Comments on: Controversial Modern Warfare 2 Opening Act

By: Extron

Extron — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 19:18:13 +0000

I believe that this is way too far. People can compare this to thinks like GTA and stuff, but there is a subtle and important difference. In GTA, regardless of who you attack, they will fight back, as with most games, regardless of who you are attacking. With this, you are shooting civilians that do not fight back, instead trying to get to safety, even helping other injured people. Including the fact that you are committing a massacre in an airport, this has just crossed the line. I would not be bothered if this scene took place in third person, or at least if this section was not playable, like the third level of Call of Duty 4, where some similar stuff goes on. But actually participating in the murders of unarmed civilians that won't fight back? Anyone who is looking forward to this is just disturbed.

By: Dont be a tard

Dont be a tard — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 06:07:16 +0000

I don't know why so many people are complaining about this. They act like they are being forced to watch these videos on the net and that they are being forced to spend the money and install and play this game. If people don't like it so much then they shouldn't type it into there Google search. I think a level like this would be awesome nothing like spraying down a bunch of unarmed noob civilians. IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT DON'T BUY IT. Doesn't matter anyway everyone knows that theirs going to be a zombie apocalypse sometime in the future. Then what are you going to do be afraid of mowing down a bunch of unarmed civilians/family/friends.

By: nimz

nimz — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 03:20:25 +0000

I don't get why everyone is getting up in arms about this, some of the best cinema in the world depicts some of the worst atrocities committed by human kind without restraint or apology, why should games be any different?

It isn't glorifying killing innocent people or terrorism in any way and is just being used as a very powerful plot device to draw the player in to the plot and have some compassion for the people fighting against this.

Perhaps if you were required to throw a grenade in to a group of children to be met with a "MMMOONSSSTTEERRRRRRRRR KKILLLLL" from the airports PA system I would feel different, but there is no glorification there, only a realistic depiction of war and the innocent casualties that it inevitably creates.

By: Asim Tanvir

Asim Tanvir — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 23:47:32 +0000

You make some valid point guys. I guess it is just a plot device at the end of the day but one which puts you in the shoes of the “terrorist”. If Infinity Ward wanted to, they could have just made that whole section into a flashback cut-scene to save the “hassle” of the controversy. Infact the better idea probably would have been to put the player in the shoes of a person experiencing this terrorist act at the airport. They could of made the player be a CIA agent at the airport at that moment experiencing the chaos at the airport, it would have been like the part from Call of Duty 4 where the soldier dies and you view it from his perspective.

Hmm the more I think about it, the more I think Infinity Ward could have made the player feel emotion and hatred towards the terrorists in many different ways rather than the one they ultimately went with. They clearly have a talented bunch of people working there but I can't help but think they went with the “any publicity is good publicity” angle.

By: CLD

CLD — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 23:45:43 +0000

Waaaa fuckin Waaaaaaa its a game you over pacified pussies. Welcome to the real world. This shit happens every day. Deal with it.

By: Nacho Libre

Nacho Libre — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 23:14:21 +0000

Yeah, teach players how to be like terrorists? I don't see any good in that, too. Using the scene as a plot device as an excuse is bs. There are other ways to tell the story rather than experiencing it in First Person perspective. Just one more inspirational tool for would be Columbine wanna-be's, and I bet this game will be popularly pirated in terrorist states for this scene alone. As a FPS game player this is not acceptable. Good thing Activision has already put me off with the $10 price increase on PC games and the ommission of Dedicated Servers.

By: L_Vanguard

L_Vanguard — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 22:10:26 +0000

One point I think everyone seems to be missing in this discussion is this: why, if you are playing as a CIA agent undercover, who is (or should be) currently aware that these are terrorists that you are with, who will soon be shooting people en masse, why not just, oh you know SHOOT THE TERRORISTS FIRST. The whole “they are kill innocent civilians jazz” isn't what gets to me, its the fact that, the CIA agent (you), seeing that these guys are obviously terrorists (the whole shooting civilians would be a good indicator) doesn't shoot these terrorists!

This is probably just a plot device – as the only reason why this would happen is to ensure that the villian lives to the end (as he is present at the scene), because it would be kinda anti-climatic to kill him in the beginning. I get that the point of this intro is to stir up hate for the bad guys, but I just can't bring myself to feel it knowing that the character I am controlling isn't one of them, but rather a “good guy” in disguise (who misses an opportunity to get them). And the (possible) counter-argument “he didn't want to blow his cover” is bull****, as your character is the last to leave the elevator and has a chance to shoot the rest of them while their backs are turned.