a civilian and not an enemy soldier?
its still killing.
you are taking a human life.
regardless of who it is.
if you so disgusted by one kind of killing and not the other then you must have some means of deciding its ok to kill.
my point being its STILL KILLING.
Either you Disturbed by killing or your not.
other killings being better then some killings? its still killing damn it.
you just dont seem to get it get it at all.


i suppose i'm being more philosophical then some people can handle.
no offence.

You're not really being philosophical. You're simply overlooking some of the most basic human qualities. Mainly, the ability to perceive something as a threat.

Yes, an enemy soldier could have a family, friends, and just be another innocent caught up in the cruel war machine. But it's hard to sympathize with such a person when they are trying to kill you. Now take the same person, but have them be of no threat to your survival. Suddenly it's a lot easier to sympathize with them, since your not looking at them as a killer.

A civilian isn't a threat to you. The civilians are running and screaming, trying to escape from you. An enemy soldier will try to gun you down. People find it easier to sympathize with the harmless citizen rather than the deadly soldier, for obvious reasons.

Oh, and would it kill you to use proper sentence structure? It's hard to read your posts sometimes.

I would have to argue, Killing is killing is killing is killing.
I dont understand how one can decide its ok to kill one person and not another.
simply because we perceive one a threat?
what if one is provoked? so you saying if we provoke these civilians and they attack us then we can kill with no remorse? the difference between killing two people is merely if one armed or not?

its a thing of morals i'm trying to bring out here.
is it OK to kill anyone?
well sure if they have a gun and are shooting at you right?
how does that make it right? oooh i get it!
because HE'S doing something wrong that means WE can do something wrong and it doesnt matter!
From a moral standpoint that is an idiotic argument.

I didn't say it was ok to kill anybody. Don't put words in my mouth. I was simply trying to establish why it's easier to sympathize with certain people, and as a result why it's harder to cope with the idea of killing these people.

Keep in mind we are not talking about killing people in real life, which is a completely different argument. We're talking about killing people in video games, and why the player may find it harder to kill certain people in the game.

And the thing i dont enjoy about controversy is, well hell if you dont like it then shut up and dont play it. dont make it a huge ass deal for everybody who doesnt mind it.

Those people have every right to be vocal about their opinion on the game. Just like you do.

 

[brainless906]

Brainless, I said it once and I'll say it again.

The world isn't black and white. Killing isn't killing. Killing a slave for dropping his tools is not the same as killing a mugger in self-defense. Killing a "lawful enemy combatant" as outlined in Geneva Conventions is not the same as killing unarmed civilians in an airport.

War and terrorism are not synonymous, furthermore. An act of war and an act of terrorism are not and will never be the same thing.

True, very true.

however how can somebody be disgusted by killin a civilian and not an enemy soldier?
its still killing.
you are taking a human life.
regardless of who it is.
if you so disgusted by one kind of killing and not the other then you must have some means of deciding its ok to kill.
my point being its STILL KILLING.
Either you Disturbed by killing or your not.
other killings being better then some killings? its still killing damn it.
you just dont seem to get it get it at all.


i suppose i'm being more philosophical then some people can handle.
no offence.

You're not really being philosophical. You're simply overlooking some of the most basic human qualities. Mainly, the ability to perceive something as a threat.

Yes, an enemy soldier could have a family, friends, and just be another innocent caught up in the cruel war machine. But it's hard to sympathize with such a person when they are trying to kill you. Now take the same person, but have them be of no threat to your survival. Suddenly it's a lot easier to sympathize with them, since your not looking at them as a killer.

A civilian isn't a threat to you. The civilians are running and screaming, trying to escape from you. An enemy soldier will try to gun you down. People find it easier to sympathize with the harmless citizen rather than the deadly soldier, for obvious reasons.

Oh, and would it kill you to use proper sentence structure? It's hard to read your posts sometimes.

I would have to argue, Killing is killing is killing is killing.
I dont understand how one can decide its ok to kill one person and not another.
simply because we perceive one a threat?
what if one is provoked? so you saying if we provoke these civilians and they attack us then we can kill with no remorse? the difference between killing two people is merely if one armed or not?

its a thing of morals i'm trying to bring out here.
is it OK to kill anyone?
well sure if they have a gun and are shooting at you right?
how does that make it right? oooh i get it!
because HE'S doing something wrong that means WE can do something wrong and it doesnt matter!
From a moral standpoint that is an idiotic argument.

I didn't say it was ok to kill anybody. Don't put words in my mouth. I was simply trying to establish why it's easier to sympathize with certain people, and as a result why it's harder to cope with the idea of killing these people.

Keep in mind we are not talking about killing people in real life, which is a completely different argument. We're talking about killing people in video games, and why the player may find it harder to kill certain people in the game.

And the thing i dont enjoy about controversy is, well hell if you dont like it then shut up and dont play it. dont make it a huge ass deal for everybody who doesnt mind it.

Those people have every right to be vocal about their opinion on the game. Just like you do.

there opinions i can deal with, we all have rights to opinions.
however the thing i cant deal with is controversy always leads to something bigger.

This is a video game,
i realize this.

Sympathizing is one thing, but refusing to play the game because its wrong? that goes a little beyond sympathizing.

very sorry didnt mean to "put words in your mouth" twas not my intention.
merely pointing out that people who take this game to literally do more then sympathize.
If your going to do it with one person in a game then i'm going to hold it to you to do it with any person in any game.

(not saying you were doing this just saying if people do it they should at least be held to those morals)

 

[clixx13]

From rumors going around this are NOT terrorists but CIA operatives in a RUSSIAN airport. In the trailer you can see a similar scene but with a soviet flag in the airport.

But these are just rumors.

I will say that I recognized Cyrillic characters on a sign at the airport. I wasn't sure what to make of it but perhaps it is actually not an American airport?