PDA

View Full Version : Modern Warfare 2 + Spoilers



JKTrix
10-27-2009, 10:48 PM
I'm not sure if I'll be able to get the game as soon as it comes out, but I'm more interested in it now than I have ever been.

As a general warning though, If You Are At All Interested In Not Being Spoiled About Modern Warfare 2, Do Not Look At ANYTHING New (related to the game) On The Internet.

Just a few minutes ago, I haphazardly clicked a video link. And what a piece of dynamite it was. I'll post the link and describe it in spoilers for anyone who doesn't really care, because I would be interested to see what people think about what happens. This is related to events that happen within the single-player game, not any of the other hogwash that's been happening outside of that. I will preface it by saying that Activision has balls.

http://www.destructoid.com/is-this-a-modern-warfare-2-level-about-spoiler--153300.phtml
Just to make sure...
So, at one point (some are saying at the very beginning of the game), you perform a terrorist attack in an airport, mowing down mere civilians in the process. You are an undercover CIA agent when it happens.

For those that did watch it or read the description, I would be interested to see what you think about it. Both fans of the franchise and non-fans (which I expect there are more of here). Once the mass media gets wind of this, I think there will be another ignorant anti-videogame meltdown that GTA couldn't hold a candle to.

Edit: And it's already gone! haha. If you do want to find it elsewhere, or if you come past it in the game itself, I'm talking about a mission that takes place in the Airport.

Edit Edit: Found the video somewhere else.

Slothy
10-27-2009, 11:12 PM
And to think I was already salivating when I saw that the fight would be taken to Washington D.C. Haven't seen this new video but it sounds cool to me from what you've described. Wouldn't be the first time Infinity Ward gave the player a front row seat to some pretty crazy stuff. Being hauled off and executed on live TV as well as dying of radiation poisoning after a nuke went off were pretty powerful moments in COD4. As long as something like this is handled well (and with Infinity Ward behind it I'm sure it will be) then we can probably expect some more stuff that's mature in all the right ways.

JKTrix
10-27-2009, 11:18 PM
Found it somewhere else. It's about 8 minutes long and in French. In the spoiler in the first post.

Bolivar
10-27-2009, 11:32 PM
Here's a new link for it (again, don't watch it if you don't want spoilers):

Its all about the Game! (http://www.gamedat.blogspot.com/)

He's clearly killing innocent people on the ground wounded.

I guess I have to put my thoughts in spoiler tags as well, so:

This is really bad taste. To be honest, I'm not even sure why I feel this way. I loved every minute of Killzone 2 - the game with the deepest hit detection and death animations possibly of all time. And I've killed tons of civilians in GTA, most for no reason at all, probably while I was fleeing another atrocity I've caused.

But this is different, and I don't know why. It just reeks of being controversial for the sake of being controversial. There's a difference between this and GTA. GTA is controversial for the sake of gamers having a good time, over-the-top, black comedy experience. That's actually an aesthetic.

But this.... sorry. I wasn't going to buy this game b/c the multiplayer is the same 4-5 generic FPS game modes I've been playing for the last fifteen years. I planned on renting it to play the campaign. I probably still will, I want to give this a fair shake. But my first impression is not good.

Funny how whoever's playing this is gettiong PSN friend invites as he's doing it lol.

JKTrix
10-27-2009, 11:45 PM
On one hand, I have played CoD 4 and am familiar with Infinity Ward's method of story telling. So I have faith that they will do something to explain why that sequence is necessary. On the other hand, if this is done just for the sake of shock, then they will lose a lot of respect from those--like me--who might appreciate their prior works.

Still, I'm sure that had to go through a chain of approval from within Infinity Ward *and* Activision--maybe the biggest game company in the US--so there must be something more to it. They are really sticking their necks out.

I think the video was taken from a stream, so people were sending him PSN messages while he was playing. I've seen it many times, people just want their name to show up on the screen :P

Slothy
10-27-2009, 11:48 PM
This is really bad taste. To be honest, I'm not even sure why I feel this way. I loved every minute of Killzone 2 - the game with the deepest hit detection and death animations possibly of all time. And I've killed tons of civilians in GTA, most for no reason at all, probably while I was fleeing another atrocity I've caused.

But this is different, and I don't know why. It just reeks of being controversial for the sake of being controversial. There's a difference between this and GTA. GTA is controversial for the sake of gamers having a good time, over-the-top, black comedy experience. That's actually an aesthetic.

But this.... sorry. I wasn't going to buy this game b/c the multiplayer is the same 4-5 generic FPS game modes I've been playing for the last fifteen years. I planned on renting it to play the campaign. I probably still will, I want to give this a fair shake. But my first impression is not good.

I may as well use spoilers as well just in case.

I don't see it as in bad taste necessarily. Is the thought of mowing down innocent civilians horrific? Of course, but I'm pretty sure that's what Infinity Ward is going for. They didn't shy away from putting us in the middle of televised executions and nuclear fallout before. Both were horrifying moments that were presented in such a way that it really made you feel at least some of what it may feel like to be in that position. It's horrifying yes, but making people realize that is part of the point because crap like that happens every day in many parts of the world. I see it as Infinity Ward sort of putting the player in the middle of it to make a statement: that this stuff is terrible and shouldn't happen or be ignored ever.

GTA features violence for the sake of entertainment. It's supposed to be fun because you can do whatever you want consequence free. Infinity Ward is showing the more horrifying reality of such violence though. It may not change how you feel, but if you find it appalling then good. My bet is that that was their intent.

Bolivar
10-28-2009, 12:06 AM
I may as well use spoilers as well just in case.

I don't see it as in bad taste necessarily. Is the thought of mowing down innocent civilians horrific? Of course, but I'm pretty sure that's what Infinity Ward is going for. They didn't shy away from putting us in the middle of televised executions and nuclear fallout before. Both were horrifying moments that were presented in such a way that it really made you feel at least some of what it may feel like to be in that position. It's horrifying yes, but making people realize that is part of the point because crap like that happens every day in many parts of the world. I see it as Infinity Ward sort of putting the player in the middle of it to make a statement: that this stuff is terrible and shouldn't happen or be ignored ever.

GTA features violence for the sake of entertainment. It's supposed to be fun because you can do whatever you want consequence free. Infinity Ward is showing the more horrifying reality of such violence though. It may not change how you feel, but if you find it appalling then good. My bet is that that was their intent.

