We see civilians get massacared in movies, why can't we see it in games?
Granted you're not controling the actions of the movie, however if killing civvies in game is integral to the plot of the COD story, then fuck it. Lets do it and move on.
They're fake people by the way, it's not like that shitty movie where they have to press a fucking button and someone real dies somewhere (which I'd push, lots)
Limed for truth, but it seems that IW is deviating from expressing the horrors of war and turning MW2 into a high-budget Tom Clancy novel adapted on screen by Michael Bay.
Which totally works for me.
Micheal Bay makes some pretty eye catching movies, although they might not be the best movies in the world. When it comes to COD I'm not really in it to get a feel for the story. I just want to see epic battles where I shoot stuff and that stuff ultimately blows the fuck up. And not only that, every single COD has at least once scene that is obviously a homage to various action movies. COD1 and W@W had the whole enemy at the Gates thing going on (yeah I know historically enemy at the Gates is based on facts) but I mean it looked like it was take right from the movie. COD4 had the whole fast roping Black hawk, feeling bad ass while Metal / Middle eastern music is blaring, just like it was straight from Black Hawk Down. CODMW: 2 looks like it's playing homage to Tom Clancy movies and the movie The Rock.
Ok I just saw the airport video, and I'm failing to see what the big deal here is.
Look at it from a different perspective. IW wants to give you the greatest incentive possible to continue playing. They want to tap into your own emotions as a player to give you a reason to fight. What better way to do that than to have you temporarily occupy the shoes of an enemy combatant taking part in an absolutely heinous act?
On top of that nowhere in the video does it demand that you pull the trigger. It looks like you can just follow your AI partners around until the SWAT teams show up near the end.
Personally I have to tip my hat to IW, as what they're doing with that opening level is far and away more impressive than anything they've ever done in a CoD game. They're actually attempting to unsettle the player in the same manner as games like BioShock. This is far more effective than the aftermath of the nuclear bomb in CoD4 ever was.
They did a fine job in CoD4 with the nuke.
I mean, they nuked a character you played 30% of the game with, and although he said nothing, you became attached to him. Hearing "I love you, Daddy" right before Jackson closes his eyes for the last time is heartwrenching (because I'm a dad as well).
Throwing you in the shoes of a random goon doesn't have the same effect.
Except as an opening level it's much more effective at giving you the incentive to fight later on. I mean they can show you a video of the guys shooting the place up, or you can participate. What they're doing is not taking away a character you're attached to. They're forcing you to play as a character you, for all intents and purposes, should utterly despise. They're unsettling the player by essentially asking them to do something that no moral human being wants to do.
What better way to open the game and give you a reason to beat some ass than that? It's unsettling in a different way than the nuke scene was, but to be honest feels more effective. Because frankly I didn't give a flying shit about the guy dying of the nuke in CoD4. He didn't give me a reason to be attached to him because I had another guys shoes to jump into anyway. If it were a game played entirely through that soldiers eyes then yes it'd be much more effective, and serve as a brilliant end to the game. But I had no emotional attachment to that man as a character, and while the scene was fantastically put together. It was just ineffective at unsettling me as the player because I couldn't give a flying fuck about the guy dying.
Which totally works for me.
Micheal Bay makes some pretty eye catching movies, although they might not be the best movies in the world. When it comes to COD I'm not really in it to get a feel for the story. I just want to see epic battles where I shoot stuff and that stuff ultimately blows the fuck up. And not only that, every single COD has at least once scene that is obviously a homage to various action movies. COD1 and W@W had the whole enemy at the Gates thing going on (yeah I know historically enemy at the Gates is based on facts) but I mean it looked like it was take right from the movie. COD4 had the whole fast roping Black hawk, feeling bad ass while Metal / Middle eastern music is blaring, just like it was straight from Black Hawk Down. CODMW: 2 looks like it's playing homage to Tom Clancy movies and the movie The Rock.
Not a bad way of looking at it. More I think about, actually, this seems like something of an evolution of the stuff seen in World at War. I suppose what's most jarring to me is the sudden shift in perspective.
I mean, I was expecting to see it from the FSB side to be honest. I still think it's a pretty overboard, but this does seem to be the direction it's going. And it's certainly making me loathe the Ultranationalist faction more than already established.
Ok I just saw the airport video, and I'm failing to see what the big deal here is.
Look at it from a different perspective. IW wants to give you the greatest incentive possible to continue playing. They want to tap into your own emotions as a player to give you a reason to fight. What better way to do that than to have you temporarily occupy the shoes of an enemy combatant taking part in an absolutely heinous act?
On top of that nowhere in the video does it demand that you pull the trigger. It looks like you can just follow your AI partners around until the SWAT teams show up near the end.
