surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
I feel as though this isn't even a big deal and people are just treating it as such specifically because its terrorism and thats one of those "big topics" these days.
I'm not supporting the game either, but it has nothing to do with this, more to do with no Dedicated Servers. I don't really see the big issue with this either, and the entire level is shippable and even comes with a disclaimer, it's not like they are forcing you to play it.
An excellent writup of the issue.
To be honest I'm not quite sure where I stand on the issue. I know that a lot of people who are going to be playing MW2 won't give a damn about immersion or storytelling, hell, some of them skip SP all together. So as a result a lot of people are just going to see it as another level where you shoot dudes. So I'm not entirely sure it's necessary to put a scene like this in a game with a F.A.G.S PSA statement, since I'm fairly sure that shows the target audience of the game quite well, 13 year old xbox kiddies.
The actual event itself however, doesn't feel like an event, it looks just like an average level. If IW wanted to stir REAL emotions, they could have given some weight to your actions rather than killing faceless civilians, but instead they go for the GUNS GUNS GUNS route, which kind of kills the experience a bit. Remember the ending of MW1? When those people died, you FELT IT. That's because they had character. Plus other stuff I won't go into because it's MW2 spoilers.
Anyway, I've rambled on a little too much. Nice article.
To be honest I'm not quite sure where I stand on the issue. I know that a lot of people who are going to be playing MW2 won't give a damn about immersion or storytelling, hell, some of them skip SP all together. So as a result a lot of people are just going to see it as another level where you shoot dudes. So I'm not entirely sure it's necessary to put a scene like this in a game with a F.A.G.S PSA statement, since I'm fairly sure that shows the target audience of the game quite well, 13 year old xbox kiddies.
The actual event itself however, doesn't feel like an event, it looks just like an average level. If IW wanted to stir REAL emotions, they could have given some weight to your actions rather than killing faceless civilians, but instead they go for the GUNS GUNS GUNS route, which kind of kills the experience a bit. Remember the ending of MW1? When those people died, you FELT IT. That's because they had character. Plus other stuff I won't go into because it's MW2 spoilers.
Anyway, I've rambled on a little too much. Nice article.
I'm gonna sit on this one. MW2 wasn't a day one purchase to begin with, and now I want to wait it out even more.
Hopefully opinions such as yours will make Infinity Ward rethink or remove the offending scene. I understand the idea they're trying to get across, but I agree that it could be done much more tastefully. One does not need to play a cat torturing simulator to know that torturing cats is bad.
Hopefully opinions such as yours will make Infinity Ward rethink or remove the offending scene. I understand the idea they're trying to get across, but I agree that it could be done much more tastefully. One does not need to play a cat torturing simulator to know that torturing cats is bad.
The big difference between GTA's random killings and this is, you have CPU allies who are slaughtering innocents in this game, and (as far as I know), it's only you in GTA, so the whole optional morality comes more into effect with GTA. Here...well, I presume you still progress through the level, but it may be a case of "cannot look away". Or worse yet, it won't be a case where you have to progress through the level without killing someone.
I didn't see the video, and I'm kinda glad I didn't. I'm not the kind of person who can completely shut down his brain while playing a game, so I actually connect with the characters and scenery like most people would a good book or movie. The thing I want to ask is, is this really necessary? There are better ways to show the horrors and evils of terrorism than having the player experience it all firsthand. This point is especially true if you're forced to kill people to advance. Now that I think about it, didn't they later say that the section was optional? It seems like backpedaling to me, but if you're going to have such a controversial section in the game be completely optional, why have it at all?
This reeks strongly of "controversy for controversy's sake" to me. And, to go further off the deep end, look at the type of people who say that video games teach us how to kill. Do you want them to find out about this? This is exactly the kind of ammunition that we don't want those types of people to have against gamers.
What was that one game...? Six Days in Fallujah or whatever? Doesn't it strike anyone else odd that that game got so much flak in development that it eventually went canceled despite being a supposedly faithful look at the war, and yet this game is absolutely going to be released with the player actively engaging in terrorism?
Regardless of me being right on those points, I still feel the section was thrown into there only for the "because we can" factor.
I didn't see the video, and I'm kinda glad I didn't. I'm not the kind of person who can completely shut down his brain while playing a game, so I actually connect with the characters and scenery like most people would a good book or movie. The thing I want to ask is, is this really necessary? There are better ways to show the horrors and evils of terrorism than having the player experience it all firsthand. This point is especially true if you're forced to kill people to advance. Now that I think about it, didn't they later say that the section was optional? It seems like backpedaling to me, but if you're going to have such a controversial section in the game be completely optional, why have it at all?
