"no russian"

[General Chaos]

The real issue I have with this stage is the fact that they made it playable. That's the disturbing part, if it was a cut scene, it would be different. I don't believe in censorship or banning, no matter how distasteful I may personally consider something to be.

I agree. There is something about forcing the player to act out this scene that makes it troubling. It also limits the narrative to the perspective of the shooter so the victims are basically just ducks in a shooting gallery and not really characters. Things could have been different in a cut scene, probably making the impact more powerful as well.

And yes, it's an important distinction to make between saying something is distasteful/disturbing and calling for censorship. I don't know why some of these public activists and politicians can't do the former without the latter.

[Weekend_Warrior]

I honestly wish they'd make more games like this - where you are the bad guy.

And killing innocent people is nothing new in video games. If you remember, that was the biggest draw and most controversial game element of Grand Theft Auto III - that you could go on a shooting spree and run people over with stolen vehicles.

The only difference between GTAIII and MW2 is that the latter would be considered much more graphically realistic.

[Weekend_Warrior]

The real issue I have with this stage is the fact that they made it playable.

But you don't have to play through it. You can skip the level if it bothers you.

It's like listening to the radio or watching tv - you can always turn it off.

[Hobie-wan]

If you remember, that was the biggest draw and most controversial game element of Grand Theft Auto III - that you could go on a shooting spree and run people over with stolen vehicles.

The only difference between GTAIII and MW2 is that the latter would be considered much more graphically realistic.

I just want to point out that the difference is that in GTA III, you could go run down and shoot innocent people, but in this example you're expected to.

[Weekend_Warrior]

If you remember, that was the biggest draw and most controversial game element of Grand Theft Auto III - that you could go on a shooting spree and run people over with stolen vehicles.

The only difference between GTAIII and MW2 is that the latter would be considered much more graphically realistic.

I just want to point out that the difference is that in GTA III, you could go run down and shoot innocent people, but in this example you're expected to.

Only if you choose to play the level.

[Gamerforlife]

I honestly wish they'd make more games like this - where you are the bad guy.

And killing innocent people is nothing new in video games. If you remember, that was the biggest draw and most controversial game element of Grand Theft Auto III - that you could go on a shooting spree and run people over with stolen vehicles.

The only difference between GTAIII and MW2 is that the latter would be considered much more graphically realistic.

GTA III and Vice City had a somewhat cartoonish quality to it and many of the people in the game were all annoying or portrayed in some sort of negative way. You sort of felt like everybody was bad in those games, including your character. I haven't played more recent GTA games, but somehow those two managed to make violence comical and even funny. It wasn't quite as affecting as this scene in Call of Duty.

Also, most of the killing innocents in those games was optional.

It's not the same, perhaps others could explain it better than me, but they crossed a line here that wasn't crossed in GTA games that I've played. I have played tons of violent games. I just recently finished WET, dismembering and spraying blood everywhere, but that game is like a cheesy Grindhouse flick. It's harmless, exaggerated, not to be taken seriously violence. It's the kind of game that I usually think of when people attack video games for their violence, but after seeing "no russian" I'm starting to wonder if maybe they have a point.

[Weekend_Warrior]

I honestly wish they'd make more games like this - where you are the bad guy.

And killing innocent people is nothing new in video games. If you remember, that was the biggest draw and most controversial game element of Grand Theft Auto III - that you could go on a shooting spree and run people over with stolen vehicles.

The only difference between GTAIII and MW2 is that the latter would be considered much more graphically realistic.

GTA III and Vice City had a somewhat cartoonish quality to it and many of the people in the game were all annoying or portrayed in some sort of negative way. You sort of felt like everybody was bad in those games, including your character. I haven't played more recent GTA games, but somehow those two managed to make violence comical and even funny. It wasn't quite as affecting as this scene in Call of Duty.

Also, most of the killing innocents in those games was optional.

And once again, it's optional to play this level.

[Gamerforlife]

I honestly wish they'd make more games like this - where you are the bad guy.

And killing innocent people is nothing new in video games. If you remember, that was the biggest draw and most controversial game element of Grand Theft Auto III - that you could go on a shooting spree and run people over with stolen vehicles.

The only difference between GTAIII and MW2 is that the latter would be considered much more graphically realistic.

GTA III and Vice City had a somewhat cartoonish quality to it and many of the people in the game were all annoying or portrayed in some sort of negative way. You sort of felt like everybody was bad in those games, including your character. I haven't played more recent GTA games, but somehow those two managed to make violence comical and even funny. It wasn't quite as affecting as this scene in Call of Duty.

Also, most of the killing innocents in those games was optional.

And once again, it's optional to play this level.

It's presented as a main level in the story, NO ONE is going to skip it for fear of missing out on something important. Let's get real, they put that disclaimer to try and cover their asses, but they fully expected people to play that level. I know people on this forum are not that naive. We're all intelligent folk here.

Let me put it this way, we've been bitching and moaning about people attacking the games industry for its violence for years. Is Infinity Ward really helping or hurting us here? This is EXACTLY the sort of thing opponents of video game violence want to wave in front of everyone as an example of how video games corrupt our youth. Not saying I actually believe that video games DO corrupt our youth, but I know this game certainly is going to make it even harder to defend the industry against its critics. Thanks Infinity Ward.

Again, just my opinions.

[General Chaos]

It's harmless, exaggerated, not to be taken seriously violence. It's the kind of game that I usually think of when people attack video games for their violence, but after seeing "no russian" I'm starting to wonder if maybe they have a point.

See I think that's part of the problem. If you look at a lot of the early media and political backlash against violence in gaming it was toward these campy portrayals of violence (think Mortal Kombat). It's as if the industry response (at least by some in it) has been to "get serious with violence." So instead of having crazy wacky exaggerated fatalities we have some developers sitting around thinking "hey I know what will make them take us seriously and realize that violence in games isn't over the top crazy, let's have the player control an undercover agent posing as a terrorist go through an airport and methodically slaughter hundreds of innocents."

[Gamerforlife]

It's harmless, exaggerated, not to be taken seriously violence. It's the kind of game that I usually think of when people attack video games for their violence, but after seeing "no russian" I'm starting to wonder if maybe they have a point.

See I think that's part of the problem. If you look at a lot of the early media and political backlash against violence in gaming it was toward these campy portrayals of violence (think Mortal Kombat). It's as if the industry response (at least by some in it) has been to "get serious with violence." So instead of having crazy wacky exaggerated fatalities we have some developers sitting around thinking "hey I know what will make them take us seriously and realize that violence in games isn't over the top crazy, let's have the player control an undercover agent posing as a terrorist go through an airport and methodically slaughter hundreds of innocents."

Interesting point, and ironically makes it seems like the critics of video game violence are part of the problem