I guess we have a trend going, so:

I don't know, man. There's a million and one mediums and methods to get that message across, but video games are probably the most juvenile and ineffective way to do it. This isn't going to change voting behavior or increase communal awareness. It's going to give something for homophobic racists on XBox Live to high five their friends about. For kids who get picked on at school, this is going to be their fantasy and solace. I know we're on the precipice of video games emerging as a recognized form of art, but there will always be, as in movies, and music, things that go towards pretentious, under the guise of having a message. Far Cry 2 got a similar message across that you mentioned, and that's a game where you play as a guy with a gun, and you have to make some pretty tough decisions that are, like you say, horrific. But I still feel like that game was done in good taste, and I came away from it like you would from a good book. This, I don't know.

Like I said, I have to give it a fair shake, but they have a lot to prove.

Shattered Dreamer
10-28-2009, 12:10 AM
This is kinda the reason why I've got sick of play FPS games altogether. The FPS genre has sought to glamorize war as of late & the COD are especially guilty of this. The better that graphics become the more these games games become like VR simulations. If your willing to pull the trigger on something that looks 99% real & feel no remorse then your type cast immediate for some proxy war. GTA is harmless cartoon Tom & Jerry type violence but FPS's like COD focus on realism i.e. making needless murder look glamorous.

I normally don't kick up a fuss about violence in video games but that video of Modern Warfare 2 shows developers are maybe going too far

Rocket Edge
10-28-2009, 12:46 AM
^some people I've come across on COD boards feel the same as you. It does to some extent romanticize war.

This is the game I've been waiting for most since I got World at War last year. I've followed it closely and everything looks awesome! Even little things like being able to customise your own kill-streak slots, and switching hosts in the middle of an online game are neat. N00bs will no doubt be there in numbers like COD only can bring, but I'll be there with my Bolty no-scope ready to snipe them down.

We should get an EoFF Clan going if everyone's game (I'm PS3). Thoughts?

JKTrix
10-28-2009, 12:47 AM
As an extra prerequisite, I would like people to say whether or not they have played CoD4's single player. Not necessarily to completion, but at least on the two different occasions where your player character perishes.

That would help clarify your perspective as well. I'll assume Shattered Dreamer and Bolivar did not.

Rocket Edge
10-28-2009, 12:53 AM
I never played COD before WaW. A friend introducted me to the series when the latter was released last year and I got hooked to the online multiplayer matches. If it's a case It's necessary to learn the history of the game before I dive into Mw2 I will.

JKTrix
10-28-2009, 01:15 AM
I don't think it's necessary to play prior games, as far as the content of the story. I think if you have played through CoD4 though, you might have a very different perspective on the 'controversial scene' we're discussing in MW2.

Bolivar
10-28-2009, 03:03 AM
I haven't played the full campaign but I have seen the two scenes Vivi22 mentioned. I'm not sure how they would change my perspective on gunning down civilians at an airport.

Depression Moon
10-28-2009, 03:07 AM
I don't think i've played a single FPS this generation unless Team Fortress 2 counts, but y'all probably don't count it. There's too many games this year and I have limited money. I will try and get to it sometime next year., but Blockbuster is super expensive now on renting games. I remember back in the SNES days when game rentals were only $4 for a week now they're $9.66 for 5 days.

Hrmm, I might not be getting that game then.

JKTrix
10-28-2009, 03:47 AM
For $16 a month, you can rent one game at a time for as long as you want. There are other packages where you can rent more games at once for higher costs. You can also 'keep' games you rent for a 'used' price if you really want to. Only real downside is you have to wait for shipping (Tekken 6 probably won't get to me until Friday, for example).
TF2 is a FPS.

@Bolivar, 'experiencing' those events in CoD4 (and maybe others...I've only played 2 and 4) gets you familiar with the fact that Infinity Ward likes to have these emotional setpieces. Trying to make you feel something. This instance in MW2 is definitely morally heinous, but is in line with what they have done before in the sense of trying to get you to feel something. Perspective is more than just what you see in front of you. So while what you see in front of you is "THAT," you have the context of prior experience which should allow you to can kind of see where they are coming from. Even if what is actually happening is horrible, you would have a good idea that there should be something more to it. (I'm saying 'you', but I'm not exactly directing it at 'you'.)

Whereas, if you hadn't experienced any of that before from the creators, all you see is what's actually happening in front of you. Which is absolutely horrible.

Bolivar
10-28-2009, 04:41 AM
Oh, that. You're right about "maybe others", it goes back to the first Call of Duty campaign (and probably their first game, Allied Assault) and all I'm going to say is that the opening of the Soviet campaign got the point across to me much more than Enemy At the Gates or any other movie about that event could do. Of course, we all know this is something that goes back to the first Half-Life.

I honestly don't see any correlation, though. I know what their style is. It has no bearing on what's going on here. I'm really not sure what there could be more to it to make it seem any different than it already seems.

All I'm going to say is I am going to give them the benefit of the doubt, I probably will play it and render a final verdict then. Not sure if I'll stick around to join Rocket Edge's proposed clan, though.

Old Manus
10-28-2009, 09:44 AM
ITT people try to justify pointlessly shooting civilians in a mothertrucking airport as 'emotional set pieces'.

Infinity Ward is just trying to boost sales with the inevitable media coverage. There's no underlying moral truth that we must all step back and ponder at here. I think it's pretty disgraceful. They're worse than Rockstar.

Madame Adequate
10-28-2009, 11:28 AM
CoD4 was the most anti-war FPS I have ever played. These guys are clever and they know not only how to make a good game, but how subvert good game design and really fuck with you.

I imagine plenty of people will take the position that this is for sales and attention, and maybe it is. In my eyes though, games are going to be what Bolivar said, "There's a million and one mediums and methods to get that message across, but video games are probably the most juvenile and ineffective way to do it." unless and until they do do things like this.

It's entirely possible that this is baseless exploitation and utterly meritless. I am inclined to think it isn't, because I'm so impressed with how they did CoD4, but I do acknowledge the possibility. However, I think that the more likely outcome is that it's a genuine attempt to say and do something new, and whilst we should be ready to criticize it if it fails, at least they have the balls to try.

Slothy
10-28-2009, 12:35 PM
CoD4 was the most anti-war FPS I have ever played. These guys are clever and they know not only how to make a good game, but how subvert good game design and really smurf with you.

I don't think I could agree with you more MILF, but I'll ellaborate on some of my thoughts. I definitely agree that COD4 was very anti-war given that the closest we got to a bunch of good guys in the game were a team of SAS and Marines who stopped a bunch of nukes. Of course, these were the same Marines who went heavy handed into a nameless middle eastern country (and if anyone can't see the parallels then I pity them), and the same SAS who executed prisoners when they got the information they needed.

