95 réponses à ce sujet

[xODD7BALLx]

As a gamer I appreciate the leaps and bounds in which the industry has progressed making interactive gaming a more widely accepted form of entertainment. And I am seeing more and more over the last 5-10 years the progression in getting recognition that games can have mature elements that frequent the film & TV industry, though with the bumpy road developers have traveled in doing so they have managed to respect both ends of the spectrum regarding what is clearly ok and accepted and what is borderline suicide for the gaming industry's hopes to achieve a better reception by all.

I know that one day we all will be able to(with age restrictions in mind) play titles in the future that bring elements that the film industry has utilized to envoke emotion, set the overall tone, and a level of intensity and grittiness, that in all respects will be appreciated by us as gamers.

I'm a fan of the COD series(minus Treyarch's titles), I pre-ordered Modern Warfare 2 a while back, and the recent footage which has since been removed from places I had viewed it, I found that it was too much, and the fact that it was a "playable" portion of the game, well I just found it in poor taste all things considered regarding events in our history that to say the least, hit home to many of us.

POSSIBLE SPOILER FOR COD MW2 IN THIS SECTION***********************************

The level was depicted as the player being an operative, or double agent, having infiltrated a terrorists groups ranks, and in doing so became part of a terrorist act involving an airport(a touchy subject in US history), and possibly hundreds of civilians(both men and women). Being a part of this terrorist act, and to blend in to gain intel to eventually use to stop the terrorists, you become a participant of this terrible slaughter.

*************************************************************************************************
Would I feel it was too much as a cutscene? No.
Am I aware that it is in fact a game? Yes

Now before you give your opinion, think of parts in our history, not just US, or Canada etc, but world history.
If there was a game where you as an OSS operative, infiltrated the **** regime and the ranks of the 3rd Reich in a goal to bring figuratively speaking the roof down on their heads ending not only the war but the holocaust as well in their efforts to commit genocide. Would you feel/be ok with a part of the game where you must execute Jews?
Though in the idea of a story like this to save the world kill a hundred or more innocents being a neccessary evil, but even still regardless of your background regarding religion, ethnic origins, country of residence, or whether you had relatives/family fight alongside allied forces during WWII, would you think that would be going to far?

All that being said, a few questions:

1. Do you feel that this was done in poor taste?

2. Do you feel even if this part of their story was absolutely needed for overall effect, would it be acceptable as a cutscene, rather than being playable?

3. Do you think choices similar to this by developers has a probability of hurting the industry, with how the media and politicians are always on the ready to bash the gaming industry?(not as just sales, but acceptance)

4. If you were playing a game with a similar instance, and the only way through it would be to play through it requiring you to murder countless civilians, would you? and why or why not?

As I said please keep this mature, if you feel this is the ultimate fantasy for you to "kill civilians" and wish more games were like it please dont bother responding. Also I know there are other games out there that have already been released that have had negative response and reflected a bad light on the industry, but we're talking about this game, this scenario etc.

Modifié par Operative84, 30 octobre 2009 - 04:39 .

[Sword For Hire]

fallout 3 had unkillable children
fallout 1 & 2 did not

remember the small outcry because of grand theft auto?

im sure there are other games out there that i can't remember off the top of my head.
As more time progresses the more retarded things get in the industry.

The majority of the world revolves around Ignorance & Greed. There will never be anything outrageous to what you ask, even if they make movies around that. Taking part in that, in a game is completely different. There will never be full frontal nudity or elaborate sex scenes with gymnastic prowess. The killing of children won't be in either for future or present games. The only conceivable way that adult content will ever exist is if all games are distributed as a digital download. Even then ISPs might start regulating end user rights and what they can download. If not, then your government will step in to moderate your ISP to moderate you.

Best bet is to read a book

Modifié par Sword For Hire, 30 octobre 2009 - 04:34 .

[xODD7BALLx]

Ok I guess in a way you kind of answered the questions........

