Wishlist for CoD: MW2

[Prussian to the Iron]

well thats true.

however in cod 5 you had the choise to either save roebuck or the other guy in the last american mission (haven't played campaign in ages. but i got the achievement!!) so hopefully. i just think taking it to washington dc would be a little too obvious. so is in the ME, but you dont just burn down DC.it would make more sense to go somewhere in maybe SE Asia or Pakistani/Indian jungles.

[Hooahguy]

COD: MW2 minimum system requirements for PC:
Hard Drive Space : 16 GB free hard drive space
Operating System : Windows® Vista/XP
Processor : AMD 64 3200+ or Intel Pentium® 4 3.0GHz or better
RAM : 512 MB RAM (XP) / 1 GB RAM (VISTA)
Video Card : Shader 3.0 or better 256 MB nVidia® GeForce™ 6600GT / ATI® Radeon™ 1600XT or better

[tibilicus]

Not sure if this video is genuine but it was uploaded on game trailers. Also quality is poor.

WARNING, fairly graphic.

http://www.gametrailers.com/user-mov...footage/333509

I'm not actually sure if I agree with such a level being in the game if this is in fact genuine. I mean, I'm normally the sort of person who laughs at those people who claim video games are a bad influence but if this is genuine this level seems pretty chilling to me..

[Prussian to the Iron]

I'm just......speachless. I can't believe that they would do that. I hope it's either:

A. Not actually in the game
B. At least not in the American version

Look, me and my dad think playing Gears 2 and going on a chainsaw rampage all over the enemy is awesome and hilarious, but this....geeze it makes me wanna puke almost.

And why do they make you be a terrorist who has to do it? I'd be fine if I had to be like some Special Forces people or something that followed them, and saw the dead people but not actually killing anybody but the terrorists.

If it is in when I get the game, I'll do either one of two things:

1. Just run through the level, not looking, and not killing anyone until the fight with the police comes.

2. If killing everyone in the airport is a required objective (which I think I saw pop up in the top left corner, but hope not) than I'm just skipping the campaign. Infinity Ward will not make me kill all those innocent computers. I would rather pay someone to do it for me, than to have to do it myself.

[Hooahguy]

wow. just saw the footage.

[Prussian to the Iron]

well thankfully we wont have to do it:

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/104/1040095p1.html

http://www.destructoid.com/official-...k-153453.phtml

The leaked footage was taken from a copy of game that was obtained illegally and is not representative of the overall gameplay experience in Modern Warfare 2.

Infinity Ward’s Modern Warfare 2 features a deep and gripping storyline in which players face off against a terrorist threat dedicated to bringing the world to the brink of collapse. The game includes a plot involving a mission carried out by a Russian villain who wants to trigger a global war. In order to defeat him, the player infiltrates his inner circle. The scene is designed to evoke the atrocities of terrorism.

At the beginning of the game, players encounter a mandatory “checkpoint” in which they are warned that an upcoming segment may contain disturbing elements and they can choose not to engage in the gameplay that involves this scene. Consistent with its content, the game has been given an “M” for Mature by the Entertainment Software Ratings Board. The rating is prominently displayed on the front and back of the packaging, as well as in all advertising.

So that likely means we have to still hear it, we just dont need to do anything.

Personally, I'm going to walk backwards looking at the ceiling until the police part comes up.

[Monk]

No more disturbing than WaW forcing you to gun down Germans as they tried to flee or watching as your comrades slaughter PoWs and encourage you to kill men trying to surrender.

[tibilicus]

I'm just not sure what purpose such a segment would serve. Maybe they want us to get into it and really feel some hate for our adversary?

Either way it just doesn't make sense. I mean games like GTA for example, we've all gone on a random rampage but the way it's done it doesn't feel realistic, you can detach yourself from it. I just think game play like this is a step to far. There has been far to many cases in recent years of people going into schools ect and doing this kind of thing.

Quite frankly I think the only way the scene could be more controversial is if they made you hijack a plane..

[Prussian to the Iron]

No more disturbing than WaW forcing you to gun down Germans as they tried to flee or watching as your comrades slaughter PoWs and encourage you to kill men trying to surrender.

much more disturbing; here is what happens in that scene in WaW:

1. WaW takes place 65 years ago.
2. We can detach ourselves from that, because they are "the bad guys"
3. You have to admit that the Sergeant (Reznov?) makes it a little funny
4. Those scenes aren't on such a large scale. there are maybe 2-3 scenes of that? and those scenes are very short, and 3 people and at largest maybe 10 for the scene in the fields where you get molotovs.