No side in that game was exactly standing on moral high ground; you just had evil bastards and less evil bastards who are on our side.


I imagine plenty of people will take the position that this is for sales and attention, and maybe it is. In my eyes though, games are going to be what Bolivar said, "There's a million and one mediums and methods to get that message across, but video games are probably the most juvenile and ineffective way to do it." unless and until they do do things like this.

I definitely agree with you here, and strongly disagree with Bolivar. In fact, that kind of attitude makes me glad that Bolivar isn't involved in developing games. The idea of games as a juvenile medium bothers me because many people are as mistaken in that regard as they are when they think that comic books are a juvenile medium that can't handle mature topics well. They've been doing it for literally decades and there is no reason that video games can't in this stage of their development as a medium. The idea that video games would be outright inneffective at conveying a message through some very mature themes and events is a joke. I think they're better able than any other medium to convey this kind of message given the immersive quality video games have. They don't have to just talk at you with some message, they can put you in the middle of it and let you see it for yourself.

And as far as doing this just for more sales; no one accused Saving Private Ryan of just trying to sit more butts in the theatre when it effectively conveyed how terrible D-Day was. Given Infinity Wards work on COD4, I definitely would not be one to write this off as a sales grab before seeing it in context. They're better than that.


This is kinda the reason why I've got sick of play FPS games altogether. The FPS genre has sought to glamorize war as of late & the COD are especially guilty of this. The better that graphics become the more these games games become like VR simulations. If your willing to pull the trigger on something that looks 99% real & feel no remorse then your type cast immediate for some proxy war. GTA is harmless cartoon Tom & Jerry type violence but FPS's like COD focus on realism i.e. making needless murder look glamorous.

Not sure quite where to start with this one. You're argument that people who can pull the trigger with no remorse in a realistic video game are suited to kill someone in an actual war is laughable. It assumes that people can't differentiate between reality and a video game which isn't true for the vast majority of the adult population. And if, somehow, a large segment of the population couldn't tell that what they were doing was just a game and not real, then they'd have the same problem with games like GTA, making the "cartoon Tom & Jerry type violence" anything but harmless.

Games like COD4 do anything but glamorize the violence if you ask me. Yes it is a large portion of the game, but they took great pains to show just how dirty a business war is. Like I said above, there were no heroes in that game, and they even included scenes like lining people up against walls and executing them at the beginning of the game. They went to great lengths to show that what was happening in the game wasn't good. It wasn't all necessarily evil since some of the things that happen are necessary just as they are in real life, but none of what you did was portrayed as being heroic exactly (with the possible exception of stopping the nukes, but given how reprehensible it is to even think about nukes being fired at another country I don't think anyone would say that all of the violence committed to stop them wouldn't be justified even in the real world).

Dreddz
10-28-2009, 01:51 PM
While totally shocking for that piece of footage to appear in a video game, it doesn't really offend me. I'm glad there are developers who don't feel the need to tip toe around sensitive topics. People talk about how video game stories need to grow up and I think this is a nessesary step in achieving that. And I'm sure within the context of the games story it won't seem that shocking. Who's to say this footage will even appear the way it is in the final game anyway. The release is still a ways off. Some shaky footage taken from a someones bedroom isn't exactly the most legit source of information.

And Activision can kiss it if they expect me to buy MW2. I'm not paying £55 for a 4-5 hour single player campaign. I don't care how good COD4's campaign was (and it most definitely was good) there are better things I can spend my money on. I didn't even dig the multiplayer in COD4.

JKTrix
10-28-2009, 02:49 PM
YouTube - Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 - Teaser (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6t60l9cG7nc)

"Remember, you're Russian." (about 1:08 in)

As far as spending money, this is the next game I'll be renting after Tekken. I agree with not paying however much money for a fixed-length single player game and a multiplayer mode I don't care about, particularly since my cash is really limited.

I'm glad there's someone who is more intimate with the franchise than I am who can 'defend' it a little better than I can. Really, we can't pass judgement on it without getting the whole story. That's not quite what I want to happen here, though.

This will hit the mass media. People will judge it out of context (regardless if there is any justifying context within the game or not). You will hear about it elsewhere. I hope to get at least some discussion going beforehand, so if a 'normal person' comes to you as a gamer and says 'How 'bout that Terrorism simulator Call of Duty?' you potentially have something more constructive to say than 'I dunno, I don't play that.' Whichever way you feel about it.

*goes back to paying attention in class*

Shattered Dreamer
10-28-2009, 03:24 PM
Vivi22 I respect your opinion but as usual we don't agree:D I agree with the sentiment expressed in Act 3 of MGS4, FPS are being used to make a new generation of children okay with murder as long as your doing it in a uniform or in the name of country . Just because COD puts on a negative spin on war doesn't mean its not engaging in glamorization. Bad publicist is sometimes better than good publicist in the eyes of the mass media. I'm probably still gonna play at least once but regardless they've gone too far & I'm sure there are more people who agree with Rocket Edge & myself!

Slothy
10-28-2009, 03:54 PM
Vivi22 I respect your opinion but as usual we don't agree:D I agree with the sentiment expressed in Act 3 of MGS4, FPS are being used to make a new generation of children okay with murder as long as your doing it in a uniform or in the name of country . Just because COD puts on a negative spin on war doesn't mean its not engaging in glamorization. Bad publicist is sometimes better than good publicist in the eyes of the mass media. I'm probably still gonna play at least once but regardless they've gone too far & I'm sure there are more people who agree with Rocket Edge & myself!

Once again I'm going to point out as JKTrix has that you really can't say they've gone too far at this point since you haven't seen the scene in the context of the game. Nothing that built to that moment is in the trailer so without the context to really show how it's being presented, vilifying the game for it is premature.

And I definitely disagree about COD4 glamorizing war. Like I said before, COD4 showed war for what it is; a dirty despicable thing where there are no heroes and a lot of people end up dying, and not just the bad guys. Hell, at the very end of the game, the majority of the "good guys" are executed by the main antagonist as they lie helpless on a bridge. COD4 does nothing to glamorize war and violence that we haven't seen in countless TV shows, war and action movies, or other games which actually do glamorize war and violence by not showing any of the negative consequences. If anything, given the fact that almost every character in COD4 dies a very non-glamorous death by the end, it does quite the opposite of glamorizing war.