Sword For Hire wrote...

fallout 3 had unkillable children
fallout 1 & 2 did not

remember the small outcry because of grand theft auto?

im sure there are other games out there that i can't remember off the top of my head.
As more time progresses the more retarded things get in the industry.

The
majority of the world revolves around Ignorance & Greed. There will
never be anything outrageous to what you ask, even if they make movies
around that. Taking part in that, in a game is completely different.
There will never be full frontal nudity or elaborate sex scenes with
gymnastic prowess. The killing of children won't be in either for
future or present games. The only conceivable way that adult content
will ever exist is if all games are distributed as a digital download.
Even then ISPs might start regulating end user rights and what they can
download. If not, then your government will step in to moderate your
ISP to moderate you.

Best bet is to read a book

FO series, the North American versions, you can kill children, but you arent required to slaughter them so I dont see how that really has much to do with it, plus FO is set in Post-Apoc world fantasy/sci-fi. Grand Theft Auto is as many know by a developer that takes the most heat from media and politicians, and they do it much to a purpose.  There are AO games out there, you can still buy them and or download them, the rules on AO is that retailers have made a decision not to sell AO games. But you can purchase via direct download and online game retailers.

I do read, but I'm not understanding the point of that remark, are you suggesting I give up gaming and just read a book? I'm not bashing the industry or any games, I'm asking for some mature conversation about this, and how others view it.

Modifié par Operative84, 30 octobre 2009 - 04:47 .

[BluesMan1956]

Sword For Hire wrote...

fallout 3 had unkillable children
fallout 1 & 2 did not

Um.. what about the children in Megaton?  Did they escape?

[BluesMan1956]

Operative84 wrote...


I do read, but I'm not understanding the point of that remark, are you suggesting I give up gaming and just read a book? I'm not bashing the industry or any games, I'm asking for some mature conversation about this, and how others view it.

Let's talk about "immersion".  If a game developer is trying to immerse you in a story and you find yourself playing an unsavory character or your character is asked or required to do something unsavory, what is the remedy?   The same with a book.  Either you put down the controller or forge ahead.  If the immersion is so close to reality that it gives you pause, then the developer probably achieved the desired end.   If your concious pricks you and asks you "do I really want to do this?"  I think that is a good thing.

The Call of Duty series has led millions into virtual war, requiring that they kill millions of virtual soldiers.  We grow used to the concept.  This scenario in MW2 kind of puts it in your face, like "YEAH, WAR REALLY IS HELL.  DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW?"

[Sword For Hire]

BluesMan1956 wrote...

Sword For Hire wrote...

fallout 3 had unkillable children
fallout 1 & 2 did not

Um.. what about the children in Megaton?  Did they escape?

Did you get to see them on screen when they died?  Did you get to see gritty sex with yourself and the hooker in megaton?

NO you didn't

[xODD7BALLx]

Ok guys let's try and not do something rash and insist one's opinion takes priority over anothers, again maturity.

Bluesman, I have an all to well understanding of war, it's no excuse for my feelings that war is not necessarily noble in any view but when a cause of honorable intent can only be done so by battle with others that intend ill will towards others by way of weapons and force, then I see neutralizing enemy soldiers/combatants as something that is necessary.

War is terrible, and many do not realize that it is not so much the act of war that is Hell, but the aftermath that follows.

People die, it is a fact of life, sex is a natural occurrence, it is the process in which the two occur that may be favorable or not.

Again though if a game were to have the setting taking place during WWII and the events leading up to the beginning of Allied forces intervening and eventually putting an end to the 3rd Reich.
How would you view a situation in which you as the player would have to participate in genocide, and not as a 3rd party as though you're soldier on the front, but as a soldier of the SS murdering Jews. Yes it happened it's a part of history but with respect to those that lost so many family by way of the atrocities the 3rd Reich committed, would you feel it necessary for "immersion"?

