Daily Mail Voices Concern Over "Ultra-Violent" Modern Warfare 3
- Thread starter Logan Westbrook
- Start date
Recommended Videos
You know what always mystifies me? These papers and news shows always complain about games that are too violent or in bad taste, but in almost all cases (there are a few rare exceptions, though) they just seem to be preaching to the converted.
Most people who would take offence at something bad in a video game are already non-gamers who don't find entertainment in a game, and therefor wouldn't buy them.
However, the fact is that the majority of people simply don't care, or find violent entertainment entertaining, as evidenced by Modern Warfare II, which let's not forget had you COMMIT A BLOODY TERRORIST ATTACK, and yet that was the best selling game of all time. Literally. The only way these people could prove to the companies that make these games that the content of said games is wrong, is by making these games not become wild successes. So these newspapers and news shows need to change their tune and convince the average gamer that what they are playing is wrong, not the reactionary squares that said newspapers and TV shows always aim to appeal to.
On a side note, that trailer looks awesome. I might very well buy the game, despite my dislike of the multiplayer balance in the last one, because it reminds me extremely favorably of World in Conflict.
Most people who would take offence at something bad in a video game are already non-gamers who don't find entertainment in a game, and therefor wouldn't buy them.
However, the fact is that the majority of people simply don't care, or find violent entertainment entertaining, as evidenced by Modern Warfare II, which let's not forget had you COMMIT A BLOODY TERRORIST ATTACK, and yet that was the best selling game of all time. Literally. The only way these people could prove to the companies that make these games that the content of said games is wrong, is by making these games not become wild successes. So these newspapers and news shows need to change their tune and convince the average gamer that what they are playing is wrong, not the reactionary squares that said newspapers and TV shows always aim to appeal to.
On a side note, that trailer looks awesome. I might very well buy the game, despite my dislike of the multiplayer balance in the last one, because it reminds me extremely favorably of World in Conflict.
And you can be sure I felt it all the way here everytime I heard about another attack committed by the IRA and their affiliated groups. To me terrorism has zero honor or dignity. Anybody who subscribes to it has less worth to the human race than the stuff I have to rub out of my eyes when I wake up in the morning.BrotherRool said:In fairness to you, 7/7 was a whole magnitude smaller and terrorists have been bombing us since forever. Al-Qaeda have nothing on the Irishsamsonguy920 said:
But it's very sad that the short term gain for newspapers and politicians is always to hype it up
There is fighting for something that you believe in, and then there is just murdering people because you are pissed off at a government that those murdered people have no control over.
But back to the story at hand, it is even more sad that those rags have people who buy their rags.
But people do need something for housebreaking pets and when the toilet paper is out.
It's the Daily Mail, the newspaper that does no research; kinda like FOX, really.
Anywho, I don't care, this all ends up giving more sales to MW3 anyway. Bleh.
Anywho, I don't care, this all ends up giving more sales to MW3 anyway. Bleh.
Imagine the irony if it is discovered she made it all the way to middle school before quitting to find "something more" for herself.The_root_of_all_evil said:
Mind if I print that pic? I need something for my dartboard.
I seen a whooping body count of 4 people acutly dying WITH NO BLOOD, and most are guesses I.E. guy got hit by a grenade half way in, and compared to a video trailer of Crysis 2 its about the same, if that is a definition of ULTRA VILOENT, then every move with a gun made should be the end of days for them. *Ques Fox News coverage*
It's sadder that the Daily Mail pretty much outsells all other papers, but those that go even further to do less research.samsonguy920 said:
But even terrorists aren't people to hate or look down upon, they're humans like us who've just led themselves down an incredibly wrong path and been indoctrinated by everything they've grown up to see. They deserve our pity.
Besides Churchill and Truman have been guilty of far more civilian casualties than probably the whole sum of terrorism over the past millenia.
But this is getting far too serious a discussion to be spawned from something the Daily Mail did
Firslty, I would like to point out that the writers of the Dailey Mail are complete idiots. They constantly, always do sensationalist stories like this because it'll get them publicity.