Old Manus
10-28-2009, 04:48 PM
I'm glad there are developers who don't feel the need to tip toe around sensitive topics.Dude, we're talking about the game requiring you to gun down dozens of unarmed civilians in cold blood. There are so many other ways to avoid tip toeing around the subject. If it was a cutscene or something then I wouldn't be too bothered, but this is absolutely, entirely unnecessary. The only logical reason for its existence is to create controversy. Watching that video makes me feel sick.

Dreddz
10-28-2009, 05:37 PM
Dude, we're talking about the game requiring you to gun down dozens of unarmed civilians in cold blood. There are so many other ways to avoid tip toeing around the subject. If it was a cutscene or something then I wouldn't be too bothered, but this is absolutely, entirely unnecessary. The only logical reason for its existence is to create controversy. Watching that video makes me feel sick.
The fact that this footage makes you feel sick speaks volumes about the power behind it. Becoming emotionally involved in a game is something people overlook and is the key reason why games are still seen as kids entertainment. I think people need to see the bigger picture and see the beneficial aspects of what Infinity Ward are trying to do with MW2 and how they are shaping the future of video game storytelling. Video games have an advantage over traditional forms of storytelling such as movies and books as you feel a closer connection with the story if you are the one shaping it, and I'm glad that at least one developer has realised this.

Shattered Dreamer
10-28-2009, 05:47 PM
Dude, we're talking about the game requiring you to gun down dozens of unarmed civilians in cold blood. There are so many other ways to avoid tip toeing around the subject. If it was a cutscene or something then I wouldn't be too bothered, but this is absolutely, entirely unnecessary. The only logical reason for its existence is to create controversy. Watching that video makes me feel sick.
The fact that this footage makes you feel sick speaks volumes about the power behind it. Becoming emotionally involved in a game is something people overlook and is the key reason why games are still seen as kids entertainment. I think people need to see the bigger picture and see the beneficial aspects of what Infinity Ward are trying to do with MW2 and how they are shaping the future of video game storytelling. Video games have an advantage over traditional forms of storytelling such as movies and books as you feel a closer connection with the story if you are the one shaping it, and I'm glad that at least one developer has realised this.

It's because of this emotional investment needless slaughter of civilians is never okay regardless of the context!

Dreddz
10-28-2009, 05:56 PM
It's because of this emotional investment needless slaughter of civilians is never okay regardless of the context!

Then I guess you are banging at Rockstar's doors condemning them for what they have done with the GTA series and State of Emergancy games. Those examples are much worse as they are treating the deaths of innocent people as a joke with no consequences. Infinity Ward are not at any point saying that killing these people is right. They are making you feel terrible about it, and in a way are probably going to deter people from doing these types of acts. Which is exactly the opposte of what the media is going to be telling us in a few weeks when the :bou::bou::bou::bou: really hits the fan.

Rase
10-28-2009, 06:10 PM
Just don't fire your gun at the unarmed folks if you don't wanna. Problem solved.

Slothy
10-28-2009, 06:44 PM
Just don't fire your gun at the unarmed folks if you don't wanna. Problem solved.

I had been thinking on the topic a little more since my last post and realized this as well. I really doubt that the game will force you to shoot any of the civilians during that section (in fact I'm willing to bet on it), leaving the choice up to the player though the impact of such a scene where you're in the middle of it likely won't be lessened.

Also, I was going to rip into Shattered Dreamers last post because I strongly disagree with the double standard he's preaching and think he and some others here are missing the point some of us are making by miles, but Dreddz said it far more tactfully than I might have. If killing innocent people in media is wrong regardless of context then you really can't say it's ok in GTA because they make a joke of it. That's literally the most absurd thing I've ever heard. Give me a game that makes you feel the gravity of what's happening over one that makes it a joke please, because the one that really makes you realize the horror of what's happening is doing something right and is up there with other works like Saving Private Ryan in my books. What we're probably going to see when MW2 comes out is a real maturation of video games as a vehicle for story and messages like this, and I welcome it.

Oddly enough, I find it funny that people feel this is going to far, but I doubt anyone in this thread would stop and think twice about innocent people being slaughtered in a movie and say it went too far if it conveys the right message and the gravity of the situation.

Bolivar
10-28-2009, 08:42 PM
I definitely agree with you here, and strongly disagree with Bolivar. In fact, that kind of attitude makes me glad that Bolivar isn't involved in developing games. The idea of games as a juvenile medium bothers me because many people are as mistaken in that regard as they are when they think that comic books are a juvenile medium that can't handle mature topics well.

That isn't fair. I've already stated how games specifically like Far Cry 2 and even the original Call of Duty can successfully and powerfully convey such messages using the perspective technique you guys are discussing. Everyone who knows me here knows I love MGS, especially MGS4; the way it conveys messages and makes the player think is one of the pillars of why I play the games.

You're setting up a straw man and I'm offended at you brushing off the fact that I recognize video games are (and believe they should) emerging as a recognized form of art and storytelling. I've said in nearly every post that I'm going to give Infinity Ward the benefit of the doubt and play the game, yet you're oblivious to it.

Old Manus hit the nail on the head of what I'm saying. There's a million ways to get that message across, and there will always be things that are in bad taste. MGS4 got the message of contemporary warfare across probably better than gunning down civilians in an airport ever will (sorry, I guess the cat's out of the bag).

And yes, I feel we disagree that there is a difference between this and GTA. There's a multitude of reasons for that and I'll reserve it to another post if necessary, but my first one in this thread pretty much sums it up.

Shattered Dreamer
10-28-2009, 10:25 PM
MGS4 got the message of contemporary warfare across probably better than gunning down civilians in an airport ever will (sorry, I guess the cat's out of the bag).

My opinion would be a double standard if I was pasting judgement on violence in video games in general but I'm not. I'm referring to how tastelessly war is glamorized by games like Modern Warfare 2. I don't see any harm in cartoonish violence like GTA so sue me! Cartoon violence is mere escapism! I honestly could care less if anyone agrees with this sentiment!

To tell the truth it is really the way MW2 is just being classless that annoys me. They could of brought up the issue like Kojima did in MGS4 in a social commentary narrative its not necessary to depict the slaughter of innocent bystanders to make the same point.

Slothy
10-28-2009, 11:16 PM
That isn't fair. I've already stated how games specifically like Far Cry 2 and even the original Call of Duty can successfully and powerfully convey such messages using the perspective technique you guys are discussing. Everyone who knows me here knows I love MGS, especially MGS4; the way it conveys messages and makes the player think is one of the pillars of why I play the games.