Yes movies have shown us the horrors of such things, but are these movies made with money as it's sole reason for being made or is the film showing history and trying to get the viewer to see and remember that things like this were committed and as such we should insure that it doesnt happen again. And also remember movies cannot really be interacted with just responded to with emotion and thought. I think again that if the part of the game in question wouldnt be over the line if it were merely a cutscene.

Modifié par Operative84, 30 octobre 2009 - 05:31 .

[Giant Panther]

its a game as in  not real and it doesn't matter if you kill helpless civilians or bad guys/terrorists you are NOT going to go out and start shooting people unless you already wanted to.

[Dawnhorn]

I think the point was touched upon best by BluesMan1956. The writer, director, story teller, whatever nomenclature you wish to use is trying to elicit a real reaction in the audience (you). The fact that you cringed and actually had to think about your actions is a success (whether it was in good taste or not is really not the point). The point is that the user immersed you beyond cartoon-like fantasy and into real roleplay.



That is how some of my best friends would describe war (one is a Marine and one from the Army) - that it's not the glory you see in most games. It's true combat and you have to either detach yourself or get out.



I could only imagine how an operative would feel under the rouse of a terrorist. It's similar, I guess, to an undercover cop within a gang situation. Since I can only imagine, I am willing to guess scenes like this are the reason to be so stunningly realistic - so that you believe what it is like and have the opportunity to become truly immersed in the role.



On a lesser note - there were parts of KotOR 1 that irked me for a while where you could use the dark side to influence civilians to do unthinkable things.

[AustrianAndI]

I haven't read everyone's reply to this so don't get mad if I say something that had already been said...



I think that this could add a certain element of depth in the game, you know, a kind of "the ends justifies the means" kind of thing. Making the player feel guilty but then he completely redeems himself and feels like he's the bomb after the plan worked and everything is happy again?



That being said, do I think it's right that this is in a video game? I certainly feel as though it's an EXTREMELY controversial issue, but how is it different than the terrible things you can do in other games? Just because we Americans may have personal issues with it? I'm sure there have been a handful of GTA players who were friends with hookers who were killed in their line of business. Terrible example, I know, but you know what I'm getting at. In Fallout 3 you can kill several innocents just to give Mr. Burke a better view. That's not even reasonable justification.



I just got up to get some coffee and I kind of forgot where I was going with the rest of this post... But those are my thoughts. If I remember where I was going with that I'll repost or edit this one.

[xODD7BALLx]

Giant Panther wrote...

its a game as in  not real and it doesn't matter if you kill helpless civilians or bad guys/terrorists you are NOT going to go out and start shooting people unless you already wanted to.

Mature and sensible people understand that nobody is claiming otherwise, again be mature and by that speak to others as though they have intelligence and by that understand it is not real.  This thread is meant to be a platform in which people can digest this information and speak to eachother in kind, without jumping to a conclusion that the other is an idiot or should shove off and get a grip "it's just a game, doesnt mean you're gonna kill people gah" kind of things.

I'm obviously purchasing a fantasy rpg with gore violence language and sexual content, so dont misunderstand and think I'm against freedom of expression.

I'm trying to see what others thoughts are on not only this situation but, say you had been through rape, and you as a player could sexually assault another, regardless of it being a game would you say that's worth the immersion? Would it not bother you? Would you think it's a good idea? Do you think it will(and despite any damage to the industry there is to much money in it to stop it) hurt the industry's efforts to broaden our experiences in the future with any possible setbacks?

Modifié par Operative84, 30 octobre 2009 - 05:41 .

[BluesMan1956]

Operative84 wrote...

Ok guys let's try and not do something rash and insist one's opinion takes priority over anothers, again maturity.

Bluesman, I have an all to well understanding of war, it's no excuse for my feelings that war is not necessarily noble in any view but when a cause of honorable intent can only be done so by battle with others that intend ill will towards others by way of weapons and force, then I see neutralizing enemy soldiers/combatants as something that is necessary.