This reeks strongly of "controversy for controversy's sake" to me. And, to go further off the deep end, look at the type of people who say that video games teach us how to kill. Do you want them to find out about this? This is exactly the kind of ammunition that we don't want those types of people to have against gamers.
What was that one game...? Six Days in Fallujah or whatever? Doesn't it strike anyone else odd that that game got so much flak in development that it eventually went canceled despite being a supposedly faithful look at the war, and yet this game is absolutely going to be released with the player actively engaging in terrorism?
Regardless of me being right on those points, I still feel the section was thrown into there only for the "because we can" factor.
i respectfully disagree with most of your points to the degree that i feel like i need to write a blog about it. To bad im lazy, cause it would have been an elaborate and well thought out counter argument to this little editorial.
Absolutely fantastic. I'm glad to see this side of the argument fully represented. Here's to hoping you don't get vitriolic responses.
Even though I think they could have been a bit more subtle in presentation, I'm still intrigued. But I can't make any sort of realistic judgment having not played it and having only seen it in shit-o-vision.
It's a shame I'll have to wait so long to play it; I'm buying it used. Fuck you Activision.
Even though I think they could have been a bit more subtle in presentation, I'm still intrigued. But I can't make any sort of realistic judgment having not played it and having only seen it in shit-o-vision.
It's a shame I'll have to wait so long to play it; I'm buying it used. Fuck you Activision.
Well honestly, a game that "takes the will to fight" out of us sounds like it's doing more for us than any other game out there. Fact is war sucks, killing people is horrible, and it happens everyday, yet we do it in games all the time and never feel the remorse or guilt that goes along with it.
I can't say IW had noble intentions with the game, I don't know the guys personally, but I can see some positiveness in the negative.
I can't say IW had noble intentions with the game, I don't know the guys personally, but I can see some positiveness in the negative.
If the final product is the way that you describe, I definately will be renting the game and deciding from there. But I'm not making my final decision until the game comes out. I just want more context.
I myself will still be getting it, but I respect your reason for not wanting to support them. You put your own opinion online, and not that of what the mass media thinks like some of the other "gaming" blogs out there.
"In my mind, what the scene actually does is take the will to fight out of me. By having me participate in the slaughter, it makes me question if this fighting is even worth it. It seems as though there's no way for me to reconcile with what I've done -- saying that it's in order to protect a greater number of lives."
That's the real beauty of it, in my opinion. If a level evokes such a strong response, it's getting somewhere. Granted, it needn't be so necessarily negative, and almost telling the gamer to hate himself, but this is a step towards what moral choice in a game SHOULD be. Not cut-and-dry "here's a good option, here's a bad one" that slightly changes conversation trees or whatever. An actual choice. Based on actual morals.
Citizen Kane this is not. (I personally think the comparison to Citizen Kane is stupid, for any medium. What's the Citizen Kane of books? Sorry, unrelated.)
But anyway, even if this is a bit of a clumsy, misguided execution, it's the kind of thing that puts in a little bit of hope for advancement.
That's the real beauty of it, in my opinion. If a level evokes such a strong response, it's getting somewhere. Granted, it needn't be so necessarily negative, and almost telling the gamer to hate himself, but this is a step towards what moral choice in a game SHOULD be. Not cut-and-dry "here's a good option, here's a bad one" that slightly changes conversation trees or whatever. An actual choice. Based on actual morals.
Citizen Kane this is not. (I personally think the comparison to Citizen Kane is stupid, for any medium. What's the Citizen Kane of books? Sorry, unrelated.)
But anyway, even if this is a bit of a clumsy, misguided execution, it's the kind of thing that puts in a little bit of hope for advancement.
lol everybody else is just not buying the game because "EVIL ACTIVISION."
also, i have a feeling you never had any intention of buying this game anyway, as this was written to be your mature examination on videogame entertainment and its psychological effects on todays society. 4 more pages and MLA format btw.
for your BattleField: Bad Company2 blog just say "EVIL E.A." except you never had any intention of buying that one either.
also, i have a feeling you never had any intention of buying this game anyway, as this was written to be your mature examination on videogame entertainment and its psychological effects on todays society. 4 more pages and MLA format btw.
for your BattleField: Bad Company2 blog just say "EVIL E.A." except you never had any intention of buying that one either.
and since i can't edit. In addition, I also believe it will be the best selling game of all time. 99% of the people who will buy it have no idea of the scene until it happens. So therefore, it will go unnoticed until we hear moms across america scream in terror as they rush back to the store and say, "I had no idea THAT was in it, how could you let me pay for this for my 3 year old". And I'll say you frickin idiot its M rated.