You're setting up a straw man and I'm offended at you brushing off the fact that I recognize video games are (and believe they should) emerging as a recognized form of art and storytelling. I've said in nearly every post that I'm going to give Infinity Ward the benefit of the doubt and play the game, yet you're oblivious to it.

Sorry if I hurt your feelings since that wasn't my intention, but you can't argue that video games are emerging as a new method of story telling and then claim that they're a juvenile art form and the most ineffective way to get a message across. It's one or the other, you can't have it both ways. And that's not even me putting words in your mouth; go back and read your second post and tell me you didn't outright say that video games are a poor place to convey messages like this.


And yes, I feel we disagree that there is a difference between this and GTA. There's a multitude of reasons for that and I'll reserve it to another post if necessary, but my first one in this thread pretty much sums it up.

My problem with the comparison to GTA violence was Shattered Dreamers implication that COD is making people trigger happy lunatics who could more easily take a life and GTA is good clean fun. Sorry, but if one of them is going to desensitize someone to the point that taking a life in reality actually became easier (which I don't believe either would for any mentally healthy teenager or adult), then so will the other.


I'm referring to how tastelessly war is glamorized by games like Modern Warfare 2.

I've stated numerous examples of how COD4 did not glamorize war and all you've come up with as a retort is to repeatedly state that it does glamorize war. Seriously, give me some examples of how it does or quit beating the dead horse, because saying it glamorizes war a hundred times isn't going to make it so.


To tell the truth it is really the way MW2 is just being classless that annoys me. They could of brought up the issue like Kojima did in MGS4 in a social commentary narrative its not necessary to depict the slaughter of innocent bystanders to make the same point.

I love MGS4, I really do. It's one of my favourite games on the PS3. That said, every single scene I've talked about in COD4 was far more moving and demonstrated the actual horrors of war far better than any in game narrative could. I feel the same way about this given scene. It's one thing to say that innocent people are killed in acts of terrorism and war everyday. Hell, we see it on the news all the time. The thing is, you tell most people and they'll say "that's a shame," and move on with their day. As far as getting the messages of how horrible war can be, I think sometimes it is necessary to see what happens and the consequences since that can send the message much better than even the greatest oration. And I feel video games can be the greatest vehicle for things like this because they're interactive. You can go ahead and be offended by something like this, in the mean time, I'll thank Infinity Ward for not glossing over the ugly truths of war and the human race.

Bolivar
10-28-2009, 11:35 PM
Sorry if I hurt your feelings since that wasn't my intention, but you can't argue that video games are emerging as a new method of story telling and then claim that they're a juvenile art form and the most ineffective way to get a message across. It's one or the other, you can't have it both ways. And that's not even me putting words in your mouth; go back and read your second post and tell me you didn't outright say that video games are a poor place to convey messages like this.


I guess I could have worded my thoughts better. My main point is - who is going to play this game? The vast majority, regardless of age, is not going to be mature enough to internalize it in the way you guys are suggesting, and the ones who are will be divided on whether this is actually good storytelling or just plain bad taste. Ourselves discussing this have yet to see for ourselves.

Activision has publicly confirmed and commented on the segment:
Activision Confirms and Explains Leaked Modern Warfare 2 Footage - IndustryGamers (http://www.industrygamers.com/news/activision-confirms-and-explains-leaked-modern-warfare-2-footage/)

Apparently there are non-optional checkpoints that warn that the upcoming content may be disturbing. I don't know how this game isn't going to be AO in the states.

Madame Adequate
10-29-2009, 12:01 AM
The thing about CoD4, and the reason I rate it so highly in terms of moving the medium forward, is that it used gameplay to make its points as much as it used story. Yes we can all sit around beating the drum about how war is bad and nukes are bad and etc. but CoD4 actually gave the player something to think about.

I'm hard pressed to think of another game, certainly another mainstream one, which so successfully and dramatically subverts the tropes of the genre it belongs to. CoD4's most memorable moment is a level where there are no enemies, no allies, no weapons; you do not fire a shot. You crawl around for a minute and die. That might just about fit in a game like Disaster Report, or could be a mindsmurf in a survival horror game, but in a mainstream big-budget FPS? That took balls and it worked damned well. Telling the player that nukes are bad is one thing. Making the player die in a nuclear explosion is another. One of these is certainly something most people might ignore, but actually playing through things like that does, I believe, have much more impact. Ultimately my point is that it's not good storytelling in the traditional sense, it's good storytelling in a much more exciting way; through gameplay.

That is why I am somewhat optimistic about this whole thing. Based on past experience, I am of the opinion that Infinity Ward will do something interesting and thought-provoking.

Finally, if games aren't able to force players to think of them as serious narrative vehicles, and players aren't going to open their minds to the idea themselves, then we might as well give up the whole pretentious thing and stop caring.

Slothy
10-29-2009, 12:12 PM
I guess I could have worded my thoughts better. My main point is - who is going to play this game? The vast majority, regardless of age, is not going to be mature enough to internalize it in the way you guys are suggesting, and the ones who are will be divided on whether this is actually good storytelling or just plain bad taste. Ourselves discussing this have yet to see for ourselves.

The thing is though, even if the majority who see it can't internalize it and see the purpose behind it as we can, will still feel the purpose behind it on a sub-conscious level when they realize how horrible it is. They may quit there and say that it's a terrible game and never should have included that, but it still did it's job of getting some part of them thinking. If you ask me, that's a mark of a great work of art, and there have been plenty of great works of art that weren't recognized for what they were until well after release.

Also, what MILF said.

JKTrix
10-29-2009, 02:27 PM
Activision has publicly confirmed and commented on the segment:
Activision Confirms and Explains Leaked Modern Warfare 2 Footage - IndustryGamers (http://www.industrygamers.com/news/activision-confirms-and-explains-leaked-modern-warfare-2-footage/)

Apparently there are non-optional checkpoints that warn that the upcoming content may be disturbing.

Wanted to draw attention to this again. I'll put Activision's full statement in a spoiler.


The leaked footage was taken from a copy of game that was obtained illegally and is not representative of the overall gameplay experience in Modern Warfare 2.

Infinity Ward’s Modern Warfare 2 features a deep and gripping storyline in which players face off against a terrorist threat dedicated to bringing the world to the brink of collapse. The game includes a plot involving a mission carried out by a Russian villain who wants to trigger a global war. In order to defeat him, the player infiltrates his inner circle. The scene is designed to evoke the atrocities of terrorism.

