bbondaloose Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 Forget my comment above, I was thinking from a Console gamer's view, not a PC gamer's view. The reality is, IW has gotten way too big for it's own good, and the amount of petition signers won't mean anything to them, since they'll still be racking in millions of dollars from the Console players. I do miss the CS:S and COD2 days on the PC... Link to post Share on other sites
Plankton Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 man, good old cod:2 I wish there was still a large player base for that game. I love it to death. Link to post Share on other sites
BIn Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 say whaaaaaat? PC users getting limited servers? There is a website, which you can sigh your name, to let them add more servers Link to post Share on other sites
DesertFoxRomel Posted October 26, 2009 Report Share Posted October 26, 2009 There is a website, which you can sigh your name, to let them add more servers http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?dedis4mw http://nerfnow.com/comic/199/comments Link to post Share on other sites
Jagdraben Posted October 26, 2009 Report Share Posted October 26, 2009 So much for hope for humanity. Gone right out the window... there are people going hungry tonight, but all anyone cares about is whether or not the next Call of Duty will support dedicated servers. Link to post Share on other sites
T3CH Posted October 26, 2009 Report Share Posted October 26, 2009 Pity about HALF of the signatures are spamboits, duplicates, fake names, and single name entries and so will be ignored. If these idiots were serious they'd have entered their full name and/or deleted the fake entries. for example 158597. Jelicic Slobodan angus7 158596. Ninou [b69]Ninou 158595. Jarod fLanKeD 158594. Angel Enano 158593. Thomas Helmn {BoSS}Hopper 158592. Jean Francois Bel Krieg 158591. Joshua Burton Gravypants 158590. Denny Treichel PRIME_030 158589. Steven speddy411 158588. ikke Ike 158587. ikke Ike 158586. ikke Ike 158585. richard van berkel bergachaea game names/ gamertags in red Out of that lot SIX managed to fill out their names properly, while one guy spammed threee times managing to forget his last name each time, and 4 other people also CBA to enter their name properly. So the REAL sie of that petition is about 75,000 names, which is not so impressive. edit: scanning through a few more pages reveals it might be more like 2/3 of the names could be discounted so 50,000 names Link to post Share on other sites
ST19AG_WGreymon Posted October 26, 2009 Report Share Posted October 26, 2009 I honestly like CoD1's multiplayer better. The guns have that oomph factor when you fire them. Link to post Share on other sites
PWRRTiger16 Posted October 28, 2009 Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 I'm going to be honest. I'm not that excited. Link to post Share on other sites
sigma3 Posted October 28, 2009 Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 GET excited, because have you seen this video? http://www.wearetheinternetz.com/2009/10/2...-controversial/ This is going to be a shitstorm for the games industry. What were you thinking, IW?? Link to post Share on other sites
Jagdraben Posted October 28, 2009 Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 ... I'm not sure what to be more disgusted by. The presence of the level or the fact that the guy recording it did anything other than stomp the *suitcase* out of the other Tangos. EDIT: And the CODMW2 forums and IW's forums are both down. Link to post Share on other sites
MCXL Posted October 28, 2009 Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 Oh snap, game story just got interesting. Link to post Share on other sites
Agent47 Posted October 28, 2009 Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 I thought that was supposed to be a cutscene, not an actual level where you actually get to carry out the act...I was more expecting you to play as the Spetznaz team that responds to the attack... Link to post Share on other sites
sigma3 Posted October 28, 2009 Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 Yeah, I remembering seeing screenshots of that a long time ago, I always assumed it would be a cutscene. But it looks like instead IW decided to do something "ballsy" just for the sake of being ballsy. "Look how disgusting this is!" I'll admit it makes me feel very dirty and uncomfortable, so if that was their goal, kudos. Still a very irresponsible thing to do. Or I guess there is the possibility that this is some sort of hack or mod, but I doubt it. I won't be surprised if they try to spin it that way, at least. Link to post Share on other sites
spetsnazdave87 Posted October 28, 2009 Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 Bloody hell, did they really need that kind of controversy to push sales up even more? Tad unnecessary IMHO. Link to post Share on other sites
Chimpy Posted October 28, 2009 Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 It's a computer game. You can skip the sequence if you have issues telling fantasy from reality; the publishers said: The scene establishes the depth of evil and the cold bloodedness of a rogue Russian villain and his unit. By establishing that evil, it adds to the urgency of the player's mission to stop them. Players have the option of skipping over the scene. At the beginning of the game, there are two 'checkpoints' where the player is advised that some people may find an upcoming segment disturbing. These checkpoints can't be disabled. Modern Warfare 2 is a fantasy action game designed for intense, realistic game play that mirrors real life conflicts, much like epic, action movies. It is appropriately rated 18 for violent scenes, which means it is intended for those who are 18 and older. Frankly you see worse in movies and I've read much more graphic things in books. If anything games should tackle these sorts of things particularly when you are rampaging through a load of faceless 'baddies' that no one minds massacring. Link to post Share on other sites