@Zeta Crossfire: You are the opposite of correct. Gamers being thoughtful about violence instead of psychotic is what we need, if we're ever to be taken seriously by the general public. Also Wanted was a shithouse game, GTFO.
lol i could care less about a fictional scenario no matter what it is, for all i care i could be slaughtering babies and being rewarded for it as long as the game is fun i wont mind, i will be first inline at midnight to pickup my copy on launch day and btw American movies tend to have happy endings so you might no be use to this type of scenarios but third world country's tend to have more gritty human endings so this is all but shocking to me
That level looks like a bunch of fun, I can't wait to see how many innocents I can murder. I hope you can replay the level in arcade mode and try to get a high score!
"I hope more people don't become the kind of gamer you are or fox news will win."
One of these days Zeta, straight to the Moon!
One of these days Zeta, straight to the Moon!
I'm just not supporting it because... you know... Activision. You people should be ashamed of yourselves.
I've got to say that I agree; this attempt is completely ham-fisted. It's (at its best) an ambitious move, and at its worst is a complete misrepresentation of terrorist actions, concepts, and consequences. When most people think of terrorism, the image of wholesale slaughter is usually the first thing that comes to mind, but this is a pretty gratuitous and lousy attempt at cashing in on that.
I honestly think IW got stuck looking for something that would cultivate a similar "wow" factor to the infamous nuclear blast in Modern Warfare, and that's a real shame because they seem to have shot over a potentially incredible sequence into a no mans land.
Personally, this obvious misstep isn't going to stop me from buying the game. I'm sure I'll still enjoy it, despite this sequence. To each his own, I suppose.
I honestly think IW got stuck looking for something that would cultivate a similar "wow" factor to the infamous nuclear blast in Modern Warfare, and that's a real shame because they seem to have shot over a potentially incredible sequence into a no mans land.
Personally, this obvious misstep isn't going to stop me from buying the game. I'm sure I'll still enjoy it, despite this sequence. To each his own, I suppose.
I don't want to attack your point of view but I disagree with what you've said here.
Games as a medium have the power to force the player to do things they don't essentially want to do. I applaud Infinity Ward for being willing to push the boundaries of what is acceptable within games. If someone doesn't have the stomach for it that's no issue - but you aren't meant to be comfortable with this and that's really the important part of this scene. Cutting away or fading to black is just skirting around the event and plenty of games already do that and if games are to be taken seriously as a medium they do need to push a little bit outside of comfort zones.
Despite this amusingly enough I won't be buying the game for awhile as I'm a PC gamer who happens to like things like dedicated servers. If their IWNET works out fine and everyone swears it's perfect I'll pick it up.
Games as a medium have the power to force the player to do things they don't essentially want to do. I applaud Infinity Ward for being willing to push the boundaries of what is acceptable within games. If someone doesn't have the stomach for it that's no issue - but you aren't meant to be comfortable with this and that's really the important part of this scene. Cutting away or fading to black is just skirting around the event and plenty of games already do that and if games are to be taken seriously as a medium they do need to push a little bit outside of comfort zones.
Despite this amusingly enough I won't be buying the game for awhile as I'm a PC gamer who happens to like things like dedicated servers. If their IWNET works out fine and everyone swears it's perfect I'll pick it up.
You have not played it, you have only viewed a video on the scene. Nor have you seen how they handle it after the scene. AND you have the ability to skip it. Fuck all this sissy 'wah wah terrorists boohoo' bullshit. Let the game do it in its own way. I wanna see this scene (not to kill innocents, but to see how they handle it)! I think this is an amazing step for videogames!
Fuck activision, but GO IW! If we dont let this sort of storytelling happen in games, the growth of the industry is stunted. There are things in movies that can hit just as hard. Yes you may not be able to be the one DOING whats happening in the movie. But you have to view someone doing it who is enjoying it! Thats a whole different thing....satisfaction of an atrocious act is all but evident in movies. Now allowing for it to happen by your hands ( reluctantly or....whole heartedly) Gives a different prespective in many ways.
I believe most will skip the scene. Or they shall play it and most will not shoot anyone, unless necessary to progress. Now, in this sense you are just viewing the scene in a more interactive and gritty form.