At the beginning of the game, players encounter a mandatory “checkpoint” in which they are warned that an upcoming segment may contain disturbing elements and they can choose not to engage in the gameplay that involves this scene. Consistent with its content, the game has been given an “M” for Mature by the Entertainment Software Ratings Board. The rating is prominently displayed on the front and back of the packaging, as well as in all advertising.

Wal-Mart is also pushing this pretty hard, and they have a 2-minute TV commercial about it (http://g4tv.com/videos/42400/Call-of-Duty-Modern-Warfare-2-Walmart-TV-Spot/). Near the beginning, the Wal-Mart commercial also stresses that the game is for adults (in a rather interesting way). The rest of the video is kind of lame, but whatever.

So, Activision says you can 'choose not to engage in the gameplay that involves this scene'. Some sites are saying that means you can skip it, but I'm not sure the quote from Activision indicates that. I think it just means you can choose not to...engage in the gameplay.

I'm glad that it doesn't just happen without warning. They state their intent with the scene clearly there, stress that the game is rated M for a reason, and warn you--the adult player--in advance that stuff is gonna happen soon that you might not like.


I don't know how this game isn't going to be AO in the states.

Violence < Sex in America, apparently.

Shattered Dreamer
10-29-2009, 03:24 PM
I'm referring to how tastelessly war is glamorized by games like Modern Warfare 2.

I've stated numerous examples of how COD4 did not glamorize war and all you've come up with as a retort is to repeatedly state that it does glamorize war. Seriously, give me some examples of how it does or quit beating the dead horse, because saying it glamorizes war a hundred times isn't going to make it so.


To tell the truth it is really the way MW2 is just being classless that annoys me. They could of brought up the issue like Kojima did in MGS4 in a social commentary narrative its not necessary to depict the slaughter of innocent bystanders to make the same point.

I love MGS4, I really do. It's one of my favourite games on the PS3. That said, every single scene I've talked about in COD4 was far more moving and demonstrated the actual horrors of war far better than any in game narrative could. I feel the same way about this given scene. It's one thing to say that innocent people are killed in acts of terrorism and war everyday. Hell, we see it on the news all the time. The thing is, you tell most people and they'll say "that's a shame," and move on with their day. As far as getting the messages of how horrible war can be, I think sometimes it is necessary to see what happens and the consequences since that can send the message much better than even the greatest oration. And I feel video games can be the greatest vehicle for things like this because they're interactive. You can go ahead and be offended by something like this, in the mean time, I'll thank Infinity Ward for not glossing over the ugly truths of war and the human race.

I reckon we final put this to bed. I think the very fact Infinity Ward think its okay to depict such scenes in MW2 counts as a certain degree of glamorization whether or not its doing so screaming NO MORE WAR as it does it. I appreciate we see it on TV everyday but that galvanizes my point. Most people use video games for escapism they don't need a constant reminder of the slaughter of innocence. I'm am happy to hear about the mandatory checkpoint with the warning but regardless I'm sorry the scene is tasteless regardless.

It's likely the controversy surrounding the scene will help sell the game which suggests its probably lacking in some part. I appreciate the visual medium is more affective then the narrative but having to shock people to sell your game is distasteful! But hey thats life!

JKTrix
10-29-2009, 04:30 PM
If there is any game that does not need controversy to sell more copies, it is Modern Warfare 2. It is the highest profile release this year, and I suspect few games already released will be able to compete with it when it comes to sales. Maybe Wii Fit +.

I understand why you think that though, since there have been games in the past that did that. This ain't one of them.

Slothy
10-29-2009, 05:56 PM
I reckon we final put this to bed. I think the very fact Infinity Ward think its okay to depict such scenes in MW2 counts as a certain degree of glamorization whether or not its doing so screaming NO MORE WAR as it does it.

I'm fairly convinced at this point that you don't actually know what glamorize means. I hate to keep on this point but glamorizing war would mean that COD4 or MW2 glorified it or romanticized it, in some way packaging it so that it seems like a righteous calling or noble crusade. From a gameplay stand point, it does no more to glamorize war and violence than any other game that has ever portrayed either. From a story standpoint, as I have said with numerous examples from COD4, it outright shows war for the dirty business it is and makes it seem about as appealing as getting kicked in the nads a hundred times over then being tortured to death.

There is nothing glorious or noble about war as it was portrayed in COD4. If you found it to be glmorizing war, that says more about you than it does COD4 and Infinity Ward.


Most people use video games for escapism they don't need a constant reminder of the slaughter of innocence.

Most people use TV, movies, books, etc. as forms of escapism. It doesn't mean they can't feature mature and even distasteful themes as part of their plot. Trying to argue this point is weak at best. If you don't want to play a game that maturely handles uncomfortable topics then don't play it. Don't try saying that it's unnecessary and goes too far though because then you're just trying to ruin it for those of us who can appreciate what Infinity Ward is trying to do.

Shattered Dreamer
10-29-2009, 06:43 PM
I reckon we final put this to bed. I think the very fact Infinity Ward think its okay to depict such scenes in MW2 counts as a certain degree of glamorization whether or not its doing so screaming NO MORE WAR as it does it.

I'm fairly convinced at this point that you don't actually know what glamorize means. I hate to keep on this point but glamorizing war would mean that COD4 or MW2 glorified it or romanticized it, in some way packaging it so that it seems like a righteous calling or noble crusade. From a gameplay stand point, it does no more to glamorize war and violence than any other game that has ever portrayed either. From a story standpoint, as I have said with numerous examples from COD4, it outright shows war for the dirty business it is and makes it seem about as appealing as getting kicked in the nads a hundred times over then being tortured to death.

There is nothing glorious or noble about war as it was portrayed in COD4. If you found it to be glmorizing war, that says more about you than it does COD4 and Infinity Ward.


Most people use video games for escapism they don't need a constant reminder of the slaughter of innocence.

Most people use TV, movies, books, etc. as forms of escapism. It doesn't mean they can't feature mature and even distasteful themes as part of their plot. Trying to argue this point is weak at best. If you don't want to play a game that maturely handles uncomfortable topics then don't play it. Don't try saying that it's unnecessary and goes too far though because then you're just trying to ruin it for those of us who can appreciate what Infinity Ward is trying to do.

If you use glamorize as a hypernyms it can mean to alter, change or modify something in a either a possible or negative light . Infitity Ward in MW2 does at least try to alter,change or modify graphic scenes of war to sell a videogame. To me its tasteless! Accept not everyone agrees with your view points because I honestly don't what you think of mine, I've said that in previous posts. You seem at this point to be honestly going out of your way to prove mine wrong or misinformed. No offence I was just offering another view point:D

Rocket Edge
11-10-2009, 11:20 PM
Awesome, awesome, awesome! I'll go into more dept soon but I can't turn my head away from the online multiplayer.

