Top
140°

Sessler's Soapbox: The Modern Warfare 2 Airport Scene

Since everyone is talking about or playing or buying extra copies of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 right now, Adam couldn't let this week's Soapbox go by without talking about the controversial "Airport Scene" gamers have all been hearing so much about.

While this video is fairly light on spoilers, if you haven't finished the single-player campaign in the game, you might want to wait before you hear what the Sess has to say on the subject. That being said, how did playing through that scene make you feel? Or did you skip the level, expecting it to be gratuitous and offensive?

The story is too old to be commented.
LtSkittles2448d ago

I totally agree with him. If other forms of media can do this why can't video games? I agree with him on Infinity Ward also. I know they have been horrible towards the PC community, and removing with stuff, but they have balls to do this, and I respect them for that, but at the same time I can't really support them right now for what they did, but I will eventually get the game.

Cwalat2448d ago

It's not that they don't have the balls to do it... Has nothing to do with that. I mean it's pretty obvious it's gonna contain mature content when it gets an M rating.

The thing that surprised me was that the scene wasn't needed storywise, and throwing it in there just for the heck of people discussing about and media calling it controversy is bull***t imo. Rather than making a better told story, or adding in more hours to the campaign. They wasted all their resources on designing a level only for people discussing about its' controversy.

madpuppy2448d ago (Edited 2448d ago )

controversy is a great way to make people curious about a game they may not have considered purchasing. you add a perceived taboo in a game it gets more publicity. look at GTA and the hot coffee minigame. all the free publicity from that and all the kids that went out and got it. I would say that is money well spent by IW.

P.S.

IW still sucks.

PrimordialSoupBase2447d ago (Edited 2447d ago )

The problem isn't the content itself but how it was positioned within the game. The scene is only made possible through the largest of plot holes and because of that it seems like lazy controversy bait on the part of Infinity Ward.

The most ridiculous part isn't even the scene itself but the one that comes up directly after. You accidentally shoot a few civies in Rio and it's game over. I found that really quite funny. Interactivity is a new form, sure, but it's also incredibly difficult to grapple with when new freedom is offered but the limits of the genre take it away the next.

Willio2447d ago

I simply just don't understand the scene at all. An undercover agent willing to sacrifice hundreds of people to capture a few terrorists? Had anyone else be the agent, they would have shot the terrorist group. Had anyone been the terrorist, they would not have trusted the agent in the assistance of killing civilians. The scene had no logic.

PrimordialSoupBase2447d ago (Edited 2447d ago )

@Willio

Indeed. It simply wasn't positioned and given proper context.

Hell, I can think of something right now. There's a hidden nuke in the States that's going to go off and you need to get close to Makarov to find out where it is. Thus having to do the horrid things he engages in.

It's more problematic for the game than anything else.

Ju2447d ago (Edited 2447d ago )

First things first. This "controversy" is hypocritical at best. If at all, we can discuss violence in video games in general, where MW (and 2) contribute their fair share to.

I personally think that scene is unnecessary, but this game is not art, its an action flick. A AAA action flick, but still no art.

I think its good it raises concerns and steers up controversy. But I would like to see that extended to the "playing war" in general.

This game plays with stereotypes like no other. Uses the "terrorist thread" as a marketing instrument. I would like to see a discussion about all that. Impact of violent games on young adult. Games as a medium of propaganda (which this definitively is).

And, selling M games to under age customers. Which this game sell more then any other. I guarantee, the amount of under 17 year old in CoD is sensational high.

Now I throw all this out here - knowing it will lead to nowhere. But eventually, I can thank IW that they started this with putting that scene in there - which I agree, I have a personal problem with (but understand from the POV to raise awareness), and possibly would skip playing it.

DelbertGrady2447d ago

It's up to you if you want to shoot the innocents or not. No one's forcing you to pull the trigger.

Imo the scene was brilliantly executed. It made me feel sick and disgusted. Games rarely have that emotional effect on me. It also gives the player insight into what kind of monster it is you are chasing.

LtSkittles2447d ago

I know I said I haven't played it yet, but I saw one of the videos, and I couldn't watch it, because the guy was laughing at all of the civilians, but I also I just felt weird watching it, and it was different feeling that I got when I pop-in GTA, and decide that I need to blow off steam.

AssassinHD2447d ago

Life just isn't that black and white I am afraid. It is easy to say that if you were the agent you would kill the terrorists and save the civilians, but an undercover agent must look at the big picture. Life is gray, like it or not. Killing the terrorists would save the people in the airport, but also blow the operative's cover. Is it better to save a hundred people in an airport, or kill the man who plans to kill millions?