War is terrible, and many do not realize that it is not so much the act of war that is Hell, but the aftermath that follows.

People die, it is a fact of life, sex is a natural occurrence, it is the process in which the two occur that may be favorable or not.

Again though if a game were to have the setting taking place during WWII and the events leading up to the beginning of Allied forces intervening and eventually putting an end to the 3rd Reich.
How would you view a situation in which you as the player would have to participate in genocide, and not as a 3rd party as though you're soldier on the front, but as a soldier of the SS murdering Jews. Yes it happened it's a part of history but with respect to those that lost so many family by way of the atrocities the 3rd Reich committed, would you feel it necessary for "immersion"?

Yes movies have shown us the horrors of such things, but are these movies made with money as it's sole reason for being made or is the film showing history and trying to get the viewer to see and remember that things like this were committed and as such we should insure that it doesnt happen again. And also remember movies cannot really be interacted with just responded to with emotion and thought. I think again that if the part of the game in question wouldnt be over the line if it were merely a cutscene.

I hope you read my entire message and did not just take the shouting out of context. 

I am not Jewish so I cannot understand the cultural experience of being from a people who have been hated, oppressed, and persecuted for ten thousand years.  I can appreciate the sensitivity that Jews would have for such a scene in a video game.   If there is a silver lining, it is that the authors have not tried to whitewash the fact that Islamic extremists really do want to wipe out the State of Israel. 

Given the current political state of the world, this scenario in MW2 is very real.  This is the ideology that so many world leaders and diplomats want to coddle up to.   I am personally sickened at how political correctness has caused so much of the world to choose not to see the evil that they believe doesn't exist even though it is right in front of their face.

I seriously doubt the intent of the writers was to involve the player in a recreation of the holocaust.  Maybe they hoped to open some of those blind eyes?  Or would their be unintended consequences of this game when played by those with that toxic genocidal ideology?

[xODD7BALLx]

Bluesman

no not at all, I was just making a statement that we're on the same page as far as the reality that war is Hell. But I just added that most really dont understand that the aftermath is typically the worst.

I agree with what you mean by the idea behind having these types of scenarios, I do understand that they want to evoke emotions(and hopefully anyone who does play through this scenario will feel the intended emotion), I had read a few comments regarding it, and many spoke as though it were a dream come true to slaughter unarmed men and women. Frankly it disgusts me, and I feel that frame of mind is in the end what can truly hurt the industry, with GTA you are a criminal, you rob you steal and in most cases kill, and people know GTA is about more than just that, but also understand it's context. Have I played GTA and made a point to run down and kill hundreds of pedestrians no, have I run them over during a chase yep, but you are a criminal.

In MW2 assuming it follows the gameplay of the others, friendly fire will result in failure, so if the terrorists are considered in that level to be friendly, yet you choose to say to hell with this and unload on the terrorists taking as many with you as possible, and it results in failure, I for one see that as wrong. Because even if it were my duty to gain intel etc, if put in that situation I'd take as many of the terrorist as possible and give the civilians as much of a chance at survival as possible even if meaning I die as a result.

Modifié par Operative84, 30 octobre 2009 - 05:55 .

[samal90]

I understand that this can be a touchy subject for some people. But let's face it, people don't start wars, politicians do. There is no good side or bad side...because it all depends which side you were born into. When the US joined WW2 and they had to send all those guys out there to die...maybe those guys didn't want to be there..but they had to follow orders. If you think that the people in the german side were any different, you are kidding yourselves. In total, there was maybe around 30 really hardcore guys in the **** regime that really wanted to do all those atrocities. But in the end, most soldiers don't want to fight or die for that matter. They just follow orders cause they don't have a choice.

That's why I hate movies or games that portray german soldiers as bloodthirsty people just seeking to kill americans or russians. It's not like that, the german soldiers are the same as the US soldiers..just following orders. There is a good movie portraying this, its called "Merry Christmas" and talks about the Chritmas truce in 1914 during WW1.

