Modern Warfare 2 Opening Is Real, Aussies Flip Out

Recommended Videos

johnman

New member
Oct 14, 2008
2,915
0
0
Sisyphus0 said:
Hardcore_gamer said:
Your playing a terrorist gunning down civilians?

No offense, but are they trying to make censorship boards ban there game?

This sort of mission feels entirely unnecessary, and it won't add enough to the game for it to we both the bad name it will undoubtedly give gamers.
It's a war game about, oh let's see, WAR. Fuck, are you stupid? Terrorism is another form of war, it's not especially evil, it's actually effective in many circumstances. Having some guys shoot a bunch of civilians in an airport is no different from playing an American soldier and shooting a bunch of people trying to protect their country. "Oh deary me, playing someone from another country killing people from this country is horrible!!!! But playing someone from this country killing people from other countries is fine."

As far as I'm concerned there should be no censorship in games, movies, music, books, anything. At most there should be warnings for those who don't want to see certain things, but for those who are mature enough to view REAL LIFE in its entirety, they shouldn't be prohibited from experiencing it.

Hardcore_gamer, your views are cowardly and pathetic, as well as woefully hypocritical. You are not a hardcore gamer.
And you are blinkered to reality, while your points are fairly accurate, people will not agree with them.
And welcome to the Escapist, where telling people that their veiws are inferior to your own is not looked kindly upon.
 

Chicago Ted

New member
Jan 13, 2009
3,463
0
0
Isn't the whole point of it to show how brutal, violent, and horrible these things really are in order to get across the point that the shit just hit the fan in the game and you are under the threat of certain evil? It's trying to build the atmosphere for the game.
 

sunpop

New member
Oct 23, 2008
399
0
0
How exactly does something showing that the terrorists are evil and horrible people promote what they do in a positive way? Who could see this scene and think "Wow those are some pretty cool people" If it was someone too young to handle it they would be terrified by whats going on and probably never touch the game again.

However this has caused me to think twice about skipping over this game I do like that they are ignoring all the bitching and going ahead with what they planned and seem to focus on the story. I figured much like a lot of fps these days this would focus on multiplayer and say fuck the story.
 

Georgeman

New member
Mar 2, 2009
495
0
0
I feel that this scene is unnecessary. Nothing that couldn't be handled by a cutscene. Point proven further by the fact that it can be skipped, just like a cutscene. I hope that this ISN'T the extent of what Modern Warfare 2 has to offer, that is, military drama replacing gameplay. And seriously, how much more negative publicity do games need? (Oh wait, there can never be enough)
 

Tiamat666

Level 80 Legendary Postlord
Dec 4, 2007
1,012
0
0
I can hardly believe they are pulling this off. A scene where the player is actively supposed to gun down helpless civilians.

I'm sorry, but this is where I draw the line. The justification for this scene is bullshit. You can show off how evil something is without requiring the player to participate in it. By their logic, they might as well have you play a rapist or a child molester on a police game like SWAT, for the player to appreciate "the urgency of the situation". Seriously, come on! This is just a fucked up excuse for the shock value of the scene and the publicity that goes along with it.

Also, it doesn't help us as gamers or the whole gaming industry in any way. With all the controversy going on and every shooting spree being blamed on videogames, something like this is the last thing we need.
 

Thricelost1

New member
Aug 2, 2009
11
0
0
It's the parents complaining because they want the corporate world to do their parenting for them...

Frankly, I think it's as simple as NOT LETTING YOUR 12 y/o PLAY M-RATED (18+, any other countries rating system's equivalent) VIDEO GAMES! >_>
 
Apr 28, 2008
14,634
0
0
TheTygerfire said:
Except....they aren't innocent civilians...They aren't even live people. Get the hell over yourselves.
Exactly, they are the people I have to stand behind for 2 hours to get to the screening area spending another 2 hours making sure I don't have anything more violent than a teddy bear in order to get to the boarding area for my plane which was delayed another 4 hours.

Who wouldn't want to kill everyone after dealing with that.
I can see where the terrorists are coming from.
 

pirateninj4

New member
Apr 6, 2009
525
0
0
Woodsey said:
Well maybe the Aussie officials need to be locked away, because clearly none of them are mature enough to handle any content not designed for a 3 year old.

If it was done in a film (in fact I think it has anyway) no one would care. Nor if it was done in a book, where the description was in-depth and grotesque.

But OH NOEZ!!1! PIXELZ!!

The only people that are affected by this are dip shit officials, they're the ones who can't tell fact from fiction.

Now if you don't mind I'm off to clean my AK, I've got an airport to raid in the morning.
Hear hear.

Although, it's been said many times before that video games are interactive and therefore pose the dilemma of choice. I think that people are right to be a little shocked, this is a bold move from a company to immerse us in (well not us, fuck paying 60 dollars for 4 hours of play time - no I don't play multiplayer) their version of saving the world.

