• Our spoiler embargo for the non-DLC content for Pokémon Legends: Z-A is now lifted! Feel free to discuss the game freely across the forums without the need of spoiler tabs, and use content from the game within your profiles!

Call of Duty: MW2 has a contreversial mission.

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Golbat-Man

New Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2009
Messages
237
Reaction score
0
Now, I usually think most FPSes in this day and age are monotonous and indistinguishable. You got your melee weapon, pistol, shotgun, machine gun, grenades, rocket launcher, and pending on when the game takes place, your fictional weapon of the day. You play capture the flag or whatever on the war-torn town map or the jungle map ad nauseum. It's boring as hell from the looks of it.

So I wasn't really excited about CoD: MW2 when my local paper and classmates got all excited over it. I thought that it was just another FPS for casual gamers, ala Halo or Counter-Strike.

Untill I saw THIS.

Now, I'm not some kind of moral guardian who believes that videogames cause violence and stuff, but this is ridiculous. I can understand killing people/monsters trying to kill you, but this is unspeakable.

I'm not making a debate over whether videogames cause violence or not, but I'm make a debate over wheather this mission is going to far. I've heard there's an option to skip the mission for this reason, but is it too soon for this stuff?
 
So what exactly is this? Can't be fucked loading video, so someone give me the juice on it.

If what I see is true, it involves the possibility of killing innocents in an airport. In this situation, all one can say is GTA.
 
Well for one I am shocked this didn't cause much more shock and outrage. It seems like only GTA now days can actually provoke people into any sort of action.

Anyway it was a bad idea for the company to do this, and trust me I am all for artistic freedom in Video Games. But when you are trying to be controversial with terror attacks that involve civilians, you have to think of the worst case scenario. I doubt any of these companies want their game and company to be shown over and over again on the news after some terror group decided to shoot up a airport, or some school killer opened fire in a cafeteria and this game was found in his room.

You really are rolling the dice in that nothing even similar will happen any time soon that could be linked back to your game in any sort or fashion. And of course I guess it didn't help that just a few days before this game came out, a Army Officer opened fire into a crowd of soldiers and civilians at Fort Hood.
 
The video loads for me, but I still don't get what's going on. Could you better elaborate on what the mission is? Not all of us play these types of games.

From the looks of it though, it appears you're going undercover (since firing on them gets "your cover blown") so I can understrand being stuck in that situation, but I do agree it's kind of sick and weird. Even if I was pretending to be on the enemy's side, I wouldn't kill the people they wanted me to, I'd try and find some way around it. Maybe it was an attempt at realism, but...eh. What do you do? This is the same world where you play games that allow you to go around stealing cars and sleeping with hookers.
 
Just for people wondering, in the game the CIA has a man that has infiltrated a Russian Terror Cell. The mission was for a terror attack at a Russian Airport, a good part of the level is walking through the airport and gunning down hundreds of helpless civilians before finally meeting the SWAT team outside and having a shoot out with them. You can play through the mission with out shooting a single civilian, but the ability and encouragement to do so is clearly there.
 
And why the fuck is that controversial again?

If you can run over and shoot hundreds of innocent civilians in GTA, then where's the problem? Those who blame their mini-genocides on this game simply have fuck all with their life and deserve to be executed.
 
A game would inspire a terrorist group to carry out an attack? Puh-lease.

As for kids shooting up their school? The only thing that would prevent that would be changing history to make it so that guns never existed. Certainly, a game could be used as a sort of "planning", but fuck, walking around in an open field could be used as planning. We gonna ban open fields?

Having said that, this actually horrifies me... if only because of how realistic it is. GTA, those people are jokes... the people in this are programmed to help out those who are injured, like real people do.
 
Last edited:
Golbat-Man said:
I'm not making a debate over whether videogames cause violence or not, but I'm make a debate over wheather this mission is going to far. I've heard there's an option to skip the mission for this reason, but is it too soon for this stuff?
Click to expand...
"Too soon" after what? Columbine? 9/11? V-Tech? Fort Hood? Whatever recent random act of mass violence has occurred somewhere that I'm not aware of? The sad fact of the matter is that there's always something like this happening somewhere in the world. As soon as it stops being "too soon" after one incident, another will sprout up the very next day.

Also, wow, some of these replies have me seriously going "WTF?!" What's wrong with you guys? There's a very clear difference between GTA and this.

In GTA, sure, you have the option of going bat-shit crazy and blowing up random civies for the hell of it. But in GTA, you're playing as a criminal, and while the option to commit mass-murder is there, there aren't any missions that say "Go out and kill 50 random pedestrians via drive-by." You're even discouraged from going on killing sprees by having it up your wanted level, which leads to the cops taking you in, losing all your weapons and some of your money.