Fuck activision, but GO IW! If we dont let this sort of storytelling happen in games, the growth of the industry is stunted. There are things in movies that can hit just as hard. Yes you may not be able to be the one DOING whats happening in the movie. But you have to view someone doing it who is enjoying it! Thats a whole different thing....satisfaction of an atrocious act is all but evident in movies. Now allowing for it to happen by your hands ( reluctantly or....whole heartedly) Gives a different prespective in many ways.
I believe most will skip the scene. Or they shall play it and most will not shoot anyone, unless necessary to progress. Now, in this sense you are just viewing the scene in a more interactive and gritty form.
Agreed on handling it in a different way would have been more tasteful, but I still feel that tackling the hard things instead of shying away (AKA bending over for EVERYONE) simply because public opinion could be bad is a good thing for gaming overall. I'm however biased (*cough* PC) and still wish a horrible media shitstorm descends upon Activision like a horde of angry locusts.
There are plenty of worse games you know. Prototype comes to mind. Personally I love Prototype, but in that game you are ENCOURAGED to kill and eat civilians, cops and soldiers (who have families and all that jazz) in really horrible ways with no consequences. You are a walking, infected, bioterror weapon who goes on a revenge quest with absolutely no guilt or remorse. Make no mistake, in Prototype you aren't the good guy. The military aren't either, but Alex is certainly not a hero. He's a bastard, and we love him for that.
How is this scene in COD MW2 any different? Just because it uses the T-word. You know, Terrorist. Ever since 9/11 that word has had uncomfortable emotional baggage for Americans. Well, you know what, I'm not an American. Other countries in the world have experienced terrorism before, but only when the US experienced it, oh only then does it become taboo. What about Counterstrike, where as a terrorist, you take hostages? Why is that any different? Oh wait, that's right, CS was developed BEFORE 9/11. Apparently when non-Americans get killed by terrorists, it doesn't become a taboo topic.
I have no issue with this. It's been done before. In many other games.
Having said that I will not be buying COD MW2 because in Australia, IT IS 120 FREAKING DOLLARS! Our dollar is at 92-95 US cents last time I checked. It's almost EQUAL to your dollar, and activision are still charging double. Now, they have a right to do that, they are the publisher, it's their game. They are a business and they want to make money and that's fine. Free market and all that jazz.
And I have the right to not buy it. 120 is too steep for me. I'll wait until it gets down to 80 bucks before I buy it.
How is this scene in COD MW2 any different? Just because it uses the T-word. You know, Terrorist. Ever since 9/11 that word has had uncomfortable emotional baggage for Americans. Well, you know what, I'm not an American. Other countries in the world have experienced terrorism before, but only when the US experienced it, oh only then does it become taboo. What about Counterstrike, where as a terrorist, you take hostages? Why is that any different? Oh wait, that's right, CS was developed BEFORE 9/11. Apparently when non-Americans get killed by terrorists, it doesn't become a taboo topic.
I have no issue with this. It's been done before. In many other games.
Having said that I will not be buying COD MW2 because in Australia, IT IS 120 FREAKING DOLLARS! Our dollar is at 92-95 US cents last time I checked. It's almost EQUAL to your dollar, and activision are still charging double. Now, they have a right to do that, they are the publisher, it's their game. They are a business and they want to make money and that's fine. Free market and all that jazz.
And I have the right to not buy it. 120 is too steep for me. I'll wait until it gets down to 80 bucks before I buy it.
I appreciate your ability to form a coherent argument, but I definitely disagree. It is a skippable cutscene. If this sort of thing bothers you, you haven't been on the internet long enough.
My opinion, and what many others will say. Wait till the game comes out, then we shall see. If
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
you watched the COD4 nuke scene before you played the game, do you think it would have the same impact. (I still haven't played COD4) Play the game, then we shall see.
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
you watched the COD4 nuke scene before you played the game, do you think it would have the same impact. (I still haven't played COD4) Play the game, then we shall see.
I for one happily await my airport level. I trust IW knows what they are doing and that everything will be okay. By okay, I mean I can stomach joining the fake terrorists to fake kill fake people in a fake airport, but that's just me. You can skip it.
Also I can't shake the feeling that if the airport scene had been posted and there were no controversy over it, if nobody really complained, you wouldn't have posted this and it wouldn't effect whether or not you purchase this game at all. As I said before this entire controversy is ridiculous.
I wouldn't have done the scene, but I can understand what they are trying to do with the scene, so I'm willing to give it a chance.
