We need more missions like MW2's "No Russian"

Gamer Limit writes "The significance of Modern Warfare 2 and its drip fed pre-launch information are nothing without the controversies that have followed its tumultuous path to existence. We've had price concerns, format concerns, distribution concerns, and most recently, content concerns regarding the much lauded "Airport Scene", in which the player becomes part of a terrorist attack."

[SilverDragon1979]

Everybody loves contraversy!

[nycredude]

No we don't. That crap was boring as hell and my guy moved like he was stuck in molasses! Also there is no fun to found in shooting targets that don't fight back!

[Hill_billy]

And I call it a scene because that's what it felt like. I partly controlled cut scene that really was not needed.

[darkmurder]

No what we need is more companies not becoming greedy.

[vhero]

The whole thing should have been cut I'm 100% surprised they were allowed to release the game with the level.

[sikbeta]

"Everybody loves contraversy!"

No one can play with that, maybe it help to get into the mass like "Davinci Code" movie, but if Fox news find you, they will rip you off and make you the legit son of Satan XD

[paul0388]

If the scene served as a poignant plot pot point, it would be a bit more acceptable. But what I saw was not there for the plot, it was there for shock. In light of recent tragedies such as the Mumbai and Fort Hood shootings, something like this should have never made it past the cutting room.

The scenerio is obscene and gratuitous. Some may argue that it's rated M for a reason. I don't know if it's ignorance fueling that argument or what, but every game I play on Xbox live has at least a few children obviously under the age of 17.

It was just uncalled for, what if something comes out of this? What if a kid is bullied in school and plays this scene constantly because in his mind it's glorified? What if he decides to walk into a public place, be it a school or a mall, with a weapon, and enacts his rage? Then is it only a video game?

Ask yourself that. If something does come out of this, say goodbye to video games as we know them in the United States because we'll be faced with a system of censorship not unlike what's in Australia.

This is not like GTA violence which was cartooney and funny. This was a disturbing, realistic scene that encourages the mass execution of civilians by players. I'm a known liberal, but I just can't accept something like this because it's too much. They've crossed the line.

[STK026]

the scene was great and served it's use. It was meant to have us see Makarov as a rthless killer. In games today, it seems it's okay to be a manic launching nukes on a nation killing millions of civilians while doing it, but once you get up close and personnal, it's too much?

IW wanted us to make it more realistic. In the real world, terrorists aren't launching nukes, they're killing civilians using guns and small bombs. Just because you're not seeing the victim's faces when you launch a missile on a civilian doesn't make it any better than killing him with a gun.

Postal had you kill civilians, GTA has you kill civilians, SR has you kill civilians. While the scene wasn't exactly all that fun, it was refreshing to see one developper thought it'd be nice to finally have a realistic enemy, not some cliche ego maniac threatening the world with a super laser...

[Snoozer282]

Well done for being so educated and eloquent in your reply Paul. Not only are you spot on, but you managed to do it with a maturity that is consistently lacking from this website.

[Unicron]

I have to disagree Paul, especially in your analysis of GTA. How is it any more "cartoony" or "funny" in its more recent incarnations than CoD? You are still murdering innocent people in GTA, why is this any different? Because it's in an airport? I don't follow the reasoning. I also fail to see how this is any different from watching a movie like Heat. Civilians dying for entertainment purposes is nothing new. I find it funny that as a society we glorify some aspects of violence but then cry foul when a presentation of it hits too close to home.

As for the whole "bullied kid" scenario, I think you are simply feeding into the fallacy that games breed killers. I've been gaming since I was 7. I played Mortal Kombat when I was a pre-teen. I've never so much as started a fight in my life, let alone torn someone's spine out or thought about shooting up a school. Want to know why? Because I was actually raised by my parents and have the common sense to distinguish reality from fiction. It's a game, nothing more. Can we please stop blaming the games, in this case a game not meant for a child audience anyways, and start looking towards education and good parenting? Or is that too much to ask, as videogames are the perfect babysitter?

[Maddens Raiders]

"games" like ODST according to Sessler. Media make up your fickle & inconsistent minds already. Article is fail.

[paul0388]

I guess logic eludes you because you can't see outside of your own narrow spectrum.

GTA is more cartoony because its meant to be played like that. You're the anti-hero in a sense. Ever notice when you're walking down a street in GTA and run into someone? They get pushed back and give you the finger or say something utterly hillarious. So in turn, I get into a car and run them over.