However, in COD:MW2, you're playing as an undercover agent, a "Good Guy", and murdering dozens of innocent civilians is part of the mission. Even if you can clear that whole stage without firing a shot, as Big Lutz pointed out, you're clearly encouraged to take down as many civies as you can. There's also the fact that this is just so much more graphic than anything I've ever seen in a GTA game, even GTA4.

I've never been the kind of person to blame society's shortcoming on violent entertainment, be it movies, video games, or any other form of fiction. In fact, I really love violent video games. Whenever I play the Left4Dead2 demo, I always love using the hunting knife whenever the hoard comes around, simply because I love watching my screen get splattered in gore, and my machete getting more and more blood-stained as I progress. That said, I can totally see why a level like this could cause an uproar and spark up the whole "Video games inspire violence" people again. While I admire Infinity Wards attempts to create as realistic a game as they possibly can, I definitely think that MW2 crosses a line with this mission.
 
A video game trying to get you to shoot people...

how is that any different from any other first-person shooter?
 
Ryuutakesh! said:
A video game trying to get you to shoot people...

how is that any different from any other first-person shooter?
Click to expand...
Most FPS games have the people you're shooting at shoot back.

EDIT: Also, in before obligatory "If you don't like it, don't play it" comments.
 
Rellik said:
Most FPS games have the people you're shooting at shoot back.
Click to expand...

Depends. I thought the rule was shoot them before they can shoot you. And I see know difference between shooting someone holding a gun but not using it, and shooting someone not holding a gun.

In a video game of course. Real life tends to be different.
 
Ryuutakesh! said:
Depends. I thought the rule was shoot them before they can shoot you. And I see know difference between shooting someone holding a gun but not using it, and shooting someone not holding a gun.

In a video game of course. Real life tends to be different.
Click to expand...

My point was, there's a clear difference between a game where you're killing enemies, be them enemy soldiers, aliens, or mutant zombie freaks, and a game where you're massacring unarmed, defenseless, innocent people who weren't doing anything worse then waiting for their flight.
 
Rellik said:
My point was, there's a clear difference between a game where you're killing enemies, be them enemy soldiers, aliens, or mutant zombie freaks, and a game where you're massacring unarmed, defenseless, innocent people who weren't doing anything worse then waiting for their flight.
Click to expand...

If you don't mind playing games where all you do is kill random people, why do you have such a problem with... well, killing random people?
 
Minor plot spoilers ahead. Major will be tagged.


In that mission, and a part of the game leading up to it, you play as an undercover operative. Your mission is to get close to a man known as Markarov, along with his group of international terrorists. The ultimate goal is to stop him. He is a terrible, horribly dangerous person, with a master plan dead set on the murder of thousands, possibly millions.

To take this person down, you must gain his trust.

To be honest, that mission is an emotional catalyst for the rest of the game. It serves a major plot point, not just mindless shooting games. It drives the point home that war is hell, in a way that killing countless mooks can never accomplish.

The player has the opportunity to commit heinous acts for the sake of the world at large. Of course it stumbles into the gray mortality, but it wouldn't be moving otherwise. The game, and for that matter, any really good book or movie, will play with your feelings. It brings you up, and knocks you down.

This mission is designed from the ground up to instill a hatred of the enemy in the player. And in my experience, it worked beautifully.

I'm proud that video games have evolved enough to be able to produce a story this complex, able to convey feelings and emotions like they are now. Of course people who haven't played the game won't understand at first. From the outside, it's a mindless slaughter. But if you pick up that game, you know it's there for a reason.


MAJOR SPOILER-MAJOR SPOILER-MAJOR SPOILER-MAJOR SPOILER
In a sad twist of irony, it's revealed that the players efforts were for naught anyway. At the end of the mission, it's revealed that Markarov knew that you were a spy from the beginning.

EVEN MORE MAJOR SPOILER-EVEN MORE MAJOR SPOILER
The player is unexpectedly murdered in cold blood by Markarov at the level's completion.
 
lol@ this. I already saw these complaints all over YouTube videos. How is shooting 3-D animated pixels anything bad? FPS's are all about killing people, what is so different about killing pixels that represent "civilians"? It's a war game, game about world war and killing. War is not fun and this is what the game represents. In the game the capital and America are NUKED, and that isn't even contrevesial yet killing Russian "civilians" is -_-. Please go back to when the first GTA game was being released and bitch at that for having civilians in danger, all you're doing is helping the game sell, because controversy sells. Also the game is 18+ so no child should be playing it.
 
