Think Modern Warfare 2 is already controversial?

[Doctor Glocktor]

Seriously, does NOBODY have a video?

 

[Internet Kraken]

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

Not really. The scene depicts the slaughter of the civilians in a realistic manner. The running, the screaming, the feeling of absolute despair portrayed in the innocents. It looks like it's real. It feels real. This causes the game to tumble into the uncanny valley, driving someone people away from it. It's perfectly understandable.

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)

No idea what you are talking about here. I'd like to know who these people are. Provide an example.

Seriously, does NOBODY have a video?

http://www.gamedat.blogspot.com/

Does that work for you?

 

[Merteg]

For me, it says the first one was removed. As for the second one, once I click play it instantly ends.

So, I don't know what's going on here, but it sounds awesome.

 

[Good morning blues]

I hope that's not a serious question. You see nothing wrong with being a terrorist, needlessly killing innocent people in a public place in photo-realistic detail?

I'm the first guy to defend violence/sex/explicit content in games, but this doesn't sit well with me. Terrorism is a huge issue on the world right now. Putting terrorism in a game is fine, but being the terrorist is another story.

You may say "Well you kill people in other games!" Don't bring that up. COMPLETELY different factors are at play here.

So you think this sequence should be censored? Serious yes/no question here.

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.

This is a clear misrepresentation of everyone's point.

If someone is attacking me with physical violence, I have a right to defend myself with a force proportional to the force of the attack. To the extent that someone is transgressing on my right to safety, health, and life, I may transgress upon theirs to the extent that is needed to protect my own rights.

If you disagree with this, you disagree with a fundamental human instinct. This is a principle that is, as far as I know, common to every human culture.

 

[cheese_wizington]

All videos not working.

 

[Good morning blues]

I hope that's not a serious question. You see nothing wrong with being a terrorist, needlessly killing innocent people in a public place in photo-realistic detail?

I'm the first guy to defend violence/sex/explicit content in games, but this doesn't sit well with me. Terrorism is a huge issue on the world right now. Putting terrorism in a game is fine, but being the terrorist is another story.

You may say "Well you kill people in other games!" Don't bring that up. COMPLETELY different factors are at play here.

So you think this sequence should be censored? Serious yes/no question here.

Oh, absolutely not. I'm against censorship in all forms, and feel that it violates rights and stifles creativity.

I can appreciate what Inifinity Ward is trying to do. They're trying to arouse the player's morals, and strengthen the plot by making you hate your enemy. If it was just to stir controversy (which may be a small part of it) then I would think differently.

Also, this is a big step for gaming. Never-before-seen content (terrorism) in gritty detail has been introduced, so it's only natural that I would be completely shocked and react strongly.

I'll still play and inevitably love the game, but it doesn't mean I won't cringe at that part. And feel nauseous. But it should stay regardless.

All right, then we agree.

But let's open up this debate. Does anybody think this sequence should be censored?

 

[Mako144]

You know, I can't help but wonder a few things. Firstly, it's kind of odd how IW was so quick to confirm third person multiplayer but quickly locked most videos of the airport scene. Also, I thought the leaked third person scenes were kind of weird because there was no aiming reticle. Also, in the full video of the airport scene, the leaked copy owner very clearly showed his face and Activision is a rather vengeful (and anal retentive) company.

I kind of hope its some kind of a ploy from IW for two reasons. The first is that I personally don't really like the idea of shooting up an airport terminal full of unarmed civilians, sorry if a first person massacre simulator doesn't fit my taste in games but also I thought the Al-Fulani sequence in the opening of CoD4 was brilliant in its toying with my emotions, making me feel rather small and helpless (also like the The Aftermath sequence) but waltzing around with a support automatic weapon and a grenade launcher would just make me feel like the world's biggest douchebag, especially with Markarov going on about Zakhaev (I'm not fluent in French but I heard the name mentioned several times).

I don't know, I'm still going to get this game, its just I hope this sequence doesn't play out like the video makes it, because I don't really think its a greatest way to go about it nor does it look like something I'd really want to play. If it indulges in your darkest fantasy to shoot up an airport terminal than I'm not looking down on you for that, I know I've considered it more than once as means of speeding the freakin' wait.