In CoD, the main idea of the game is to kill the people. They are the objective. It only takes the twisted mind of one person to create a massacre, and this could be just the thing that can pull them over the edge. It's a realistic depiction of terrorism. GTA is not a realistic depiction of anything.

I'm happy to hear your parents raised you appropriately and instilled in you a sense of right and wrong. My parents raised me to those same standards as well. But think outside the box for a moment and remember that not all children are as fortunate as we were. Not all parents are good parents. Think of those lonely, angry children out there. Abused at home and school, they only foster hate inside. Imagine if they embraced this scene and enjoyed inflicting terror and pain, like they experience themselves, on innocent people.

I don't think GTA crossed the line, but there is already instances of violence that were attributed to it. Imagine if someone decided to reenact the violence they witnessed in this game. Imagine the potential consequences of that - not only through the deceased, but through the industry as a whole. The whole GTA argument never held up because it was meant to be outrageous and over the top. This scene is realistic, has happened in the past, and will inevitably happen in the future - I just hope this game doesn't influence it in any way.

That's why I feel they crossed the line.

[Keyser]

Okay, my take on it is in disagreement with Paul.

First, let me say where I agree with you Paul. There are many troubled kids out there who don't have parent's raising them and can be affected by scenes like this. Kids whose parent's are poor examples or neglect them to make money. Lot's of different circumstances that cause neglect till children. It's true that you don't want easily influenced children/adults to see things that can possibly set off a trigger.

Now, why I disagree with viewpoint. Our society (U.S.) is FILLED with violence. I'm talking video games, movies, tv shows, magazines, commercials, and books. Worse than all those media outlets is real life. I grew up in a bad neighborhood and people were killed in the streets or wherever on a daily basis. Nice stories don't make the news where I'm from. They try to get all the murders and robberies in 20 minutes before they report sports and weather. Video games have nothing on real life. Now, having the ability to shoot someone on Halo, COD, Killzone2, Battlefield, S.O.C.O.M. all feel life like but it is nowhere close to the real thing. The images aren't even close. It's a lot worse in real life.

What's my point? My point is that removing it from one or all video games isn't going to stop the images that exist. We can make all video games like Mario Olympics but that doesn't stop kids from seeing gruesome acts against other humans. For some youth, it is an outlet that allows them to release some frustration and anger without harming real people. Taking that away is dangerous as well.

Until society as a whole decides to pull it from all media and takes violence against each other as serious as we take the effort to make money then removing it from video games is like trying to move a mountain with a piece of straw.

I know you feel otherwise and it's cool that you have that opinion.

[HolyOrangeCows]

This will get them lots of hits.

[Consoldtobots]

Infinity Ward are pawns in a much deeper game being played out here, this is a thinly veiled message to the Russians that we orchestrated and executed the Beslan school massacre. Something like this would NEVER have made out to sale without approval from the powers that be.

[Viper7]

I didn't really see nothing wrong with the scene, and it was actually quite refreshing to get to experience something from "terrorist" standpoint. As for killing civilians and law enforcement in that scene its no different from GTA which allows the exact same thing in much wider degree.

"There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so."
Freedom fighters of one country are terrorists of another. I wonder why attack Russia tough, guess it some kind of plot twists I missed in the 1st game or in the first few episodes of the second.

[syvergy]

I stopped firing pretty early.

[Fullish]

Why? in games we are meant to play our role....

[Darkeyes]

Even I cringed at first, but then something inside my head shouted that I was shooting polygons at polygons... So then I just pressed the trigger and destroyed a lot of polygons :)

[paul0388]

They've crossed the line with this one...

[Shadow Flare]

Is that a good thing? If you felt bad doing it at first, but don't feel bad doing it now, what is that saying? I don't care if in reality the gamer would never be a terrorist but I wouldn't want my kid be entertained by something like that, practicing the motions of a terrorist and growing to accept it. Watching people save other people, and then shooting them both. Its way past the line.

[Darkeyes]

Ya @shadowflre I guess you are right... In the heat of moment I guess I lost it a little and seriously I didn't think about skipping it cause the game is only 4-5 hours lol.... Anyways, do I really want something controversial in every game.. NO, but I think people are digging a little too much in this. I also blame IW cause they should have made this into a cutscene or something (but that again would shorten a half game)...

But to tell you the truth, id this was in a movie, it wouldn't have caused any controversy. That is why I say it's blow a tad bit out of proportion.

