It took an entire day for Activision to get around to it, but the the publisher has issued an official statement on the Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 footage that made the rounds yesterday. Yes, it's legit; but according to Activision, that's not indicative of the full game experience.
Their full statement:
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.
This echoes, in part, the statements issued earlier by Infinity Ward. But now that everyone has spoken up, what's your take?
| BBcode help |
| [b]Bold text[/b] |
Bold text |
| [i]Italic text[/i] |
Italic text |
| [url]http://www.dtoid.com/[/url] |
http://www.dtoid.com |
| [url=http://www.dtoid.com/]Web link[/url] |
Web link |
|
| [img]http://www.example.com/robot.jpg[/img] |
 |
Post a comment! You can also post a photo below:
Comment with Facebook
Click connect and comment instantly!
|
Comment with Dtoid
New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds
|
73 comments | showing # 1 to 50
|
Comment with Facebook
Click connect and comment instantly!
|
Comment with Dtoid
New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds
|
Comments policy
Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?
Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!
Contest:
5:14 PM on 10.28.2009
| 
I'm going to kill a merry fuckload of civilian NPCs, it's inevitable.
Blah Artistic plot licence games fick silth.
I'm bored of this news.
And thus, shitstorm partially avoided. And I congratulate IW on their bold move.
Plus, it's not going to be hard to find the dude with a stolen copy, he shows his mug in the TV's reflection multiple times.
I find the level idea interesting and refreshing. I for one look forward to playing it.
You shouldn't like the idea of gunning down civilians, I imagine thats the purpose of the level to elicit a visceral and uncomfortable response from the player.
Ironically wasn't there a post about pointless sex earlier today? Does this not fall under the same category?
If a game is too hard on your conscious then real life must make you fearful medicated recluses.
Uhh, sorry if going around in an airport shooting civilians isn't my idea of a typical Thursday night about town.
Seriously what kind of logic is that?
"You don't like killing people? Pfft, you're weird."
Whether or not the level is merely a gratuitous slaughterfest will hinge largely on how it fits into the rest of the story and what dramatic impact it has. If the level is able to impact the player and makes them more emotionally invested in the story/game then I think it will have accomplished what IW was aiming for. If, on the other hand, it is simply a disposable shooting gallery that has no real tie to the rest of the story then it will be shocking exercise done for its own sake.
Please tell me you have never played GTA then. If you have you are a big hypocrite.
Link to where I found the video
Contrary to everyone else I played GTA IV without slaughtering everyone. And before that no I didn't play GTA because it was boring.
@testmunky
That's how I feel. What is the context? What is the point? Am I just supposed to feel bad? If so then I'll probably play it because it's an important draw into the game and I enjoy that. If it's just a free for all that would bug me.
Again it has the right to exist and I'm not sided either way. I just a lot of people are quick to jump on the bandwagon without even trying to objectively look at the other side of the argument. And there's plenty of reasons to be bothered by it.
I'm surprise no military gamers have chimed in.
"Uhh, sorry if going around in an airport shooting civilians isn't my idea of a typical Thursday night about town. "
But your typical Thursday night consists of going into fantasy worlds and saving princesses? Or being a criminal mastermind? Or fighting the Government in a post-apocalypse Washington D.C.?
Damn, that's exciting, bro.
Oh who gives a crap, you're given the choice to skip the level if you don't want to play it.
I find it amusing this creates a stir when we have movies and books that exist for no other reason that to joyfully show the gruesome and torurous deaths of innocent people. People love that crap.
If we admit games are different, we invite endless censorship and control over them by our nanny-state government. That would do us all so much good, to be more like Germany or Australia in this regard... I would just LOVE it, by which I mean, I would hate all of you for causing it.
And yes, in Grand Theft Auto I go on merry killing sprees for the sheer absurd fun of it, and I kill tons of cops and grandmas and I run people over, then backup and run them over again, and it's all a freaking BLAST, because it is fantasy, it is not real. Repeat: IT IS NOT REAL.
It's just a game and nothing but a game, i've always seen them as fun and anything
can happen. I don't know why this would disturb me.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33520338/ns/technology_and_science-games/
Who gives a crap. Holywood has been doing this for decades and games have been doing it for around a decade.
It's meant to set the mood (and give you an idea of how crazy your enemy is) in the same way the execution scene and nuke in COD4 did. And now to slaughter a few hundred innocent polygons for no apparent reason in Saints Row 2.
In any case, it seems to me brilliant. Not often do games force you to think more deeply about reality--about morality, choice, and consequence, about the difficulty in knowing right and wrong in a war-torn world. I enjoy games that are more "mindless," to be sure. But it is a game like this (as it seems) that really moves a person, and creates an unforgettable memory. I'll never forget the first time I played through Metal Gear Solid on PSone for this reason. It moved me. It made me think about the world--about advancing technology, about evil and good.
I might also add that, a game that engages with the sort of themes MW2 seems to, will only help games finally to be taken more seriously as works of "art"--things which display incredible human creativity, and engage audience's mind like other forms of art and literature. Maybe my hopes are too high in that regard, but still--I think this game will go on my shelf forever as a "classic."
StingingVelvet really hit the nail on the head. By doing this, it almost seems like we're ADMITTING that games ARE different in the emotions and effects they can have on us. And like he also said, being different in this case is a bad thing.
I think I'd rather they had not put this option in there, but at the same time I can't be mad at it because more player control is almost always a good thing. Now if we could only convince them that dedicated servers are a good thing... Bastards
still won't get it, evil activision.
if you live in britain, and american troops comes in shooting everything and proclaiming its right to do so, who would the video game make you play as?
if you live in america and british troops come in shooting everything and proclaiming its right to do so, who would the video game make you play as?
there is only one answer. see how one sided games are now? the american government and esrb lap dogs have set standards and policies no one sees.
If this bugs you, you are weak. And not only that, an insecure pussy.
The official statement is to "evoke the atrocities of terrorism."
Why on earth do they then have the PLAYER DO these atrocities of terrorism? Yes, everybody is going to throw the "video games are just pixels" (completely ignoring arguments they've violently made in the past that their medium of choice should be taken seriously because of the emotions and ideas it can project), but how the hell is this in any sense good taste?
It seems like a cash-in on getting news propaganda (which it will) so people will buy the game, and by using jumping on the tragedy that was 9/11 to just sell more copies of their game seems downright sick to me.
I do not promote video game censorship, nor do I think playing video games directly links to violent behavior, etc. But saying it doesn't influence you whatsoever is downright incorrect. Activision/Infinity Ward is cashing in on our enraged or excited emotions, and using a recent tragedy to do it. Even if it should be a part of the story, it is still distasteful.
Just my two cents. I'm interested to see how this plays out come November.
One thing I think would be interesting/creepy/terrifying (if done well) would be to experience the massacre from the eyes of one of the civilians. Maybe Soap and the other soldiers could find a survivor sometime after the incident and then this scene could be some sort of flashback to represent their testimony to the soldiers. I think that would have been a bit less controversial, but still shocking.
Oh well, too late now.