Now, about the MW2's scene. yes it is gruesome, but maybe the developer's idea here is just to educate people on the meaning of war. I think that by shocking people directly into their core you can educate them better. If I had to play a game where I had to kill jews in a concentration camp, I don't think I would like it. It never happened to me but I would still play the game, but if done correctly, the emotion that will flow through me during that scene is the one the developers wanted me to feel. The one that teaches me about what is wrong and what is right. That's all i'll say



I humorist once said: "People are cool, they don't want to go to war. It's the politicians who mess it all for us." And I think he is right.

[BluesMan1956]

samal90 wrote...

I understand that this can be a touchy subject for some people. But let's face it, people don't start wars, politicians do. There is no good side or bad side...because it all depends which side you were born into.

I don't know if I agree with this level of thoughtless, moral equvalency.  I mean, which side killed millions of jews in an attempt of genocide?

I humorist once said: "People are cool, they don't want to go to war. It's the politicians who mess it all for us." And I think he is right.

Politicans are people too.  What do they say: Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely"  Unfortunately, if we were put in those positions, we would have to be careful that we wouldn't take the same actions and justify our actions in the process...

[krouga]

I think the OP misunderstands what the game designers were doing. Just becasue they added something morally wrong into a game (bad morals are in all games) does not mean the game makers were condoning the act. For example, Schindler's List is a movie showing horrible images of how the jews were treated yet people still would "enjoy" the movie as it was well made and told an interesting story in a time of extreme hardship and if it didn't show the horrible images, i hardly think it would have been as convincing a story.



The makers of MW2 were trying to show how rough it really is and in doing so create a convincing story. Hell, even DA has the history of humans slaughtering and enslaving elves!

[BluesMan1956]

krouga wrote...

I think the OP misunderstands what the game designers were doing. Just becasue they added something morally wrong into a game (bad morals are in all games) does not mean the game makers were condoning the act. For example, Schindler's List is a movie showing horrible images of how the jews were treated yet people still would "enjoy" the movie as it was well made and told an interesting story in a time of extreme hardship and if it didn't show the horrible images, i hardly think it would have been as convincing a story.

The makers of MW2 were trying to show how rough it really is and in doing so create a convincing story. Hell, even DA has the history of humans slaughtering and enslaving elves!

Normally I would agree, but the scenario opens some very old and deep wounds within an entire race of people. 

Huh, I just had an epiphany about blacks and their seeming obsession with 140 year old slavery....

Modifié par BluesMan1956, 30 octobre 2009 - 06:37 .

[xODD7BALLx]

krouga wrote...

I think the OP misunderstands what the game designers were doing. Just becasue they added something morally wrong into a game (bad morals are in all games) does not mean the game makers were condoning the act. For example, Schindler's List is a movie showing horrible images of how the jews were treated yet people still would "enjoy" the movie as it was well made and told an interesting story in a time of extreme hardship and if it didn't show the horrible images, i hardly think it would have been as convincing a story.

The makers of MW2 were trying to show how rough it really is and in doing so create a convincing story. Hell, even DA has the history of humans slaughtering and enslaving elves!

No I dont misunderstand the intention, I was merely speaking about my opinion of the following, and then asking others questions, which seem to be ignored and thus, thinking I am against gaming being an artform and that it shouldnt have the same considerations as film or other forms of media or entertainment.

With your Schindlers List example, its not something you interact with, so it's not really in the same measure as a game is. I asked if any at all felt that with the way our society is always ready to pounce on something and bash the hell out of it, could it possibly set back the industry, do you feel even with the intentions of IW that it's worth dragging the industry through fire for yet another frenzy?

I'm not saying "Games are bad, and they corrupt and cause murder and pain in the world, games are the devil" etc, so dont assume I'm a close minded person without a sense of individuality.