Personally I have to tip my hat to IW, as what they're doing with that opening level is far and away more impressive than anything they've ever done in a CoD game. They're actually attempting to unsettle the player in the same manner as games like BioShock. This is far more effective than the aftermath of the nuclear bomb in CoD4 ever was.
They did a fine job in CoD4 with the nuke.
I mean, they nuked a character you played 30% of the game with, and although he said nothing, you became attached to him. Hearing "I love you, Daddy" right before Jackson closes his eyes for the last time is heartwrenching (because I'm a dad as well).
Throwing you in the shoes of a random goon doesn't have the same effect.
Except as an opening level it's much more effective at giving you the incentive to fight later on. I mean they can show you a video of the guys shooting the place up, or you can participate. What they're doing is not taking away a character you're attached to. They're forcing you to play as a character you, for all intents and purposes, should utterly despise. They're unsettling the player by essentially asking them to do something that no moral human being wants to do.
What better way to open the game and give you a reason to beat some ass than that? It's unsettling in a different way than the nuke scene was, but to be honest feels more effective. Because frankly I didn't give a flying shit about the guy dying of the nuke in CoD4. He didn't give me a reason to be attached to him because I had another guys shoes to jump into anyway. If it were a game played entirely through that soldiers eyes then yes it'd be much more effective, and serve as a brilliant end to the game. But I had no emotional attachment to that man as a character, and while the scene was fantastically put together. It was just ineffective at unsettling me as the player because I couldn't give a flying fuck about the guy dying.
I probably wouldn't have cared either until the game alludes that he is a father.
Also, I can see how having you play as the enemy to get your blood boiling, but I dunno, it just kind of feels like they're removing the emotional attachment they tried so hard to create in CoD4 and instead leaning more towards pointless violence. We'll see in 2 weeks if the story justifies any of it, but I'm just seeing way more negative after IW cemented a flagpole in front of every PC gamer's home and asked them to kindly sit on it.
Ok I just saw the airport video, and I'm failing to see what the big deal here is.
Look at it from a different perspective. IW wants to give you the greatest incentive possible to continue playing. They want to tap into your own emotions as a player to give you a reason to fight. What better way to do that than to have you temporarily occupy the shoes of an enemy combatant taking part in an absolutely heinous act?
On top of that nowhere in the video does it demand that you pull the trigger. It looks like you can just follow your AI partners around until the SWAT teams show up near the end.
Personally I have to tip my hat to IW, as what they're doing with that opening level is far and away more impressive than anything they've ever done in a CoD game. They're actually attempting to unsettle the player in the same manner as games like BioShock. This is far more effective than the aftermath of the nuclear bomb in CoD4 ever was.
They did a fine job in CoD4 with the nuke.
I mean, they nuked a character you played 30% of the game with, and although he said nothing, you became attached to him. Hearing "I love you, Daddy" right before Jackson closes his eyes for the last time is heartwrenching (because I'm a dad as well).
Throwing you in the shoes of a random goon doesn't have the same effect.
Except as an opening level it's much more effective at giving you the incentive to fight later on. I mean they can show you a video of the guys shooting the place up, or you can participate. What they're doing is not taking away a character you're attached to. They're forcing you to play as a character you, for all intents and purposes, should utterly despise. They're unsettling the player by essentially asking them to do something that no moral human being wants to do.
What better way to open the game and give you a reason to beat some ass than that? It's unsettling in a different way than the nuke scene was, but to be honest feels more effective. Because frankly I didn't give a flying shit about the guy dying of the nuke in CoD4. He didn't give me a reason to be attached to him because I had another guys shoes to jump into anyway. If it were a game played entirely through that soldiers eyes then yes it'd be much more effective, and serve as a brilliant end to the game. But I had no emotional attachment to that man as a character, and while the scene was fantastically put together. It was just ineffective at unsettling me as the player because I couldn't give a flying fuck about the guy dying.
I probably wouldn't have cared either until the game alludes that he is a father.
Also, I can see how having you play as the enemy to get your blood boiling, but I dunno, it just kind of feels like they're removing the emotional attachment they tried so hard to create in CoD4 and instead leaning more towards pointless violence. We'll see in 2 weeks if the story justifies any of it, but I'm just seeing way more negative after IW cemented a flagpole in front of every PC gamer's home and asked them to kindly sit on it.
My problem is even though my character is a father what do I care? Everyone I shot in the game leading up to that point is probably a father. Same with my teammates who tied en masse. It's hard for me to connect with a character that has no sense of actually being more than a camera.