I *could* walk away from this article and not be critical... except for your totally bullshit justification of GTA's violence as being above this. It is PURE BULLSHIT. If you are going to spout about how this is unacceptable, and then say "but yeah, I GTA is still okay" then it is... (redundant for emphasis) BULLSHIT.
Oh, GTA is comic. So if we make killing innocent people fun... THAT IS WHAT MAKES IT BETTER? Oh, right. You were just *suckered* into running over old ladies with a car because the game manipulated you with it's fun factor. And, right the "wanted stars." Wait... so are you saying that GTA is showing real world consequences or not? You defend it by saying, "Buuttt.... but there are wanted stars in GTA! They aren't making you do it! They are punishing you for it!" And the on the other hand you say "Yeah, but it's pretty fun. I mean they make it comical so mindless murder makes me laugh, so it's all good."
Like I said. I'm not *big* on what they are doing, but I can understand what they are attempting and give them that at least. And if all you had to say was that you, think that it was inappropriate, then that would be fine by me. But yeah... Bullshit.
I *could* walk away from this article and not be critical... except for your totally bullshit justification of GTA's violence as being above this. It is PURE BULLSHIT. If you are going to spout about how this is unacceptable, and then say "but yeah, I GTA is still okay" then it is... (redundant for emphasis) BULLSHIT.
Oh, GTA is comic. So if we make killing innocent people fun... THAT IS WHAT MAKES IT BETTER? Oh, right. You were just *suckered* into running over old ladies with a car because the game manipulated you with it's fun factor. And, right the "wanted stars." Wait... so are you saying that GTA is showing real world consequences or not? You defend it by saying, "Buuttt.... but there are wanted stars in GTA! They aren't making you do it! They are punishing you for it!" And the on the other hand you say "Yeah, but it's pretty fun. I mean they make it comical so mindless murder makes me laugh, so it's all good."
Like I said. I'm not *big* on what they are doing, but I can understand what they are attempting and give them that at least. And if all you had to say was that you, think that it was inappropriate, then that would be fine by me. But yeah... Bullshit.
All of your points are valid, but I think it would have been more prudent to wait to post this until you've actually played the scene or had it fully and accurately described. Everything we are basing this off of is just speculation until we have the full context of the scene.
I think it is irresponsible to jump to conclusions until you truly know whether IW has evoked the emotions/reactions they were aiming for.
If people had judged Michelangelo's David before it was fully released they might have thought he was just sculpting a cock! (Humor: it can navigate us through even the most controversial times)
I think it is irresponsible to jump to conclusions until you truly know whether IW has evoked the emotions/reactions they were aiming for.
If people had judged Michelangelo's David before it was fully released they might have thought he was just sculpting a cock! (Humor: it can navigate us through even the most controversial times)
Actually hold that "Not buying it thing"
It's selling for 90 bucks on Steam
Looks like I'll buy it after all.
It's selling for 90 bucks on Steam
Looks like I'll buy it after all.
I agree that the way IW is handling the scene, and it's themes, is blunt/ham-fisted, possibly to the point where it isn't effective, but I also see it as gaming maturing as a medium. Gaming can't move forward if developers and publishers are afraid to take risks and face controversy.
Now, this is completely counteracted by the announcement that you can skip the scene in question. That feels like the move of a developer/publisher afraid of the controversy the scene can cause, and in my eyes, destroys the artistic integrity of the game, and the integrity of the developer/publisher. Instead of attempting to push the boundries of what is acceptable in gaming, they are caving in and hurting the entire industry.
Now, this is completely counteracted by the announcement that you can skip the scene in question. That feels like the move of a developer/publisher afraid of the controversy the scene can cause, and in my eyes, destroys the artistic integrity of the game, and the integrity of the developer/publisher. Instead of attempting to push the boundries of what is acceptable in gaming, they are caving in and hurting the entire industry.
My immediate reaction to anyone making this arguement is: they are only polygons. Now, yes, games tell a story and you are meant to feel emotions from that story, and you should feel emotions from the level we are speaking about, but your article acts as if these situations should be taken more seriously than polygonal reenactments of events, which is all they are, and I cannot agree with that. Like Pulp Fiction or Dexter, we are not meant to root for these people or these actions, they are meant as a story tool...
Your GTA4 comparison lacks depth. There are many, many missions in GTA4 where the goal of the mission is to kill cops and civilians. There is no inevitable arrest or death in the Three Leaf Clover mission for instance, you are tasked with killing dozens of cops and then getting away with it. There is no satire or comedic tone in that mission either, it is played very serious as an homage to the movie Heat, a brilliant film all about bad men as well by the way. GTA4 is not at all as comedic on the whole as previous entries, and has many very serious story segments much more brutal than Modern Warfare 2.