Here is what happens in that scene from MW2:

1. It takes place in a post-9/11 world where everyday innocents are killed for no reason by terrorists.
2. You and 4 other terrorists cold-heartedly slaughter hundreds of innocent people in an airport
3. Crawling, mangled people trying to escape are shot
4. The screaming is extremely unnerving.


If anyone remembers a while back I had that thread "Is there something wrong with me?" because I had this horrible gory dream. That is what I imagine this scene will be like, only the people never did anything bad and you kill hundreds.


Like I said; I'm going to turn the sound off, and walk backwards looking at the ceiling until the firefight occurs.

[Monk]

much more disturbing; here is what happens in that scene in WaW:

1. WaW takes place 65 years ago.
2. We can detach ourselves from that, because they are "the bad guys"
3. You have to admit that the Sergeant (Reznov?) makes it a little funny
4. Those scenes aren't on such a large scale. there are maybe 2-3 scenes of that? and those scenes are very short, and 3 people and at largest maybe 10 for the scene in the fields where you get molotovs.

No, I do not.

The violence portrayed in WaW was very intense, enough so that even though it took place over six decades ago it had a powerful message: War is ugly. There are also more than three scenes, but listing off the ones I remember wouldn't prove a point. The original point is that WaW encouraging war-crimes is just the same as this imho.

1. It takes place in a post-9/11 world where everyday innocents are killed for no reason by terrorists.
2. You and 4 other terrorists cold-heartedly slaughter hundreds of innocent people in an airport
3. Crawling, mangled people trying to escape are shot
4. The screaming is extremely unnerving.

I'm really failing to see the difference. Was it any less bad when the soviet commander demanded you to kill surrendering germans near the subway, but if you refused he ordered them burned alive with molotovs and mocked you?

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

"You should have been merciful and saved those animals some misery."

The Call of Duty series already took steps down this road in WaW. The only difference this time around is that Infinity Ward seems to understand not everyone wants to interact with this sort of scene, instead of shoe-horning you into the situation and further punishing you if you don't play along like Treyarch did.

[Prussian to the Iron]

well, if it is the same than why is there a big outrage with this and not with WaW?

and you were never forced to kill POW's or surrendering germans in WaW either. you could, but you could also look away for 5 seconds.

you don't seem to get that there is now an entire level devoted to killing civilians.

maybe you just think different than everyone else, but nobody else seemed to care much about WaW's few scenes where POWs or surrendering enemies were killed by you.


this isnt a debate. im not arguing this any further.

[Monk]

well, if it is the same than why is there a big outrage with this and not with WaW?

I dunno, no one was paying attention?

maybe you just think different than everyone else, but nobody else seemed to care much about WaW's few scenes where POWs or surrendering enemies were killed by you.

this isnt a debate. im nto arguing this any further.

I just don't feel the two things are that different. While I very much dislike the scene, I don't understand why there's so much outrage now instead of then.

[Husar]

Call of Duty: Brütal Warfare?

Really seems a bit useless, playing the bad guy, but whatever.

[Hooahguy]

Call of Duty: Brütal Warfare?

Really seems a bit useless, playing the bad guy, but whatever.

apparently its part of the story.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

apparently you were, in the mission, a CIA or whatever agent who was with the bad guys, trying to get close to marakovs ring of advisors or something along those lines. or so i read somewhere.

[Prussian to the Iron]

apparently its part of the story.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

apparently you were, in the mission, a CIA or whatever agent who was with the bad guys, trying to get close to marakovs ring of advisors or something along those lines. or so i read somewhere.

I read that too, but you die at the end. apparently they knew.

Still, I wouldn't kill people like that just to infiltrate his inner ring. I would instead have called the police as soon as possible, and wear some sort of defining clothing. at least then they would be caught as soon as they got off the elevator; maybe I'd have one other guy not get caught too so it didnt look suspicious. we would run and they wouldn't get us. then I'd continue infiltrating.

apparently the CIA isn't as smart as a 14 year old boy.

[tibilicus]

apparently its part of the story.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

apparently you were, in the mission, a CIA or whatever agent who was with the bad guys, trying to get close to marakovs ring of advisors or something along those lines. or so i read somewhere.

Makes sense.

And then they kill the CIA agent to make it look like an American plot and as a result support gathers for the ultra nationalist movement.