And I don't see it too much as pointless violence. The trailers they've released so far seem to emphasize the story a lot more this time around, and I'm thinking this intro level is just one more piece of them trying to make a more cohesive single player game.
edit:
And the fact that you're really a good guy who gets shot in the end of the level, maybe he is a recurring character. Like you survive and play future missions as that guy
Not buying this game because of the server debacle, but if someone says that they shouldn't have put this in, they can go fuck themselves. They can put whatever they want in the game. This censorship is getting nutty.
How's about we just let people play it, and see what happens.
Who knows, maybe by the end of the game everything that happened will completley justify everything you did in game and you'll feel like a better person.
Is it just me or is the fact that videogames have advanced in graphics and story telling so much that it's amazing that we are currently arguing about moral choices made in a completley digital world?
Bioshock, I had the hardest time on my 2nd runthrough because I chose to harvest Atom from the girls.
Analrapist on
0
Options
KlykaDO you have anySPARE BATTERIES?Registered Userregular
How's about we just let people play it, and see what happens.
Who knows, maybe by the end of the game everything that happened will completley justify everything you did in game and you'll feel like a better person.
Is it just me or is the fact that videogames have advanced in graphics and story telling so much that it's amazing that we are currently arguing about moral choices made in a completley digital world?
Bioshock, I had the hardest time on my 2nd runthrough because I chose to harvest Atom from the girls.
Dude, I sat wondering for almost 2 weeks what would have happened in GTA IV if I chose differently between Playboy and Dwayne.
How's about we just let people play it, and see what happens.
Who knows, maybe by the end of the game everything that happened will completley justify everything you did in game and you'll feel like a better person.
Is it just me or is the fact that videogames have advanced in graphics and story telling so much that it's amazing that we are currently arguing about moral choices made in a completley digital world?
Bioshock, I had the hardest time on my 2nd runthrough because I chose to harvest Atom from the girls.
Dude, I sat wondering for almost 2 weeks what would have happened in GTA IV if I chose differently between Playboy and Dwayne.
I still think about that, however I can't bring my self to play through everything all over again.
I am never in agreement when people are calling for censorship within a game. This scene is obviously there to get an emotional response. Too bad I will not be paying any money to see it in game...I have decided to vote with my $ and NOT buy this game until there is dedicated server support for the PC. I play all of my FPS games via PC and will not support any game that does not have dedicated server support.
I think it would be pretty cool to be playing as another character later and seeing the security tapes of the massacre during a briefing. Then you see the guy you controlled doing whatever it is you choose to do. If the undercover agent thing is true then it would go double with comments from the team. I.E. "That guys on our side? He looks like he is enjoying this!" or "There are some lines people wont cross, look at the guy, he cant fire a shot."
I think it would be pretty cool to be playing as another character later and seeing the security tapes of the massacre during a briefing. Then you see the guy you controlled doing whatever it is you choose to do. If the undercover agent thing is true then it would go double with comments from the team. I.E. "That guys on our side? He looks like he is enjoying this!" or "There are some lines people wont cross, look at the guy, he cant fire a shot."
That's a lot like what World at War did. If you killed surrendering/badly wounded Germans, you were basically considered a monster to other members of your squad save Reznov.
I figured with the PC version being so hot this go around, i'd like to get yall familiar with the internets via a PC. You'll find its not exactly like xbl or psn.
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
edited October 2009
My flatmate isn't going to buy the game anymore now I told him about the peer to peer multiplayer. He'll just play my 360 version most likely. Poor soul, he was buying it for the multiplayer but he's just lost interest now.
My flatmate isn't going to buy the game anymore now I told him about the peer to peer multiplayer. He'll just play my 360 version most likely. Poor soul, he was buying it for the multiplayer but he's just lost interest now.
It's a shame they expect people to lay down $60 for a game that may work for everyone.
Just watched the opening level for MW2...why would they make something like that? 0_0
Free advertising for their game on every major news network. It's a brilliant marketing move, the controversy will do their jobs for them. They don't even need to make a fucking ad or trailer when every news outlet will be saying "Popular video game Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2..." followed by gameplay footage.
-SPI- on
0
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
edited October 2009
Well I didn't care about the MP, in fact that and the rumoured (but later disproved) delay were what made me go "Screw it, I'll just buy the 360 version". I wouldn't have bothered playing peer to peer PC multiplayer, because it's total fail.
Posts
There's a difference? I mean, aside from one writing sci-fi?
Which totally works for me.