I think your arguement is frankly dangerous, as are the similar arguements in some other media outlets. It is basically saying "games are different because you are the character," which is what Jack Thompson and others have been saying about games for a long time now. All the hatred thrown at Thompson and really he was never saying much other than you are now (only in a much more insanely presented fashion, granted). Once we as gamers admit that being in the role of the killer is different than watching a killer on TV, we are basically begging for government oversight and intervention, which given the situation in Australia is not exactly outside the realm of possiblity.
In the end I can summarize by saying it's just a game, we have seen worse before, it's all make believe and polygons, just like Freddy is all makeup and wires. It's telling a story, and if you don't like that story, don't buy it, but leave the arguements intended to make it out as something else in your mind, they are fabrications slanted to your political view.
Your GTA4 comparison lacks depth. There are many, many missions in GTA4 where the goal of the mission is to kill cops and civilians. There is no inevitable arrest or death in the Three Leaf Clover mission for instance, you are tasked with killing dozens of cops and then getting away with it. There is no satire or comedic tone in that mission either, it is played very serious as an homage to the movie Heat, a brilliant film all about bad men as well by the way. GTA4 is not at all as comedic on the whole as previous entries, and has many very serious story segments much more brutal than Modern Warfare 2.
I think your arguement is frankly dangerous, as are the similar arguements in some other media outlets. It is basically saying "games are different because you are the character," which is what Jack Thompson and others have been saying about games for a long time now. All the hatred thrown at Thompson and really he was never saying much other than you are now (only in a much more insanely presented fashion, granted). Once we as gamers admit that being in the role of the killer is different than watching a killer on TV, we are basically begging for government oversight and intervention, which given the situation in Australia is not exactly outside the realm of possiblity.
In the end I can summarize by saying it's just a game, we have seen worse before, it's all make believe and polygons, just like Freddy is all makeup and wires. It's telling a story, and if you don't like that story, don't buy it, but leave the arguements intended to make it out as something else in your mind, they are fabrications slanted to your political view.
Well-written and insightful. I wasn't planning on buying this game anyway so I can't say your article changed my mind, but here's hoping it makes others think twice about doing so.
Every point made actually goes to show that IW have succeeded in doing what they needed to do. We've not got the game yet obviously so nobody can tell for sure, but if it's already making you uncomfortable then they've done a great job. Though we've yet to play it, it is quite clearly a section of the game that is not meant to be ''enjoyable''.
I stand by that this could (and should) be one of the most important and revolutionary developments in gaming and in fact in post-9/11 society as a whole. I am genuinely surprised anyone would consider not buying the game because of this, if anything I think it deserves much more support. I wasn't going to buy the game until it hit the second hand market because of the inflated price - but recent developments have started to convince me otherwise and though I'm still not prepared to shell out for a pre-order, I am at leats going to be buying a new copy of the game now.
I stand by that this could (and should) be one of the most important and revolutionary developments in gaming and in fact in post-9/11 society as a whole. I am genuinely surprised anyone would consider not buying the game because of this, if anything I think it deserves much more support. I wasn't going to buy the game until it hit the second hand market because of the inflated price - but recent developments have started to convince me otherwise and though I'm still not prepared to shell out for a pre-order, I am at leats going to be buying a new copy of the game now.
Honestly, I can't wait to slaughter hundreds of people hu6 It's a video game people, grow a pair. The Act is skip able so enough bitching. The only reason not to support this game would be on the PC for the server reason which is crap on their part.
"Fact is war sucks, killing people is horrible, and it happens everyday, yet we do it in games all the time and never feel the remorse or guilt that goes along with it."
This really stood out to me, and I think it's what IW is trying to achieve. As gamers playing games where death is EVERYWHERE, we're generally pretty detached from it. When a scene in a video game comes along and manages to get that gut wrenching, disturbing, terrible feeling that should accompany death, I think they've done their job. I think it's supposed to be blunt, supposed to smack you in the face, and leave you with an "Oh my God..." sort of feeling.
This really stood out to me, and I think it's what IW is trying to achieve. As gamers playing games where death is EVERYWHERE, we're generally pretty detached from it. When a scene in a video game comes along and manages to get that gut wrenching, disturbing, terrible feeling that should accompany death, I think they've done their job. I think it's supposed to be blunt, supposed to smack you in the face, and leave you with an "Oh my God..." sort of feeling.
follow