[Shadow Flare]

@darkeyes

There is a big difference between movies and games though. With a movie, your watching. You're an innocent by-stander just watching whats being shown to you. With games your doing. Your acting out certain roles and you become the person doing the said thing. Its not so innocent. Imagine if this was on wii, and you had to stab all the civilians. And you saw your kid playing it. Can you see what I mean by the differences? Its things like this that desensitize people, and in the end where does it stop? Where does it stop? We've already seen rape games rear their ugly head

[BlackTar187]

i felt like a POS but when the cops started firing i was like alriaght your firing at me now your the bad guy and lit them up : )

But im not against this type of thing its a videogame we have brains for a reason we shouldn't have to always cater to the morons. But with that said i didn't kill to many and even turned and killed my team cuz i felt it was the right thing to do little did i know i would have to restart the lvl and move at a snails pace back thru it again in which the only civilian i killed was the one crawling on the ground it was one and it was hilarious.

Shadow Manhunt 2 on wii was awesome they werent innocent bystanders but the acting out the kills was good fun

Game on

[Keyser]

I played through that scene and didn't fire a single shot at civilians. I didn't have to so I didn't. I actually thought they may think that I'm a trader because I didn't shoot anyone without a gun. I shot at the cops of course because they were shooting at me but I didn't feel compelled to shoot at the civilians.

A long time ago I post on thinking that Bioshock crossed the lines because it wanted me to kill the little girls and I didn't think that killing children was appropriate. It's actually the reason I didn't buy the game after playing the demo. I'm not mad that others enjoyed it and were able to rationalize it but it was up to me to decide what I wanted to do. All gamers should be able to exercise choice.

I'm big on not banning things for others even though I don't choose to do it. Everyone has their limits, gay marriage, abortion etc. Lots of touchy issues out there and we don't have to get into them on a video game site but I (me, Keyser) see video games like books, movies, and music. It's an artistic expression. Even though some may not like the Mona Lisa that doesn't mean you shouldn't be allowed to paint women. In art you should have a choice to express yourself and let the audience decide. Gay marriage, abortion...those aren't art and society decides how to handle those things.

[aGameDeveloper]

Keyser, you don't HAVE to kill the little girls in Bioshock. In fact, there is a reward and an achievement if you don't...

[wonderbanana]

We need more missions like it but done properly; as it stands MW2's Airport level was very poorly done and immature. It could (and should) have been so much better.

[Madis007]

No russian mission looked awesome but pointless.
Why? Because even if you dont shoot anyone then AI will shoot enemy anyway and nothing more.

You can shoot or watch,Its still same. More like cut-scene

[bjornbear]

enemy.

[ForTheFallen]

...it was called "Re-education" or "Programming", I guess when we do it, it's called "Video Games"

[Knghtz]

So much fail in one comment...

[ForTheFallen]

You're totally right, Knghtz, I'll just go back to shooting civilians. That's the moral thing to do, right? Because it's for the good of the US, right?

Oh, but it's just a video game. I would agree if it weren't so painfully obvious that this is based off of the little Mumbai Operation this mission keeps being compared to.
Here's some facts for you.
http://www.mathaba.net/0_in...

And my comment wasn't fail. If anything yours was. You didn't even add anything to the conversation or even respond; that's way worse than anything I could've did.

[ForTheFallen]

Knghtz, I've been reading you other comments and you're either a total douche or messed up in the head. That's the only explanation one can get from the fact you apparently do not even feel remotely shamed in shooting digital civilians or watching gore.

Get a conscience.

[Knghtz]

Maybe one day you yourself will be able to distinguish real from fiction. Or not, it's up to you. I have a conscience, the news I read every day makes me sad to see the events happening. However, this is a game, a story. Just make the distinction, it's not hard...

Oh, and the whole "my comment isn't fail, yours is" argument. Really?

Anyways, if you would like to discuss this further you can get me via PMs, I will gladly debate the topic as it is a great point of interest to me and it is a bit of a controversy among folks.

[Serjikal_Strike]

thats why it didn't even give you a trophy after passing the level (cuz it's pointless)

so no we dont need more levels like that!

[peeps]

"thats why it didn't even give you a trophy after passing the level (cuz it's pointless)"

you don't get a trophy cus it's an optional mission. they didn't want ppl who didn't want to play the mission to miss out on gettin 100% completion.

[TheBand1t]

Watched a friend play the game.....I really didn't like watching this scene. Felt extremely tasteless and made me a feel a bit uncomfortable.

One thing to shoot at armed aggressors....another to salughter a group of unarmed civvies.