I think the bigger problem here is that these games continue to be the same old shit. No matter how many bells and whistles you put on the same old pie, it's still a pie. It might taste good but it's nothing new.

I for one would like to see a game about saving the world from the real villains...indifference and mediocrity.
 

Dyp100

New member
Jul 14, 2009
898
0
0
I think that the Aussie version will have that cut out, it only makes sense.

And I thank thee guy for sharing my point, films, books, even music (more sound effects for symbolism) has this kinda stuff, but when the ultimate art form (IMO) does it, apparently it's hurting the kids.

These games aren't for the kids, just because a kid can watch a film, no one rages they do, it's the same with video games, but instead of the cinema regulating, the parents have to.
 

Tiamat666

Level 80 Legendary Postlord
Dec 4, 2007
1,012
0
0
Sisyphus0 said:
Hardcore_gamer said:
Your playing a terrorist gunning down civilians?

No offense, but are they trying to make censorship boards ban there game?

This sort of mission feels entirely unnecessary, and it won't add enough to the game for it to we both the bad name it will undoubtedly give gamers.
It's a war game about, oh let's see, WAR. Fuck, are you stupid? Terrorism is another form of war, it's not especially evil, it's actually effective in many circumstances. Having some guys shoot a bunch of civilians in an airport is no different from playing an American soldier and shooting a bunch of people trying to protect their country. "Oh deary me, playing someone from another country killing people from this country is horrible!!!! But playing someone from this country killing people from other countries is fine."

As far as I'm concerned there should be no censorship in games, movies, music, books, anything. At most there should be warnings for those who don't want to see certain things, but for those who are mature enough to view REAL LIFE in its entirety, they shouldn't be prohibited from experiencing it.

Hardcore_gamer, your views are cowardly and pathetic, as well as woefully hypocritical. You are not a hardcore gamer.
Sisyphus, you have no idea what you're talking about and your morals are just about on-par with Bin-Ladins. Congratulations.
 

oppp7

New member
Aug 29, 2009
7,045
0
0
Well who didn't see this coming?
If I do get this game (which is a very low chance) I'm just going to skip to the multiplayer anyways, so whatever...
 

Amnestic

High Priest of Haruhi
Aug 22, 2008
8,946
0
0
Sevre90210 said:
There goes an episode of Unskippable.
You play this sequence, Unskippable only does cutscenes, no?

Tiamat666 said:
Not to get in on this pissing contest, but using Ad Hominems is no way to prove someone wrong.

In fact it's pretty much the opposite of how you do it.
 

Tiamat666

Level 80 Legendary Postlord
Dec 4, 2007
1,012
0
0
Amnestic said:
Not to get in on this pissing contest, but using Ad Hominems is no way to prove someone wrong.
In fact it's pretty much the opposite of how you do it.
You see, the thing is, if you don't get it just from reading what he wrote, you don't really deserve an explenation.
 

Jandau

Smug Platypus
Dec 19, 2008
5,034
0
0
While the Aussies are overreacting (as usual), it still doesn't change the fact that IW knew what it was doing and what backlash it would cause (it would be naive to assume otherwise). Anything that happens from here on in is their own fault. Personally, I consider the sequence in poor taste and not neccessary to establish a proper villain. It's a lazy and unsophisticated way to get a point across and it crosses the line of good taste.
 

John Funk

U.N. Owen Was Him?
Dec 20, 2005
20,364
0
0
Hardcore_gamer said:
Your playing a terrorist gunning down civilians?

No offense, but are they trying to make censorship boards ban there game?

This sort of mission feels entirely unnecessary, and it won't add enough to the game for it to we both the bad name it will undoubtedly give gamers.
How is it unnecessary if the entire point is to make gamers feel uncomfortable, in order to make the enemies feel that much more evil?
 

Amnestic

High Priest of Haruhi
Aug 22, 2008
8,946
0
0
Tiamat666 said:
Amnestic said:
Not to get in on this pissing contest, but using Ad Hominems is no way to prove someone wrong.
In fact it's pretty much the opposite of how you do it.
You see, the thing is, if you don't get it just from reading what he wrote, you don't really deserve an explenation.
Eloquently constructed explanation, up until the point where you didn't bother explaining anything at all. If you can't even be bothered to elaborate on why you think something, why bother posting it at all?
 

John Funk

U.N. Owen Was Him?
Dec 20, 2005
20,364
0
0
Tiamat666 said:
Amnestic said:
Not to get in on this pissing contest, but using Ad Hominems is no way to prove someone wrong.
In fact it's pretty much the opposite of how you do it.
You see, the thing is, if you don't get it just from reading what he wrote, you don't really deserve an explenation.
I'm just going to step in here and warn everybody to play nice, or don't play at all.

If you disagree, disagree respectfully.