P.S.

If this is really part of the game, the people who are going to be in really trouble of a ban aren't the Australians but the Germans, no way this'll fly after all the school shooting and violent game hullabaloo over there.

P.P.S.

I don't think it should be censored, but I shouldn't have to play it.

 

[badgersprite]

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

Not really. The scene depicts the slaughter of the civilians in a realistic manner. The running, the screaming, the feeling of absolute despair portrayed in the innocents. It looks like it's real. It feels real. This causes the game to tumble into the uncanny valley, driving someone people away from it. It's perfectly understandable.

But, then, isn't that the point? They're not showing this because they condone it - it's to drive home a point of the amorality of warfare in the modern age. CoD:MW always stood out for me because it's a war game that's openly anti-war. I would be disappointed in them if they chose to overlook how the reckless actions of military powers and terrorist groups alike have led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians (just in the last decade).

Personally, I think CoD:MW2 is showing a sense of social responsibility by offering an alternative depiction of what war is. In reality, it's not unambiguous good guys going off an fighting against a supervillain. It's countries getting destroyed and lives getting ruined and taken for little or no reason, and it's often hard to tell who has the moral high ground.

I can still understand why it might put people off playing, but, considering that this is getting interpreted outside of any context within the game, I think it's unfair to judge it without knowing the message they're trying to get across.

 

[Troublesome Lagomorph]

Ahh link fail!
Anyway, if it's what i think, then it shows both sides of war, instead of the "I'm a shining knight of freedom." This makes me more excited for the game. Finally it won't be diluted. And finally, a chance to play as the bad guy...

 

[Good morning blues]

P.P.S.

I don't think it should be censored, but I shouldn't have to play it.

I don't quite get what you're saying here, could you clarify? I mean, of course you don't have to play it, they're not mailing it to you and you're not going to be arrested if you don't.

 

[Mako144]

P.P.S.

I don't think it should be censored, but I shouldn't have to play it.

I don't quite get what you're saying here, could you clarify? I mean, of course you don't have to play it, they're not mailing it to you and you're not going to be arrested if you don't.

I mean, I should be able be able to enjoy a fast-paced, action shooter without having to shoot up the airport full of civilians. I said I was buying the game, I'm not even entirely objecting the scene itself, I think it would have a strong impact on me if I was one of the civilians running around in panic and chaos.

 

[Zersy]

What was in it ?

Can someone please describe ?

 

[Windexglow]

hooooooooo boy.

Media are going to have a field day when the next child kills someone, and this game was in their collection.

 

[Good morning blues]

P.P.S.

I don't think it should be censored, but I shouldn't have to play it.

I don't quite get what you're saying here, could you clarify? I mean, of course you don't have to play it, they're not mailing it to you and you're not going to be arrested if you don't.

I mean, I should be able be able to enjoy a fast-paced, action shooter without having to shoot up the airport full of civilians. I said I was buying the game, I'm not even entirely objecting the scene itself, I think it would have a strong impact on me if I was one of the civilians running around in panic and chaos.

Thing is, you can enjoy a fast-paced action shooter without having to shoot up the airport full of civilians ? you'll just have to play a different game.

 

[vivec710]

I personally don't find anything wrong in this. I mean you see way worse things in movies and even sometimes on tv. If games want to be seen in the same light as a movies and such I think they need to push the envelope a little bit. But I'm sure the media will have some things to say about it they always do.

 

[Jekken6]

And MW2 still fails to impress me. I might pick it up used at a cheap price, though.

 

[bobbidog]

Soooo...people are outraged that war is finally being portrayed as anything other than glorious and righteous? That instead it is being shown as...well...unpleasant?

 

[Good morning blues]

Soooo...people are outraged that war is finally being portrayed as anything other than glorious and righteous? That instead it is being shown as...well...unpleasant?

Generally, I agree with the point you're making here. Here, however, people are pretty clearly objecting because they are uncomfortable with a game that puts you in the shoes of terrorists killing innocent civilians. It is a very sensitive topic, and it violently confronts the most fundamental fear that we, as a culture, currently have. It's not that people don't like the depiction of war, it's that they're uncomfortable with this topic.