Guess it does kind of fit in..

[Hooahguy]

I read that too, but you die at the end. apparently they knew.

Still, I wouldn't kill people like that just to infiltrate his inner ring. I would instead have called the police as soon as possible, and wear some sort of defining clothing. at least then they would be caught as soon as they got off the elevator; maybe I'd have one other guy not get caught too so it didnt look suspicious. we would run and they wouldn't get us. then I'd continue infiltrating.

apparently the CIA isn't as smart as a 14 year old boy.

wow you clearly have no idea about espionage. when you are undercover and trying to get infiltrate an organization, you do NOTHING to make them suspicious. you act EXACTLY as they do, even if that means some un
apparently IW and CIA are much smarter than a 14 year old.

[Prussian to the Iron]

wow you clearly have no idea about espionage. when you are undercover and trying to get infiltrate an organization, you do NOTHING to make them suspicious. you act EXACTLY as they do, even if that means some un
apparently IW and CIA are much smarter than a 14 year old.

[A Very Super Market]

It's an FPS. You kill people all the time. I don't care if you think it's "justified" to kill Germans, Russians, or lizardmen from the Earth's core. You're killing them.

I pains me to hear someone say that. It absolutely destroys me to know that someone can happily mow down thousands, but cry crocodile tears when something like this is thrown their way. Maybe it puts things into perspective. No matter how evil someone can be (And sometimes that is even arguable) a life is a life.

IW had another controversy when people learned you would get nuked, I believe. I thought it was a chilling truth of our day and age.

[KarlXII]

Here's my wishlist:

Dedicated Servers.

/thread.

[Prussian to the Iron]

It's an FPS. You kill people all the time. I don't care if you think it's "justified" to kill Germans, Russians, or lizardmen from the Earth's core. You're killing them.

I pains me to hear someone say that. It absolutely destroys me to know that someone can happily mow down thousands, but cry crocodile tears when something like this is thrown their way. Maybe it puts things into perspective. No matter how evil someone can be (And sometimes that is even arguable) a life is a life.

IW had another controversy when people learned you would get nuked, I believe. I thought it was a chilling truth of our day and age.

I never heard of the nuke controversy; I was kinda pissed to learn that I couldn't keep playing as a marine, but it was a good plot twist/element.

I think part of it though is you're killing innocent civilians, whereas in previous CoD you were in a real war. I don't know, but I never saw any controversy or uproar over WaW.

[al Roumi]

This article offers interesting discussion of the issue.

As it says, for me context plays a large part. I've not played COD5:WAW, but I'm drawn to agree with Monk in questioning why one concept is worse than the other.

I suspect the reason for the lack of uproar around COD5:WAW is that it happened in the past and that oddly, people may be less upset about war crimes in WW2 than in the contemporary, post 9/11 context.

Ok, so a brief perusal of the Monastery and backroom here might provide evidence to the contrary of that last statement, nonetheless in the Uk at least, WW2 is generaly accepted as a past time of great evil. As if WW2 is what the old order stood for or allowed, and the contrast with which supposedly legitimises the present -and ultimately contemporary expedients of "questionable morality", e.g. (on a simple level) at least is wasn't as bad as what the Nazis did.

It could also be that WW2 has been so washed and re-washed through western culture and psyche that people are more innured to it -dare i say blase about it.

On the other hand, gratuitous targetting of civilians with violence, Terrorism, is seen as a polar opposite to the western world's current "mission" -liberating the world through the war on terror, or more sedately - ensuring our national security.

[KarlXII]

I was disturbed at the POW slaughterings, and the Japanese bayonettings. I cringed watching the Marine get his throat sliced, all in WaW.

I stopped the aforementioned video clip when they blew up the elevator.

WaW pushed it, but it was manageable. However, I don't need to partake in the killing of civilians, virtual as it may be, to know that these things acts are being committed. To devote a whole level to gunning down airport civilians, a situation that CAN occur nowadays, is crude, in my opinion.

[naut]

My wish:

That they don't censor the Aussie version. It appears that the suits in power feel it could train you up to become a terrorist.

Anyway just another to buy overseas.

[Crazed Rabbit]

wow you clearly have no idea about espionage. when you are undercover and trying to get infiltrate an organization, you do NOTHING to make them suspicious. you act EXACTLY as they do, even if that means some un
apparently IW and CIA are much smarter than a 14 year old.