Micheal Bay makes some pretty eye catching movies, although they might not be the best movies in the world. When it comes to COD I'm not really in it to get a feel for the story. I just want to see epic battles where I shoot stuff and that stuff ultimately blows the fuck up. And not only that, every single COD has at least once scene that is obviously a homage to various action movies. COD1 and W@W had the whole enemy at the Gates thing going on (yeah I know historically enemy at the Gates is based on facts) but I mean it looked like it was take right from the movie. COD4 had the whole fast roping Black hawk, feeling bad ass while Metal / Middle eastern music is blaring, just like it was straight from Black Hawk Down. CODMW: 2 looks like it's playing homage to Tom Clancy movies and the movie The Rock.
Except as an opening level it's much more effective at giving you the incentive to fight later on. I mean they can show you a video of the guys shooting the place up, or you can participate. What they're doing is not taking away a character you're attached to. They're forcing you to play as a character you, for all intents and purposes, should utterly despise. They're unsettling the player by essentially asking them to do something that no moral human being wants to do.
What better way to open the game and give you a reason to beat some ass than that? It's unsettling in a different way than the nuke scene was, but to be honest feels more effective. Because frankly I didn't give a flying shit about the guy dying of the nuke in CoD4. He didn't give me a reason to be attached to him because I had another guys shoes to jump into anyway. If it were a game played entirely through that soldiers eyes then yes it'd be much more effective, and serve as a brilliant end to the game. But I had no emotional attachment to that man as a character, and while the scene was fantastically put together. It was just ineffective at unsettling me as the player because I couldn't give a flying fuck about the guy dying.
Not a bad way of looking at it. More I think about, actually, this seems like something of an evolution of the stuff seen in World at War. I suppose what's most jarring to me is the sudden shift in perspective.
I probably wouldn't have cared either until the game alludes that he is a father.
Also, I can see how having you play as the enemy to get your blood boiling, but I dunno, it just kind of feels like they're removing the emotional attachment they tried so hard to create in CoD4 and instead leaning more towards pointless violence. We'll see in 2 weeks if the story justifies any of it, but I'm just seeing way more negative after IW cemented a flagpole in front of every PC gamer's home and asked them to kindly sit on it.
The Raid
Believe me, having sold a lot of copies of MW1 to people, there are a lot of people where this is simply not going to fly.
REAL SPOILER
Am I going to hell for chuckling at this?
I assumed this might have been the case, but I don't really think it's mattering much to me. It's still messed up.
My problem is even though my character is a father what do I care? Everyone I shot in the game leading up to that point is probably a father. Same with my teammates who tied en masse. It's hard for me to connect with a character that has no sense of actually being more than a camera.
And I don't see it too much as pointless violence. The trailers they've released so far seem to emphasize the story a lot more this time around, and I'm thinking this intro level is just one more piece of them trying to make a more cohesive single player game.
edit:
Who knows, maybe by the end of the game everything that happened will completley justify everything you did in game and you'll feel like a better person.
Is it just me or is the fact that videogames have advanced in graphics and story telling so much that it's amazing that we are currently arguing about moral choices made in a completley digital world?
Bioshock, I had the hardest time on my 2nd runthrough because I chose to harvest Atom from the girls.
Dude, I sat wondering for almost 2 weeks what would have happened in GTA IV if I chose differently between Playboy and Dwayne.
The Raid
WHAT A TWIST!
Or maybe it's not and since the first guy got shot everything else that happens in the game is all in his head while he recovers from a coma.
I still think about that, however I can't bring my self to play through everything all over again.
Up and at them!
I'm at this point, but I don't have to like what I see so far. It does lack perspective right now. It's still ugly, though.
And whoever said anything about censorship? I just said it was jarring and from what we've seen it doesn't seem to serve a purpose.
That's a lot like what World at War did. If you killed surrendering/badly wounded Germans, you were basically considered a monster to other members of your squad save Reznov.
Oh, I wasnt talking to you. I'm speaking a bit prematurely I suppose, I mean when this inevitably hits the news.
Ah, my bad. Fair enough, when any news station sees this on a slow day, it's gonna be a shitfest.
just wanted to quote this since it made me giggle.
carry on.
Google isn't a catchall phrase for "search using the internets"?
Are you sure?
[tiny]I almost quoted it and said something just cause it sounded so weird to me[/tiny]
looks like their forums are taking a beating
http://www.modernwarfare2.com/forum/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3QdGljaxsY
:winky:
damn it
especially with your name
Its completely crashed at this point.
Steam Name: Dr.Oblivious
If you can't live for the now, at least live for the future.
It's a shame they expect people to lay down $60 for a game that may work for everyone.
Free advertising for their game on every major news network. It's a brilliant marketing move, the controversy will do their jobs for them. They don't even need to make a fucking ad or trailer when every news outlet will be saying "Popular video game Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2..." followed by gameplay footage.