Second, if films can reproduce and recreate terroist actions that really happened - Several 9/11 ones, a few on massive bomb attacks in Saudi Arabia etc etc - then surely games should be able to. It's not an utterly direct reference, it's a viable plot move in a game series that has previously had nuclear explosions, EMPs, the destruction of the White House and so on. They appear to forget that in the last game, Russia INVADED America. Pretty obvious reference to the Cold War and how close we were to world-wide destruction?
Third, a possible reference to the 7/7 bombings were comparitivly few people were hurt is not a particularly big thing. Atleast the company were presumably aware of this and brave enough to still put it in. If anything, UK gamers are going to be more involved with the game's story as it mirrors something that probably effected their lives not long ago. I suspect that those calling for it's ban/whatever are never really going to consider buying the game anyway.
Forth, Ultraviolent? I remember playing GTA-London, and even if the graphics were...interesting, I could still drive through accurate London in a double-decker bus, mowing people down. Halo 1 allowed me to stick grenades to the enemies face. In the Total War RTS games, I can choose to have the entire population of a captured city executed.
TL;DR
This will probably help the games sale, The Dailey Mail are being sensationalist idiots, and a UK citizen I'd like to see how they do the underground train scene, I think it'll draw me into the game alot more when it's not just places in America being blown up.
Second, if films can reproduce and recreate terroist actions that really happened - Several 9/11 ones, a few on massive bomb attacks in Saudi Arabia etc etc - then surely games should be able to. It's not an utterly direct reference, it's a viable plot move in a game series that has previously had nuclear explosions, EMPs, the destruction of the White House and so on. They appear to forget that in the last game, Russia INVADED America. Pretty obvious reference to the Cold War and how close we were to world-wide destruction?
Third, a possible reference to the 7/7 bombings were comparitivly few people were hurt is not a particularly big thing. Atleast the company were presumably aware of this and brave enough to still put it in. If anything, UK gamers are going to be more involved with the game's story as it mirrors something that probably effected their lives not long ago. I suspect that those calling for it's ban/whatever are never really going to consider buying the game anyway.
Forth, Ultraviolent? I remember playing GTA-London, and even if the graphics were...interesting, I could still drive through accurate London in a double-decker bus, mowing people down. Halo 1 allowed me to stick grenades to the enemies face. In the Total War RTS games, I can choose to have the entire population of a captured city executed.
TL;DR
This will probably help the games sale, The Dailey Mail are being sensationalist idiots, and a UK citizen I'd like to see how they do the underground train scene, I think it'll draw me into the game alot more when it's not just places in America being blown up.
I think it was more like..anthony87 said:Those "reviews"....they stir up so many emotions within me.The_root_of_all_evil said:By the way, I thought people would like to see their reviews.
Amusement....Pity....Intense Rage towards the ignorance contained within.
Oh and that bit about the 19 year old calling the opening of Call of Duty "worrying"? I'm calling bullshit, that's a damn lie right there says I.
Daaaaaad, I want to play!
Not now son, I am writing about the evils of this "Call of duty"(Chugs bottle of Drano)
(Before seeing the trailer)
I feel like an answering machine for crying out loud. There isn't an inch in this domain that hasn't been beaten to death and milked just to make people look behind their backs in the worst way possible, without any damn reason.
It is a form of entertainment. Saving Private Ryan presented us with a fucked up (and probably, very real) version of the Normandy Invasion, more bloody and realistic than any war scene I have seen on screen. And it got awards for that!
Getting back to MW3, it is a game about the freaking WWIII! 'I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.'
What the fuck did you think it would be like?! Cities and people are depicted being destroyed. Just like every form of media that has covered a Military subject and has made reasonable money out of it.
(After seeing the trailer)
Ok, it had a pretty awesome bit where you actually swam through the underground. I understand Britain's position in this. I really do, it's part of their history. Frank Miller's 300 was also a part of my history. I didn't like the fact that the Spartans died. But it was a form of media. I didn't Viagra'd his ass to hell and back to make it look bigger than it was.