No, IW is stupider. It seems to me the whole point of infiltrating a terrorist cell would be to stop an airport massacre.

And from what I know, the grunts involved in such a mission would not be part of a terrorist leader's inner circle. Planning attacks and shooting fleeing civilians are not the same.

Also, what kind of BS plot is IW throwing together? Some Russian villain wants to start WWIII? What 60s spy movie reject script did they take that from? If they are going to claim a realistic portrayal of war, they could at least try to have a believable story.

Finally, though, is the simple fact that if they wanted to show the atrocities of terrorism, they could have had the player in the role of a civilian, instead of having an entire level devoted to the player shooting fleeing, defenseless, civilians. I don't think they'll show how terrible such an act is by having you commit it I think it will just desensitize you to it and lessen whatever impact the game would have had.

One thing I know, though; I am not buying this game.

CR

[a completely inoffensive name]

No, IW is stupider. It seems to me the whole point of infiltrating a terrorist cell would be to stop an airport massacre.

And from what I know, the grunts involved in such a mission would not be part of a terrorist leader's inner circle. Planning attacks and shooting fleeing civilians are not the same.

Also, what kind of BS plot is IW throwing together? Some Russian villain wants to start WWIII? What 60s spy movie reject script did they take that from? If they are going to claim a realistic portrayal of war, they could at least try to have a believable story.

Finally, though, is the simple fact that if they wanted to show the atrocities of terrorism, they could have had the player in the role of a civilian, instead of having an entire level devoted to the player shooting fleeing, defenseless, civilians. I don't think they'll show how terrible such an act is by having you commit it I think it will just desensitize you to it and lessen whatever impact the game would have had.

One thing I know, though; I am not buying this game.

CR

The point of infiltrating a terrorist cell is to stop the hijacked nuke and the tens of millions of American deaths in the future not the dozens of Russian civilians they kill to start their war.

The definition is a terrorist is one who uses terror as a weapon to further his/her goals. It doesn't matter what rank they are, they kill because killing is the best way for people to fear. Killing public and getting away with with is the best way for people to fear constantly knowing they are not safe anywhere.

It is no BS plot. When the Berlin Wall and the Iron Curtain fell, the Communists and Nationalists did not all suddenly disappear and the US did not buy all the nuclear material or weapons from former Soviet Republics or Russia itself by far. It is not WW3 the terrorists want to start, it is end of everyone who does not believe the same as they do. The dangers of The Taliban or Al Queda acquiring a nuke are (were?) real, so this is actually extremely believable.

I'm glad IW pushed it with this intro mission. We can kill thousands and thousands of simulated Nazis and terrorists because they were the bad guys, but even one glance in the eyes of an active terrorist is too far? It is hypocrisy on two counts, for one claiming that a game where you kill people goes too far because it kill those you wouldn't want to see die and second for the stunning backlash video games get for being the newest entertainment medium and treading into more mature grounds that other mediums cross every day. We can watch a show revolving around a serial killer (Dexter) and see him kill innocents and try to blend into normal life and get away with it, oh but lets focus on the video game.

What is the purpose of this scene? Gratuitous death? I doubt it, obviously the developers knew with this game they would get hassle from the content they decided to include so there must have been a reason. This scene is more likely supposed to bring about a emotional reaction, it gives a bigger connection to the player about how terrible terrorists can be and breaks down the standard "bad guy" whitewash that every other FPS has by shoving reality in your face, literally.

[KarlXII]

I'm glad IW pushed it with this intro mission. We can kill thousands and thousands of simulated Nazis and terrorists because they were the bad guys, but even one glance in the eyes of an active terrorist is too far? It is hypocrisy on two counts, for one claiming that a game where you kill people goes too far because it kill those you wouldn't want to see die and second for the stunning backlash video games get for being the newest entertainment medium and treading into more mature grounds that other mediums cross every day. We can watch a show revolving around a serial killer (Dexter) and see him kill innocents and try to blend into normal life and get away with it, oh but lets focus on the video game.

Terrorists/Combatants does NOT equal civilians. They're incomparable. It's not hypocrisy, it's sickening and shameful. Are you ok with a special unlockable 9/11 level! You can fly planes into buildings and watch as the passengers scream! HOW REALISTIC!

I'd rather we had a cutscene of this. It is ridiculous to dedicate and ENTIRE LEVEL TO SHOOTING CIVILIANS.

Can't wait to unlock the "Beat Osama's High Score" achievment.