[xODD7BALLx]

BluesMan1956 wrote...

krouga wrote...

I think the OP misunderstands what the game designers were doing. Just becasue they added something morally wrong into a game (bad morals are in all games) does not mean the game makers were condoning the act. For example, Schindler's List is a movie showing horrible images of how the jews were treated yet people still would "enjoy" the movie as it was well made and told an interesting story in a time of extreme hardship and if it didn't show the horrible images, i hardly think it would have been as convincing a story.

The makers of MW2 were trying to show how rough it really is and in doing so create a convincing story. Hell, even DA has the history of humans slaughtering and enslaving elves!

Normally I would agree, but the scenario opens some very old and deep wounds within an entire race of people. 

Huh, I just had an epiphany about blacks and their seeming obsession with 140 year old slavery....

Exactly, if anyone here regardless of ethnic origin feels that in the same scenario, your character is trying to put an end to something but in order to do so must betray his own ethics, scenario: a lynch mob with the KKK is terrorizing towns and doing what we all know have done, in all the horrible ideals and acts committed by these psychos, would it be ok with you if there was a game where in order to stop the KKK you had to commit the same acts you were trying to stop? Do you think a game like that wouldnt in anyway hurt the industry and set it back years and years?

[BluesMan1956]

BluesMan1956 wrote...
...

Exactly, if anyone here regardless of ethnic origin feels that in the same scenario, your character is trying to put an end to something but in order to do so must betray his own ethics, scenario: a lynch mob with the KKK is terrorizing towns and doing what we all know have done, in all the horrible ideals and acts committed by these psychos, would it be ok with you if there was a game where in order to stop the KKK you had to commit the same acts you were trying to stop? Do you think a game like that wouldnt in anyway hurt the industry and set it back years and years?

I think it could hurt the publisher and other companies responsible for creating the game, but I don't think it would set the entire industry back.  At least in the USA.  We will forget about the transgressions of the game company the next time American Idol comes on....

[xODD7BALLx]

BluesMan1956 wrote...

BluesMan1956 wrote...
...

Exactly, if anyone here regardless of ethnic origin feels that in the same scenario, your character is trying to put an end to something but in order to do so must betray his own ethics, scenario: a lynch mob with the KKK is terrorizing towns and doing what we all know have done, in all the horrible ideals and acts committed by these psychos, would it be ok with you if there was a game where in order to stop the KKK you had to commit the same acts you were trying to stop? Do you think a game like that wouldnt in anyway hurt the industry and set it back years and years?

I think it could hurt the publisher and other companies responsible for creating the game, but I don't think it would set the entire industry back.  At least in the USA.  We will forget about the transgressions of the game company the next time American Idol comes on....

Yeah I get that, and like I said before, there is too much money in gaming for it to ever end, what I mean is, there are people in power just looking for a reason to take something you enjoy away, and it seems pointless in some cases as it were to give them an opportunity to do anything by giving them any fuel to drive their agendas into a law.  Hot coffee for instance, caused a lot of crap, and it wasnt meant to be accessible yet Rock Star left that portion on the final game, and then had to recall in many cases games that had already shipped.

And with COD obviously anyone who has played any of those titles online can tell that the M rating hasnt done a damn thing, it's filled with kids and teens that by all accounts shouldnt be playing the game, but the ignorance of parents buy their kids things to pacify them or to get them out of their hair. So that being said we all know MW2 will be experience by a wide spectrum of ages and mentalities. Those factors into consideration, cause me to take pause and look at the situation in question as more than just a "game". And the response of so many on the IW forums are I like the idea of killing civilians, and that kind of thinking even amongst people of age for a M title is disturbing to say the least. 

Perception will always be different and even like this thread I'm misunderstood by some, and rightfully so, it's natural. That being said what if, the intent of this level is taken into a different light by those without the ability to see that it's not meant to be a "this is an awesome experience this is soooo much fun"?