robp Posted October 28, 2009 Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 ...and topical given today's events at the UN hotel in Kabul. Link to post Share on other sites
sigma3 Posted October 28, 2009 Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 It's a computer game. You can skip the sequence if you have issues telling fantasy from reality; the publishers said: Frankly you see worse in movies and I've read much more graphic things in books. If anything games should tackle these sorts of things particularly when you are rampaging through a load of faceless 'baddies' that no one minds massacring. Some people DO have issues telling fantasy from reality, and I don't know if giving them an option to skip is a suitable excuse for glamorizing a massacre. This can easily be seen as indoctrination, and to prove that point all you have to do is look at is the people posting that video and calling it "awesome" or "hilarious". I'm generally opposed to censorship, but to me this crosses a line in the same way the (rightfully) slammed Columbine game did. Comparing this to movies or books is an invalid argument, because a movie never says, "Now YOU slaughter the innocents!" Link to post Share on other sites
Chimpy Posted October 28, 2009 Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 Some people DO have issues telling fantasy from reality Yes and they are mentally ill. They can't tell fantasy from reality in any setting! BTW the people calling it "awesome and hilarious" are the people that recognise this as being pure fantasy and are being *albartrotheth* on the Internet. and I don't know if giving them an option to skip is a suitable excuse for glamorizing a massacre. This can easily be seen as indoctrination, and to prove that point all you have to do is look at is the people posting that video and calling it "awesome" or "hilarious". I'm generally opposed to censorship, but to me this crosses a line in the same way the (rightfully) slammed Columbine game did. Comparing this to movies or books is an invalid argument, because a movie never says, "Now YOU slaughter the innocents!" I take it you've never played the Columbine game then? It's not some shoot-em-up and is actually very thoughtful and thought provoking. How do you feel about all the virtual people you've massacred previously? It was okay because they were virtually out to get you? You didn't give a thought to their virtual motivations? You don't care that their poor little virtual lives were given to give you wood about how righteous war against people you barely know is? In reality this stuff is not black and white, goodies and baddies. Good entertainment that means something recognises this. Look at the morality explored in great film, TV and literary fiction. I'm not saying this won't make you feel uncomfortable. It does make me feel bad and I doubt I'll have fun as such playing through it. I didn't enjoy parts of the Baader-Meinhof Complex either but I still went to see it and that graphically recreates real events. I think challenging yourself morally like this is a good thing. It will be interesting to see peoples reaction after they've played the game. Link to post Share on other sites
spetsnazdave87 Posted October 28, 2009 Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 I suppose Ive played GTA and massacred a couple of islands full of civilians in my time but its still pretty stark... Link to post Share on other sites
Chimpy Posted October 28, 2009 Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 I suppose Ive played GTA and massacred a couple of islands full of civilians in my time but its still pretty stark... Sure, you're thrust into the position of playing the guys you are supposed to be trying to stop. It's pretty much supposed to be stark. Like the scene where you enjoy Mr. Blonde's dancing in Reservoir Dogs and the contrast between that as a beginning and the cops ear being cut off. Link to post Share on other sites
spetsnazdave87 Posted October 28, 2009 Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 Ah well still looking forward to it. Gonna get it, go see Harry Brown then come home and play it non stop thirteen days! Link to post Share on other sites
Chimpy Posted October 28, 2009 Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 Yes me too, the first game was epic and the beginning of that was pretty punchy too. Link to post Share on other sites
Misfit Posted October 28, 2009 Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 Yes me too, the first game was epic and the beginning of that was pretty punchy too. Such as the killing of unarmed, sleeping Russian sailors which didn't seem to cause an outcry at all. There does seem to be double-standards. For example, in Mercenaries 2 you could blow up every single building in the game, prompting Yahtzee (of ZeroPunctuation) to say "it's only terrorism if the occupants are white". Link to post Share on other sites
Scuffer Posted October 28, 2009 Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 How do you feel about all the virtual people you've massacred previously? Personally, I say a little prayer for each of them before I go to sleep............................................ possibly why I haven't slept for the last 10 years then. Link to post Share on other sites
apmaman Posted October 28, 2009 Report Share Posted October 28, 2009 I can see why this would be seen as a bad move, but isn't GTA this but all through out the game? (if you choose to, like you can choose to skip this part) I don't see why it's any different. I've seen far worse in films or read in books. I have a funny feeling it will get patched out as well now that its been leaked. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.