Shoeberto
11-10-2009, 11:42 PM
And Activision can kiss it if they expect me to buy MW2. I'm not paying £55 for a 4-5 hour single player campaign. I don't care how good COD4's campaign was (and it most definitely was good) there are better things I can spend my money on. I didn't even dig the multiplayer in COD4.
Pretty much how I feel. My copy of CoD4 came with a graphics card I bought, but it's really not something I'd pay full retail for. $20-$30, maybe, but as much as I thought the multiplayer was well done, it didn't really grab me like it does most people. I'll probably just hold off and try to avoid spoilers until I can find it on sale or something.

Bolivar
11-11-2009, 03:49 AM
Well the game's out and I have to say the scene wasn't that bad actually playing it. I think it was just something that seemed creepier than it really was, being played in some shady kid's room with french dialogue and bad quality. However, it kind of feels out of place in a game that pretty much has a non-existent story. IW themselves explained they make the missions and have the story fit that. It's obvious that two different operations (and maybe 3) at different parts in the campaign were made from the same level. It doesn't really make sense to have something like the airport scene in a game like this.

Dreddz
11-11-2009, 08:49 PM
I see no one wasted any time in picking this game up. Last night my friends list was packed with people playing MW2. Even people who I thought had no interest in buying the game seem to be playing it. I almost feel a little bit left out :cry:

I won't be buying this game at £55 although I saw an advert in the Metro this morning showing MW2 going for just £26 at Sainsburys. I'm very very tempted to pick this game up now. Like, tomorrow.

Bolivar
11-11-2009, 08:51 PM
Dreddz, please please please pick this game up if you can get it for a steal. You're pretty much spot on about the campaign, but i think with the addition of co-op this is something people will be playing for a long time.

Dreddz
11-11-2009, 09:00 PM
For £26 I can't really say no. Although it seems like I'm not the only one who saw the advert (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pt9G2IrCArc). Ill be surprised if Sainsburys have any copies left.

~*~Celes~*~
11-11-2009, 10:20 PM
lol, my boyfriend's trying to play it on his ps3 but there seems to be a big server crash or something going on. I have to giggle at his misfortune :D

Rocket Edge
11-11-2009, 10:34 PM
Yeah, the patch that was supposed to come in for trophies actually screwed up the online multiplayer. It's back friday, so I'll be twiddling my thumbs until then. :(

And yeah, for 26 quid its a bargain. Even give the multiplayer a try, I can't imagine how anyone wouldn't find it addictive.

~*~Celes~*~
11-11-2009, 10:43 PM
Yeah, the patch that was supposed to come in for trophies actually screwed up the online multiplayer. It's back friday, so I'll be twiddling my thumbs until then. :(

And yeah, for 26 quid its a bargain. Even give the multiplayer a try, I can't imagine how anyone wouldn't find it addictive.

He's quite saddened by this news as well. Ah well, he'll just play campaign in the meantime, or WoW.

ljkkjlcm9
11-11-2009, 10:46 PM
how often do we watch people get mindlessly killed in movies? How often do minor characters get gunned down next to the main character and we think nothing of it? How often does the main character of a movie kill people because it was "necessary" and how often do they do it just to do it?

Really, the only reason it's even an issue, is because it's a game. If this were a movie, and we saw the main character struggle with doing this to keep his cover safe, we'd have no problem with it. But the fact that a person is playing the game and doing it themselves? Well that's horrible!

I mean, in Infamous, to become evil, you essentially beat up and kill civilians left and right. The game is rated by the ESRB: M, meaning people under 18 or whatever aren't suppose to be playing this game. If by the age of 18 you can't differentiate between fiction and reality, then you have more problems then this game.

I have way too many other games right now to actually buy this, especially considering I will play very little online. But after awhile when it drops in price or something, I may get it. Or maybe I'll ask for it for christmas.

THE JACKEL

Mirage
11-11-2009, 11:35 PM
Hey guys

final fantasy tactics glamorizes war

it's tasteless

Bolivar
11-12-2009, 02:31 AM
Just wanted to say PSN matchmaking servers are gradually coming up, some weird thing where 20k additional people can connect at a time. I just kept hit circle and x on play online and got in.

Was hoping we could get some EoFF private games going but not so many people here have it yet on PS3, but I guess we could each get people on our friends list to have a decent game. let me know my psn is rmx687.

Rocket Edge
11-12-2009, 03:14 PM
^ Very much so. If we have enough people for a private game that would be great fun.

Bolivar
11-16-2009, 04:37 AM
Sorry, but I just had to revive this thread from obscurity since we all pretty much said "Wait until you play the game!!!" (including me) and now that the game's out we really should be talking about this.

Yes, this scene is completely out of place in the game and has no value to any kind of plot or message outside of you killing civilians. There is only one mission in the entire game where you actually square off against Makarov's people and he completely evaporates as a villain for pretty much the entirety of the game. The conflict with Makarov never gets resolved; I have to say this is easily one of the least cohesive stories I've ever seen in a video game.

Infinity Ward themselves explained in a recent Bonus Round episode on GameTrailers.com that they create the missions and then move them around to accomodate the story. This scene makes absolutely no sense in a game which is built around its missions. Essentially, they want to create action-packed, emotional missions, and that's what you get most out of the game. Considering this, and taking into account Modern Warfare 2 as a game, this scene has absolutely no importance outside of its shock value.

That being said I've already beaten the campaign twice (Normal and Hardened) and its absolutely a campaign I'll see myself playing time and time again for years to come. It's incredibly well done and easily holds up against the best games of this year. But finally getting to see the context of this scene and judging it along the entire game has pretty much confirmed my preconcieved notions of this scene:

It's tasteless.

Yes, it's far less disturbing when you actually play it. Seeing it for myself in my living room made it almost analogous to the Grand Theft Auto black comedy I alluded to previously in this thread. I just can't see any significance to this being in the game other than its immediate shock value.