We also are all aware of the ignorance and stupidity of our political leaders, not all but enough to know.
In a situation like right to bear arms, people in power always seek to take that right away, granted much more serious than gaming, but they dont stop and think if you take away all arms from law abiding people, people who are criminals who arent law abiding citizens will still obtain them and the law abiding are left with little to defend themselves. It seems so clear and evident yet politicians that have body guards and such see no idiocy in the idea of taking that right away.

Modifié par Operative84, 30 octobre 2009 - 07:12 .

[Cuuniyevo]

Have you seen the TV show 24? At one point (I won't say where or in which season, to avoid spoiling anything) the main character is under cover and helping 'the bad guys' attack a government target. When he has a moment to spare, he calls in and warns of the impending attack. Then he goes along with 'the bad guys' to their target. He does what he can to appear as though he's helping them, and also does what he can to try to stop them from succeeding. I have not played MW2, nor have I read any reviews, but if I'm understanding your post correctly, the game requires that you commit an act of terrorism, without any way to even try to undermine it's chances of success? If you want to progress in the game, you have to do it? I dislike that idea. Having a game give you the choice is fine, and having something terrible happen as a consequence is fine, but I don't like the idea that they would make that the only path. That being said, they can make whatever story they want, and historically, FPS's have always forced you down certain paths whether you wanted to do it or not. Most FPS's require you to be the good guy and always try to do the right thing. That this one goes the other way is no more or less wrong than that, from a gameplay perspective. Either way, you are being forced down a certain path. I won't buy the game, but many people are planning on doing so, and most of them will probably enjoy the overall experience.

[Ravenshrike]

Given that it's a military and not a CIA op the probability of a scenario as described in the game is slim to none. And that assumes it's not happening on US soil. On US soil there's no ****ing way it'd happen. But then, this is the same game that assumes the terrorists would somehow be able to take and hold the DC area, the absurdity of which if ****ing hilarious.

[xODD7BALLx]

Ravenshrike wrote...

Given that it's a military and not a CIA op the probability of a scenario as described in the game is slim to none. And that assumes it's not happening on US soil. On US soil there's no ****ing way it'd happen. But then, this is the same game that assumes the terrorists would somehow be able to take and hold the DC area, the absurdity of which if ****ing hilarious.

www.gametrailers.com/user-movie/modern-warfare-2-leaked-footage/333509
WARNING M Rated Gameplay Video

From the looks of it: CIA yes, American soil no, could it happen in the US absolutely, I remember in one point in time even after 9/11(which was also something the majority believed would never happen either), where US Marshals managed to get by security and make it to baggage loading areas where luggage is trans to bottom of plane. And the Marshals didnt simulate any type of forced approach ie: weapons etc.

Watch the vid and take it for however you want, and from the looks of it, after he completes the level it looked like he got a Trophy PS3, Achievement 360 in which any reward for this is pretty F'ed up. It's a screwed up scenario so if you're more into happy rainbow bunny hopping around types of games then dont watch it.

Modifié par Operative84, 30 octobre 2009 - 08:36 .

[MrGOH]

I admired Infinity Ward for it's very dark, but honest portrayal of War in MW1.  I've seen this level and I think it very much fits the style of the company which produced a game that killed off both its protagonists (one via a nuke halfway through the game!) and did not hesitate to paint a vaguely critical picture of the way nation-states conduct war.
I mean, you play as a CIA infiltrator into a Russian terrorist cell and are able to murder Russian civilians alongside the terrorists. It's quite an interesting idea, really - the agent is likely there because the terrorist organization threatens millions by its crazy ways and WWMD possession, so what's a few dead travelers if it means the agent's cover isn't blown and he's able to stop the madmen from killiong millions? No matter what, the infiltrator gets his comeuppance at the end of the level, so you're not locked into playing the agent who thinks slaughtering innocents is cool to maintain his cover.

Modifié par MrGOH, 30 octobre 2009 - 08:29 .