This scene is more likely supposed to bring about a emotional reaction, it gives a bigger connection to the player about how terrible terrorists can be and breaks down the standard "bad guy" whitewash that every other FPS has by shoving reality in your face, literally.

Yeah, a level dedicated to shooting civilians is totally "revolutionary" and "in my face", and not a cheap shock attempt.

[Crazed Rabbit]

The point of infiltrating a terrorist cell is to stop the hijacked nuke and the tens of millions of American deaths in the future not the dozens of Russian civilians they kill to start their war.

Like I said, some grunt is not going to be part of the inner circle.

It is no BS plot. When the Berlin Wall and the Iron Curtain fell, the Communists and Nationalists did not all suddenly disappear and the US did not buy all the nuclear material or weapons from former Soviet Republics or Russia itself by far. It is not WW3 the terrorists want to start, it is end of everyone who does not believe the same as they do. The dangers of The Taliban or Al Queda acquiring a nuke are (were?) real, so this is actually extremely believable.

Then why not have an Al Queda or Taliban linked group try to set off a nuke? Oh, yeah, because they're afraid of offending certain people so they use some farcical villain, like the movie adaption of Sum of All Fears.

I'm glad IW pushed it with this intro mission. We can kill thousands and thousands of simulated Nazis and terrorists because they were the bad guys, but even one glance in the eyes of an active terrorist is too far? It is hypocrisy on two counts, for one claiming that a game where you kill people goes too far because it kill those you wouldn't want to see die and second for the stunning backlash video games get for being the newest entertainment medium and treading into more mature grounds that other mediums cross every day. We can watch a show revolving around a serial killer (Dexter) and see him kill innocents and try to blend into normal life and get away with it, oh but lets focus on the video game.

Bah, there's no hypocrisy. Nazis and terrorists are not in any way unarmed civilians. Heck, they could have had terrorists attacking soldiers, you know, someone who could fight back. And television shows are not interactive; you're watching other people, not doing anything yourself.

This seems nothing like a cheap shock, since they could have easily conveyed what they claim they wanted to through other methods.

CR

[Knight of Ne]

Like I said, some grunt is not going to be part of the inner circle.

You can't just waltz in and join the inner circle, you have to prove your part of the team.

Then why not have an Al Queda or Taliban linked group try to set off a nuke? Oh, yeah, because they're afraid of offending certain people so they use some farcical villain, like the movie adaption of Sum of All Fears.

Because A: They don't have one
B: By detonating a nuke these organistaions would be signing there own gravestone.

Although personally i couldn't care if this level is included or not, i cannot understand what the developers were thinking while making it.

Ne

[a completely inoffensive name]

Terrorists/Combatants does NOT equal civilians. They're incomparable. It's not hypocrisy, it's sickening and shameful. Are you ok with a special unlockable 9/11 level! You can fly planes into buildings and watch as the passengers scream! HOW REALISTIC!

I'd rather we had a cutscene of this. It is ridiculous to dedicate and ENTIRE LEVEL TO SHOOTING CIVILIANS.

Can't wait to unlock the "Beat Osama's High Score" achievment.

The context is different. That would be in bad taste because of the lingering emotional effects due to its recency. However, if there was another Call of Duty game where you play as the Japanese and bomb Pearl Harbor there would be much less backlash. We already have Call of Duty and Metal of Honor games where we witness Pearl Harbor being bombed, but no backlash was made about that. However, Fallout 3 puts posters up of the city in the game around D.C. to advertise and that gets flak. This just seems to be the case of modern events and politics hitting too close to home for people. There is also a reason why they use a made up Russian ultranationalist faction as the main villain instead of Osama, it's about context not content. Lets at least wait for the game to come out so we can full examine the full context around it.

That last statement is know is supposed to a cutting remark, but it fails because you already do such a challenge in many other games with a different context around it. In the GTA games most of the missions are to be better at stealing, killing, selling drugs and being the kingpin then the other kingpins. Instead of beat Osama, in GTA Vice City the long term goal is to beat the Liberty City mafia at being the biggest and richest criminal faction in the country.

Yeah, a level dedicated to shooting civilians is totally "revolutionary" and "in my face", and not a cheap shock attempt.

I didn't say revolutionary. Don't put words in my mouth. And again, let's wait until the game comes out before we pass judgment. It will be interesting to see if you and CR actually do play through the whole game before you make a call, or if you two are going to be stubborn, and close minded and refuse to even play before going about life with your strong opinion on the game.