Godmars2902447d ago

As far as I know, other forms of media don't portray law and anti-terrorists agencies as having to go so far to catch the "big fish" they have to commit crimes like murder.

AssassinHD2447d ago (Edited 2447d ago )

Have you ever watched Deep Cover or The Departed? Have you ever played Splinter Cell: Double Agent? Don't even get me started on books.

thewhoopimen2447d ago

Life isn't black and white, but when you have the friggin leader of the russian terrorist group shooting at people and your standing next to him... wouldn't something click in your head that you've done what you were supposed to do as an agent to reach him? Shoot him already. Stupid scenario, designed strictly for shock value.

AssassinHD2447d ago (Edited 2447d ago )

I haven't played the game yet (Dragon Age: Origins hooked me), so I didn't know the leader actually presents himself in that scene. I plan on starting the campaign tonight. I agree that does seem like a good opportunity. If your mark is right next to you then I don't see any sense in maintaining your cover further.

Willio2447d ago

@ Sodapop
"It's up to you if you want to shoot the innocents or not. No one's forcing you to pull the trigger."

- By doing nothing, the "agent" assisted in the massacre. He could have stopped it by killing the terrorist group WHICH COULD HAVE ENDED THE GAME. How can any sane person live a normal life after knowing the person did NOTHING to prevent any further damage.

@ Assassin

No offence but if you havent even played the game yet to fully understand the situation, i'll have to dismiss your arguement. I never said life is just simply black and white, you just assumed. Dont just read the title, read the context.

+ Show (11) more repliesLast reply 2447d ago
kraze072448d ago

So, when did you gain this power to read people's minds and know why did something? It seems as if you're 100% sure this scene was created for that purpose, but really it's just speculation. I agree with Lt. This shows that they have balls and you have to respect that, but at the same time I'm still pissed with what they did with the PC version of this game.

Cwalat2448d ago

I can't say that i'm 100% sure, but it's pretty damn close to that.

Do you honestly believe that they made the airport level because of the continuation and upgrade of the artform? Please, IW did this for controversy and the extra free marketing it would give them. Doesn't take a mindreader to know that. Don't forget that it's a game that is more known for it's frantic and fun gameplay rather than what it does for the artform itself.

It wasn't a big surprise that singleplayer didn't get the same attention as the multiplayer, but i was still damn surprised at the very short campaign.

With that said, the Spec Ops is what shines for MW2. Hope they continue with that.

kraze072448d ago

"Please, IW did this for controversy and the extra free marketing it would give them." How is that so when the actual video of this scene didn't get that much attention until about a week before it was released? If they really wanted it to be that big of a deal we would've seen this months ago. I do believe it wsa intended to be an upgrade to the artform. The first Modern Warfare had that scene where the guy played by you was a kidnap and he got executed. This is like a huge upgrade to that scene.

Cwalat2448d ago

Actually, the smarter thing is just what they did inorder to get a boost JUST BEFORE the release of the game. Had they've shown this earlier, the "W-T-F" moments in media would've been much less during release time. It's perfect marketing plans from IW, but sadly it wasn't their intention to further develop the artform. It was just plain and simply a way of getting more sales for their games, and if there's a single company out there that stands for Sales>Quality it's IW. Just look at the dumbed down PC version they didn't bother to improve, or the "unexpected" server issues PS3 users are experiencing. Such a big title should've had more testing and more server support, but then again sales>quality.

Willio2447d ago

GTA marketing. Use controversy to sell the game.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2447d ago
Swiftfox2448d ago (Edited 2448d ago )

I agree 100%.

I'm glad to see someone so well regarded in the world of gaming seeing the game as an artform and as a medium of expression, and he's right, video games need to be able to do what movies and books can do. They need to be able to go into those grey areas without the double standards that comes from the media about such things.

He is correct in that video games are NOT a simulation, they are NOT a method of behavioral encouragement. Books had to go through the same steps as this, then radio, then movies. As long as there are those like Mr Sessler that defend it for what it is and not for what others call it or construe it as, then we will be able to see video games develop fully and truly grow into something more than it is today.

Nothing but respect for Sessler. Fight the good fight.

Willio2447d ago

The same reasoning can be said for religions. Their excuse is God(s) has a plan for them or because God(s) said so. Regardless of its art form, teenagers WILL play this game and it will influence them in one way or another. Furthermore, by offering people to skip the scene, people are even more drawn to it. It's similar to asking a person not to open the pandora's box but we are just too curious. The effect did the opposite.

Automat2447d ago

the airport scene was just boring! might as well have skipped it!

Show all comments (39)
The story is too old to be commented.