Steve
11-16-2009, 11:14 AM
I disagree Bolivar, I completed the game too and we can both agree that the ending leaves it very open to a 3rd modern warfare game. Especially since 2 of the characters make it thanks to Nikolai and they even say "you know this isn't over, they'll be looking for us" the only way to interpret this is that the game isn't over, clearly the surviving members of the games story are going to go after Makarov in MW3 when that comes out or in DLC expansion if MW3 isn't an option. The level explained why Russia and America end up at war which is something that Makarov wanted, he wanted Russia and America at war with each other after the events of the previous MW game. With that level you directly see the events what caused it to finally boil over in to war. Without that the declaration of war against america would not have been as well explained the other thing to note is that the game wanted to show the legnths Shepherd was willing to go to and that also set up further understanding for his actions later on in the game.

Rocket Edge
11-16-2009, 07:36 PM
I played through that controversial level and this is my opinion on it. The level is completely unnecessary. It's just a good old means to build hype around the game through some controversy. Don't even compare this to GTA because there is no comparison. It's the crowds AI that makes it hit home. You see guys bleeding to death while another is trying to help them off the floor, and both in turn get shot at. The sound effects are very real also, and if I was compare that to GTA you would get someone running after you screaming "oh it's on now!". There are other things too, like that it's a group doing this and not you alone, but I'll leave it there for now. I wouldn't go as far as to say I was disturbed or anything (although I assume some people were), but It wasn't in the least bit fun to play. I didn't like it at all. Please don't counter this paragraph by saying "well there's an option not to play the level you know", well of course, but who on earth will actually not go ahead with it.

how often do we watch people get mindlessly killed in movies?

Really, the only reason it's even an issue, is because it's a game.
There is a difference between a movie and a game. In a movie, you watch. In a game, your the one who carries out whatever needs to be done. But this isn't a stab at MW2 either. I haven't played Infamous but that's unnecessary also.

Madame Adequate
11-19-2009, 10:07 AM
Yeah I think you guys might have missed the point. Remember you're not a committed terrorist, you're a CIA operative who is trying to infiltrate Makarov's group and get a huge amount of intel. The point is that it doesn't work. Makarov has you figured out and he uses you to spark a freaking war between Russia and the US. Combined with the other stuff that goes on in the game, the message is pretty clear: He who would fight monsters might become one himself. And in war, he will.

MW2 was an intense, exhilarating experience, but it wasn't often 'fun' in the same way that shooting Covies is. The level in question didn't offend me, but it was very shocking. And it was supposed to be. If the game made you feel conflicted in your objective vs. "oh god what am I doing" then good.

Steve
11-19-2009, 11:42 PM
Yeah I think you guys might have missed the point. Remember you're not a committed terrorist, you're a CIA operative who is trying to infiltrate Makarov's group and get a huge amount of intel. The point is that it doesn't work. Makarov has you figured out and he uses you to spark a freaking war between Russia and the US. Combined with the other stuff that goes on in the game, the message is pretty clear: He who would fight monsters might become one himself. And in war, he will.



Exactly the point of the level, the other things to note as I said is that experiencing what caused the war rather than just hearing about it helps make the war more real and more futile. In one of the missions / briefings I heard the game state that the Russians are intent on killing 1000 Americans for every Russian casualty in the terrorist incident at the airport the entire war started due to the idea of revenge and then after taking back Washington the American troops are wondering when they will be going to Russia and the only thing they seem to care about is that when they get there they're going to burn it down in revenge for the burning of their own capitol.

On a side note, I couldn't help but notice in the Washington missions, there were trenches and such in what could only be described as The Mall, they seemed to fit kinda with the Trenches found in The Mall in Fallout 3, coincidence or maybe a knowing nod to the Fallout 3 team?

Craig
11-20-2009, 12:14 AM
Allen's death shocked me more than the killing (although i was reluctant to pull the trigger) because the start of the game builds him up to be one of your main characters, then he goes through all that innocent murder, just to be killed himself so it was all for nothing. When he was shot i thought he would survive, then K.I.A pops up and i was like "whhhattt"

Absconditus_Oraculum
11-24-2009, 08:51 AM
The scene did have a big impact. It horrified people and disgusted them. A lot of them. Not really successfull glamorization I think... You felt something bad seeing/doing it. You felt something bad will doing/seeing something bad. Last I cheched that was how it was supposed to be.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
"The thing is though, even if the majority who see it can't internalize it and see the purpose behind it as we can, will still feel the purpose behind it on a sub-conscious level when they realize how horrible it is. They may quit there and say that it's a terrible game and never should have included that, but it still did it's job of getting some part of them thinking. If you ask me, that's a mark of a great work of art, and there have been plenty of great works of art that weren't recognized for what they were until well after release."
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Very well put. Too many posts here for me to rember names, but some one was talking about how this wasn't a good way to get the message across? How simple cut scenes and text was better(something like that; MGS style they said)? Well to that person, I ask you: How long exactly did you think about the acts and what was going on after it was presented to you that way? How long do you ever stop and think about simular things when you hear them on the news? How much time of your day do you spend on it; spend debating it like this? It may have been tastless (I don't really think so..) and a flat out bad choice. It may not have been done in a way you'd prefer, either.






But you are thinking about it now aren't you.

Shadow Bahamut
11-25-2009, 03:02 PM
i haven't really played the campaign mode...i've done the first 2 missions and got extremely bored. Even then it was only because IW screwed up with the servers...

I reckon we have a good online match up with EoFF members, come on! sign up!

PSN: shadow_runner88

Bolivar
11-25-2009, 07:09 PM
^ added! (rmx687). Although I think it's just me and Rocket Edge from EoFF who are playing this game.

Anyway I still can't believe people are honestly putting this forth as a meaningful part of a compelling narrative. It's not - it's a substance-less event in a non-existent story. Maybe all that trouble making Makarov seem like the worst person in the world would have been worth it if you didn't actually ask him for help at the end. Again, there's only one mission where you actually take on his organization, for the rest of the game he's simply not there. It would be really hard for me to imagine any reason outside of shock value the developers could have made this, and given what they've already admitted about their design style, it makes it even harder.

Infinity Ward are not great developers. While they make a mean shooter, their games are nowhere near the caliber or stories of Half-Life, Deus Ex, System Shock or Bioshock.

Shadow Bahamut
11-25-2009, 07:21 PM
Infinity Ward are not great developers. While they make a mean shooter, their games are nowhere near the caliber or stories of Half-Life, Deus Ex, System Shock or Bioshock.

i don't know what to think of IW tbh. I do think, however, that the likes of CoD4, 5 and 6 are better than the afforementioned games' online playability imo. This makes them a better game for me, mainly because i can't stand a FPS trying to take on the role of an RPG as well, i just wanna get on it and shoot things, not have to sit through minutes and hours of cinematics, i'd only expect that from the likes of FF etc.