It depicts war. Since when is using bombs during one considered ultra-violent? The whole concept of war is ultra-violent. So, the terminology 'ultra violent' is completely void. That's like saying 'Hmm. I am worried about those F1 cars because they go waaaaaay too fast'. It is just stating the obvious! How the fuck does this qualify as something to post in a paper? Then again, we are talking about a tabloid that published a fake dead Osama Bin Laden pic.
Each and everyone of the perpetrators of this travesty of 'news' seems oblivious to the existence of a Rating Board and not only fabricates stories from freaking nothing, but undermines the Board's work at presenting parents with the element of choice and timing to expose their kids to what they believe they are mature enough for or not. It pretty much says that a lot of the people I know are idiots and I don't like that.
BURN THIS IN YOUR RETINA, DAILY MAIL.
And after that, go tie a rock around your neck and dive into Thames.
Also, since when a paper has taste when it comes to video games?
I feel like an answering machine for crying out loud. There isn't an inch in this domain that hasn't been beaten to death and milked just to make people look behind their backs in the worst way possible, without any damn reason.
It is a form of entertainment. Saving Private Ryan presented us with a fucked up (and probably, very real) version of the Normandy Invasion, more bloody and realistic than any war scene I have seen on screen. And it got awards for that!
Getting back to MW3, it is a game about the freaking WWIII! 'I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.'
What the fuck did you think it would be like?! Cities and people are depicted being destroyed. Just like every form of media that has covered a Military subject and has made reasonable money out of it.
(After seeing the trailer)
Ok, it had a pretty awesome bit where you actually swam through the underground. I understand Britain's position in this. I really do, it's part of their history. Frank Miller's 300 was also a part of my history. I didn't like the fact that the Spartans died. But it was a form of media. I didn't Viagra'd his ass to hell and back to make it look bigger than it was.
It depicts war. Since when is using bombs during one considered ultra-violent? The whole concept of war is ultra-violent. So, the terminology 'ultra violent' is completely void. That's like saying 'Hmm. I am worried about those F1 cars because they go waaaaaay too fast'. It is just stating the obvious! How the fuck does this qualify as something to post in a paper? Then again, we are talking about a tabloid that published a fake dead Osama Bin Laden pic.
Each and everyone of the perpetrators of this travesty of 'news' seems oblivious to the existence of a Rating Board and not only fabricates stories from freaking nothing, but undermines the Board's work at presenting parents with the element of choice and timing to expose their kids to what they believe they are mature enough for or not. It pretty much says that a lot of the people I know are idiots and I don't like that.
BURN THIS IN YOUR RETINA, DAILY MAIL.
And after that, go tie a rock around your neck and dive into Thames.
Also, since when a paper has taste when it comes to video games?
Pity, yes, and hope that they might find something better to get their message across.BrotherRool said:It's sadder that the Daily Mail pretty much outsells all other papers, but those that go even further to do less research.samsonguy920 said:
But even terrorists aren't people to hate or look down upon, they're humans like us who've just led themselves down an incredibly wrong path and been indoctrinated by everything they've grown up to see. They deserve our pity.
Besides Churchill and Truman have been guilty of far more civilian casualties than probably the whole sum of terrorism over the past millenia.
But this is getting far too serious a discussion to be spawned from something the Daily Mail did
And I dare you to find something in The Daily Mail that is worthy of such discussion as what was just made here.
This is the daily mail, they basically just complain about anything they don't like until it goes aways. Top Gear is one of their favourite targets for hate topics and they've had no more success in cancelling that.
My thoughts exactly. Where did we have pitched gun battles on 7/7? It's this kind of knee-jerk journalism that leads our Uni bars to put out copies of The Mail purely for entertainment purposes...Hybridwolf said:
My opinion? I *like* that it has echoes (echoes, not similarities) of events I've seen. I remember playing Wolverines! on MW2, and the stark contrast of the invasion against a quaint little neighbourhood was truly chilling, but perhaps lacked any point of reference for me. This, however, set in my country, wow.