.ιиsσмиιαc. said:
lol@ this. I already saw these complaints all over YouTube videos. How is shooting 3-D animated pixels anything bad? FPS's are all about killing people, what is so different about killing pixels that represent "civilians"? It's a war game, game about world war and killing. War is not fun and this is what the game represents. In the game the capital and America are NUKED, and that isn't even contrevesial yet killing Russian "civilians" is -_-. Please go back to when the first GTA game was being released and bitch at that for having civilians in danger, all you're doing is helping the game sell, because controversy sells. Also the game is 18+ so no child should be playing it.
Click to expand...

This.
 
I'm not doing to watch the video (as I'm on dial up) but I already know the general plot of what happens. Now has anyone mentioned that before this mission comes up you get a warning, saying that you will have to kill civilians, so it's not like it's suddenly like "NOW YOU HAVE TO KILL EVERYTHING K?", and after the warning you have a choice to skip the mission.

I think Infinity Ward (...they did make MW2, right, or have I got it confused?) tried to make the game stick out, and so they did.

As for my opinion on the amount of violence, I don't really care. I can tell violence on a T.V. from violence in real life, so I'm not going to play the game then suddenly pull out a rifle and shoot up an airport.

And as for the parents who are complaining about it, they forget, this is an eighteen rated game anyway, so if they buy it for their thirteen year old son and he turns out to be a homicidal manic, it's their own fault in my opinion.

I'm not saying people should, but I think there are too many twelve/eleven year olds playing eighteen rated games. Now, I'm not saying it's good that fifteen/sixteen year olds are buying them ether, but a sixteen year old would be less affected by the level of violence in certain games, whereas a child might see it, and think, "Hey? Why don't I do that! It looks fun" or something of the sort.


Just my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Hydraone said:
Minor plot spoilers ahead. Major will be tagged.


In that mission, and a part of the game leading up to it, you play as an undercover operative. Your mission is to get close to a man known as Markarov, along with his group of international terrorists. The ultimate goal is to stop him. He is a terrible, horribly dangerous person, with a master plan dead set on the murder of thousands, possibly millions.

To take this person down, you must gain his trust.

To be honest, that mission is an emotional catalyst for the rest of the game. It serves a major plot point, not just mindless shooting games. It drives the point home that war is hell, in a way that killing countless mooks can never accomplish.

The player has the opportunity to commit heinous acts for the sake of the world at large. Of course it stumbles into the gray mortality, but it wouldn't be moving otherwise. The game, and for that matter, any really good book or movie, will play with your feelings. It brings you up, and knocks you down.

This mission is designed from the ground up to instill a hatred of the enemy in the player. And in my experience, it worked beautifully.

I'm proud that video games have evolved enough to be able to produce a story this complex, able to convey feelings and emotions like they are now. Of course people who haven't played the game won't understand at first. From the outside, it's a mindless slaughter. But if you pick up that game, you know it's there for a reason.


MAJOR SPOILER-MAJOR SPOILER-MAJOR SPOILER-MAJOR SPOILER
In a sad twist of irony, it's revealed that the players efforts were for naught anyway. At the end of the mission, it's revealed that Markarov knew that you were a spy from the beginning.

EVEN MORE MAJOR SPOILER-EVEN MORE MAJOR SPOILER
The player is unexpectedly murdered in cold blood by Markarov at the level's completion.
Click to expand...

This.

If anything it shows the horrors of war, and makes the point war is NOT really a cheap game.

Hell, my brother is as neo-con as they get, and thinks people are nuts to jump on this scene. He told me something like this happens in practically every Tom Clancy novel. Yet people don't call THOSE out for being pro-terrorist.
 
Guys, I never said that this was going to start a killing spree. My idea was, was that this is kind of offensive. Comparing GTA to this is unfair. I've seen GTA and it looks like a cartoon. This looks quite realistic. And in usual war games, like Halo or Medal of Honor, the people you shoot are shooting at you. They want to kill you and you're justified in taking them out. But in this mission in CoD:MW2, it's just a slaughter for the sake of shock value.

If there was a game that let you play as a Nazi, would you be offended? What if you could fly a plane in the world trade centers, or play a Virginia Tech game? Keep in mind both of those two games exist on Newgrounds. It's just kind of a hot subject at the moment, with the terrorist threat and all. Not that you would care. It really kind of hits too close to home for some people.

Then again, I am on a pokemon message board, so maybe I should lower my expectations for mature responses.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom