Yeah that really pisses me off cause I'm from Eastern Europe. It's statemenst like this that make people call America fascist.300lb. Samoan said:
Modern Warfare 2 Trailer Criticized For "Going Too Far"
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Bah. This is annoying. I'm sick of these people pulling the "We're Americans, so we get the special treatment" card.
Y'know, maybe us Europeans are tired of being portrayed as Nazi's, divided on all issues and just generally evil, stuck up bastards who rely on the brave American soldiers to come round and save our behinds.
Maybe we'd, instead, like you to represent us as, y'know, heroic individuals who actually did a lot more for the world than Americans ever did. And not just the British. We have feelings too, you know.
Getting off track now here.
As I was saying, person talking is an idiot, America deserves to have some shocking imagery of it's own cities burning, especially since we need to hammer home the point that it's not invincible for once. Getting a little tired of the "America is the mightiest nation on the face on the planet!" chant. Stop using Europe as your battleground, since not all wars take place there and we're not really that evil to start wars at the drop of a hat.
Also, set more games with European protagonists so you could expand the European market. I don't even remember when and if I even ever saw a German or Hungarian protagonist. Make something a bit more interesting.
Might be off track, but very tired.
Y'know, maybe us Europeans are tired of being portrayed as Nazi's, divided on all issues and just generally evil, stuck up bastards who rely on the brave American soldiers to come round and save our behinds.
Maybe we'd, instead, like you to represent us as, y'know, heroic individuals who actually did a lot more for the world than Americans ever did. And not just the British. We have feelings too, you know.
Getting off track now here.
As I was saying, person talking is an idiot, America deserves to have some shocking imagery of it's own cities burning, especially since we need to hammer home the point that it's not invincible for once. Getting a little tired of the "America is the mightiest nation on the face on the planet!" chant. Stop using Europe as your battleground, since not all wars take place there and we're not really that evil to start wars at the drop of a hat.
Also, set more games with European protagonists so you could expand the European market. I don't even remember when and if I even ever saw a German or Hungarian protagonist. Make something a bit more interesting.
Might be off track, but very tired.
You're more likely to cannibalise your own country from the inside before a foreign country marches on your soil.killereddy said:
Or do the former, then the latter.
As someone who (although being English born and raised) has had a deep interest in US Politics for a long time, I take it seriously. Why? Because a number of politicians are Christian and make no secret of this. Your current President is a Christian, your previous President is a Christian and in all likelihood your next President will be a Christian as well.
But it's not just the Executive! Oh no, there are plenty in the legislature as well. If people are influenced by writings such as this, under the guise of "Christian Science" (a term that horribly befuddles me to begin with) then the US may see their gaming be less Free Speech-y than it is at the moment. Can you imagine what would happen if a bunch of politicians lobbied furiously against Modern Warfare 2 since it 'incited terrorism against the state' or something?
While no games have actually been banned in the US as far as I know, if MW2 gets an AO rating it'll be deeply affected. While I, as an educated gamer, might see this as fiction which - although perhaps offensive to some - is nothing more than what I said: Fiction, others may see it as something far more sinister.
So, up front, I think CSM is silly to imply there's any issue here.
Moving on though, there's a reason this type of imagery gets such a rise out of the US: we have zero institutional memory of widespread destruction on US soil, especially from an external force. Our Eastern Seaboard hasn't been an active battlefield since the 1880's, and the last time the aggressor was a foreigner was during the War of 1812. With isolated incidents like Pearl Harbor (Hawaii, btw, wasn't even a US State at the time), the original WTC bombings, and 9/11/2001, we're just not accustomed to it. Our institutional experience of "fellow citizens dying" is primarily of them dying "over there": Vietnam, Korea, Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan, the Western theater, the Pacific theater. You don't need to invoke "American Exceptionalism" to understand why people have strong feelings about this; you just need it to explain our chosen method of coping with those feelings.
Now on to my real question: what scenario has IW possibly come up with that makes DC look like it does in that trailer? Fallout 3 makes sense: the entire world is in ruins. DC is just a single microcosm of destruction. Judging from the trailer, it looks like all-out warfare, a la the fall of Berlin! What military scenario results in that? It certainly isn't accomplished by a team of guys in street-clothes and bulletproof vests (seen elsewhere in the trailer). You'd need another military (or coalition) of similar size to the US military, along with the capacity for launching a long-range invasion (significant naval resources, supply-chain management, etc). It is exactly the kind of war that American generals have been fantasizing about since the end of WWII, spending way too much money preparing for (thank you, Cold War), and that analysts say is absolutely the least likely thing to happen. Nearly all major world powers are way more interested in economic conquests than military ones.
THAT's what fascinated me about that trailer.
Moving on though, there's a reason this type of imagery gets such a rise out of the US: we have zero institutional memory of widespread destruction on US soil, especially from an external force. Our Eastern Seaboard hasn't been an active battlefield since the 1880's, and the last time the aggressor was a foreigner was during the War of 1812. With isolated incidents like Pearl Harbor (Hawaii, btw, wasn't even a US State at the time), the original WTC bombings, and 9/11/2001, we're just not accustomed to it. Our institutional experience of "fellow citizens dying" is primarily of them dying "over there": Vietnam, Korea, Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan, the Western theater, the Pacific theater. You don't need to invoke "American Exceptionalism" to understand why people have strong feelings about this; you just need it to explain our chosen method of coping with those feelings.
Now on to my real question: what scenario has IW possibly come up with that makes DC look like it does in that trailer? Fallout 3 makes sense: the entire world is in ruins. DC is just a single microcosm of destruction. Judging from the trailer, it looks like all-out warfare, a la the fall of Berlin! What military scenario results in that? It certainly isn't accomplished by a team of guys in street-clothes and bulletproof vests (seen elsewhere in the trailer). You'd need another military (or coalition) of similar size to the US military, along with the capacity for launching a long-range invasion (significant naval resources, supply-chain management, etc). It is exactly the kind of war that American generals have been fantasizing about since the end of WWII, spending way too much money preparing for (thank you, Cold War), and that analysts say is absolutely the least likely thing to happen. Nearly all major world powers are way more interested in economic conquests than military ones.
THAT's what fascinated me about that trailer.
its okay for games to portray america kicking the shit out of other countries but when washington dc is meerly a batlefield someone bitches anout it. i give a thumbs up for the sheer imagination of tryach for turning the most powerfull city in the world into a warzone.
gees the whole time usa fighting in iraq and as soon as washington gets touched some guy gets pissed.it prooves that some people have nothing better to do than complain.
WAIT!Malygris said:
It's okay to have an unknown eastern Europe town being destroyed, but not our own towns?
That's... really stupid. Because I don't know any easten Europe towns, but I can at least say that there are actual people living in them. It's horrific for one side, yet this guy fails to realize that... he needs to grow up.
After seing that trailer a couple of times this game looks to me like a must buy!
To much realism ? For a seven year old absolutely, but i am an adult.
Let us have this thread again with the release of Modern Warfare 5 in 2017, and discuss the rapescenes and the tort... i mean enhanced interrogation scenes.
To much realism ? For a seven year old absolutely, but i am an adult.
Let us have this thread again with the release of Modern Warfare 5 in 2017, and discuss the rapescenes and the tort... i mean enhanced interrogation scenes.
The sad thing is I had a commander who briefed pretty much the same thing right after 9/11. He pretty much said that "If those bastards flew planes into some huts in Africa then no one would care, They hit AMERICA"
I didn't take offense because I'm black and he mentions Africans. It's the fact that I guess there are lots of people in my country who think that innocent lives only exist in America.
Quite sad.
I didn't take offense because I'm black and he mentions Africans. It's the fact that I guess there are lots of people in my country who think that innocent lives only exist in America.
Quite sad.
You completely misunderstand why people would dismiss the Christian Science Monitor. Not because it's the Christian Science Monitor, but because it's the Christian Science Monitor. It is a specific news outlet which is known for silliness on this kind of subject. Also, "Christian Science" as a term has nothing to do with the contents of the article, and the Monitor as a whole is not monitoring "Christian Science". If you're so confused, go wiki it, I think you'll find yourself quite enlightened about the whole situation.Amnestic said:
Also, if you're so interested in American Politics, then it surprises me that you think a "number" of our politicians are acknowledged to be Christian. The vast majority of our politicians are Christian. It is a default thing to be in this country. You'll also find that most of the people on both ends of our political extremes would consider themselves to be Christian. The conservative percentage might be a bit higher, but it's not really worth noting. You'd be foolish to consider the contents of the Christian Science Monitor to be more indicative of the general American perspective, or that of our politicians, solely based on the common adjective/identifier of "Christian".
That is a stupid complaint. When I read Christian I thought he was going to freak out about the bible references.
Because God doesn't care about eastern european mansions, so its ok to show them blown up! "Christian Science" I've heard of contradiction of terms, but this is ridiculous!
Christian Science Monitor
Isn't that an oxymoron?
I agree with what everyone has said so far, so what if it's America being attacked? It's FAKE! Not real! People need to loosen up.
Isn't that an oxymoron?
I agree with what everyone has said so far, so what if it's America being attacked? It's FAKE! Not real! People need to loosen up.
Exactly.Caliostro said:
I hate these crazy religion freaks who try to get everything banned.
They just hate what they can't understand.