Top
90°

Narrative brilliance and social irrelevance in Call of Duty 4

Reverend Anthony writes:

"Instead of dealing with the Iraq War using the same multi-perspective storytelling conceit of the previous Call of Duty games, CoD4 chose instead to tell the story of a more or less completely fictional war against completely fictional baddies with a completely fictional sense of black-and-white morality. The battles presented in Modern Warfare don't recreate or parallel the ambiguous skirmishes of the Iraq War; they take place within a "War on Terror" which doesn't actually exist -- within the world of Call of Duty 4, there really are evil Muslims and Russians in the Middle East armed with nuclear weapons.

"The question is, then, does brilliant storytelling and use of videogame-specific mechanics in telling it make up for the fact that the narrative itself is a morally simplistic work of total fiction?"

Read Full Story >>
destructoid.com
The story is too old to be commented.
Rooted_Dust3667d ago

I think basing the game on a fictional conflict made it more marketable to those with a negative opinion on our current War on Terror. Setting the game on real event would have, at least, cut out a percent of possible sales.

littletad3667d ago

Seriously even if your the most die hard liberal, you have to come to terms with the fact that you can't mess with reality and express it well enough in a video game. Those are real troops out there, fighting and dying for our country. It's atrocious to think of the idea of "being in their shoes", even if it is fictitious but based on a "reality".

patrickp33667d ago

See, WW2 was an example of good versus evil. Even Stalin was with the good guys when it came to the ovens of Hitler's Europe.
The so-called 'War on Terror' ain't anywhere near so easy, specially when you got some Americans believing that their troops are fighting and dying to defend the US in places like Iraq... (kinda like destroying a village to save it, only it's that invading and occupying another country will save yours).
A video game, a FPS especially, has to have completely bad badguys. How else could you justify gunning them down by the hundreds? Hence the frequent use of aliens and Nazis. In today's world, it's up to debate who the real badguys even are.

Kleptic3667d ago

almost word for word what IW said...good post...

WWII based games were very easy to create the line between the good and bad...everyone hates Nazi's...you notice though that most WWII games focus a lot more on Europe than the Pacific...where as the Japanese, despite being part of the axis, had a much more blurred reason for being invovled in the War...

no doubt they have been included in some games...but with no where near the recreation...while Japan did bomb Pearl Harbor, and was definitely an enemy of the US at the time...they were not committing mass genocide on a level the world had never seen...

but in either case...even the WWII cod games were still totally fictional...they were the gaming equivelent of Saving Private Ryan and Enemy at the Gates (with very blatant rip-offs of both)...the characters were not true...in some cases towns were not real, and battles were only mimicked to be realistic...not actual by the book recreations of anything...

Say what you want about the war in Iraq now...but Saddam needed out of there...I don't usually get involved with the democracy debate, and whether or not that should continue to be pushed on a country that doesn't want it...what I do agree with is that any point where there is a man in power, with enormous resources, that makes it very obvious that if given the time...he would do as much as possible to kill US citizens...then its up to the US to get him out of power...

Saddam was given a very fair protocol to follow after the gulf war...let inspectors looks at what kind of weapons he was building...whether or not it ended up that he had built WOMD...he stopped letting the inspectors find out...like or not this is exactly how Hitler gained momemtum, only difference being no one did anything about it back then...do a quick search and find out how early it was that Poland sent distress letters to the US and England about a certain quirky toothbrush mustache'd WWI vet that was gaining a lot of support in a neighboring country...and more importantly a book by the name of Mein Kampf in wich he had written...had the US and England acted then, and started to actually enforce the Versace Treaty again, the Holocaust would never have happened...

aba3666d ago (Edited 3666d ago )

-WW2= Stalin only allied with the west because the Germans were kicking his ass and he needed help, not out of being a "good guy". That red beast was the biggest monster of the 20th century.

-Iraq= Saddam was what he was, and George Bush Sr. was smart enough to realize he would keep the peace, without him the country would fall apart into civil war. Boy, was he right huh? Too bad George W. Bush isn't as smart as his father.

Israel= Can kiss my ass, if Russia decides to crush them, good riddens. If any other country tried the sh*t they get away with, there would be severe consequences. For Christ's sake people, they've secretly been developing nuclear weapons! Wake up!

QQcrybaby3667d ago

There are Iraqi citizens and there are are terrorists. Iraqi citizens didn't deserve to be ruled over by a vicious dictator. Now he is dead. The problem is that there are Islamic facists all over Iraq right now. They need to be killed as well. Moderate Iraqi citizens, who comprise the majority of the country, don't deserve to have to live with 12th century throwback scum.

American soldiers are trying their hardest to kill the terrorists (yes, they are terrorists) in that country. Will they succeed? Who knows. But just pulling out isn't an option. Also, letting Sadaam tell weapons inspectors to piss off wasn't an option either. It's a bad situation at best, but you just can't pull out and let terrorists continue to murder Iraqi civilians.

littletad3666d ago

This is spread by secular belief that America should have kept to itself. It's up to you on which ground you stand on this issue, but yes he was dangerous and ruthless. Anyone who doesn't believe that needs to wise up and look at the facts.

ForTheFallen3666d ago

It is just so ironic considering this is probaly how the world will end. Russia and Iran teaming up againist their historical nemisis-Israel. You just wait, comrade. The time will come. And we all know what will happen if it happened in 2012...There's going to be a new US president...He doesn't want to be the next Bush...So he'll stay out of it when Israel needs us most. What a shame. Only then would a miracle save Israel, but what omnipresent being would do that?