[Knghtz]

Why would this make you uncomfortable? Surely you are able to distinguish what's real and what's not, so what's the big deal? I just went through this mission yesterday and I didn't really feel remorse or anything, but at the same time I can't watch the crap on the internet that shows people getting killed in some way because I know it's real and it's hard for me.

Honestly I could see why kids shouldn't play this game, and obviously that is the role of the parents to make sure that doesn't happen. However, saying IW should not be allowed to release this is flat out an infringement on basic rights.

[TheBand1t]

I never said I didn't know the difference between real and fake. I never said IW should not be allowed to release it. (Jumping to conclusions there, buddy....look before you leap.)

I merely stated it wss tasteless to me, and made me feel uncomfortable. Yea, it's fake, but that doesn't make it less unappealing to watch, let alone play (when you're actually pulling the trigger on them.)

[Rocket Sauce]

I went through the same deal, watched my friend play it and saw him go from "Awesome game!" to "This is disgusting!" as soon as this part hit.

It wouldn't be such a big deal if they hadn't put you in control and encouraged you to gun down everybody. That, and this level seems to go on FOREVER.

@ 6.1
Damn, dude! Has a film or a book never made you cringe?

[Knghtz]

I'm simply asking WHY does it make you uncomfortable if you can make the distinction, sorry I didn't mean to come off as an ass.

@RocketSauce:

Not that I can remember. This is probably why I don't like horror or hostel/saw type movies. The gruesomeness never gets to me and horror movies usually seem very formulaic. Having said that though I still cringe at things that are real. Because of the distinction I make I guess it's just easier to handle, I dunno.

[TheBand1t]

I assume it's some kind of subconcious thing, I just didn't want to sit through the rest of it as it was making me uncomfortable.

[ForTheFallen]

They basically said, in the plot, that terrorism is justified in order to beat terrorism. Bullsh!t.

That's what this level signifies, and it's not alone in it's sick and stupid little justifications, like when some guy is caught after a making a run away from the SAS, and he is shown tied up with a "Interrogation Specialist" who has car battery jacks ready for some torturing.

That's not what America is about. Constitution > Global War On Terror

[paul0388]

The action was good, the plot was TERRIBLE.

So an American terrorist shooting up an airport in Moscow provokes Russia to invade American Soil??? Ludacris. When I saw that I stopped taking the game seriously... That's like if someone's son stepped on your foot and you responded by shooting their father in the chest... Absolutely outrageous.

And I agree 100% 'forthefallen'.

I'm only playing this game for the multiplayer. If it was single player only I'd rate it a 6/10

[Pennywise]

I have talked to at least 10 people about MW2. 8 of the 10 are disappointed and feel like this game is not a worthy sequel.

I have not played this game because of numerous reasons. I don't really plan to play it either.

I want to know how this game is rated so high? Why are these gaming outlets that are supposed to be for the gamers just disregarding being respectable and selling out to the hype. (And btw I have no idea how a series that is rehashed every year garnishes ANY hype at all)

[FxckOSX]

Raplay....NG
homicide...OK

double standard again.

[chrisjc]

Amen.

[Queers of War]

Wow, are we trying to stir up a sh*tstorm with politicians and fuming parents? I don't have a problem with this kinda stuff but if this keeps up, a lot of video games are going to get banned in certain countries.

[Admiral_Benson]

To be honest i thought that mission was boring as hell and could have been executed (no pun intended!) far more effectively to get the desired effect. In the end it came across as a lame attempt at gaining some controversial press coverage (nothing better than free publicity and we all know controversy sells!)

There were no repurcussions during the mission from the other terrorists if you didn't fire on the civilians, surely if you were on an undercover mission that would arouse some suspicion from the others? (**POTENTIAL SPOILER** ok, i know the terrorists obviously knew you were a mole anyway but you weren't to know that at the start of the mission and you would need to maintain your cover, not firing on the civilians would most likely blow that!).

In the end you can just mundanely walk along (at an unbelievably slow pace!) watching the scene unfold without having to have any direct influence on the situation. In this case a cutscene would have sufficed.

In the preceding build up to the mission the senior officer says something about losing a part of yourself (refering to the fact that you were going to have to kill innocent civilians for a higher purpose. ie a few have to die in order to save the many). I think that by MAKING you fire on the civilians otherwise you fail the mission would have reinforced that point and made it a far more realistic, and harrowing experience in the sense that you would HAVE to do it if you were in that situation in order to maintain your cover and complete the mission, regardless of weather you wanted to or not.

IW had an opportunity to make this mission far more thought provoking and with a greater emotional impact on the player but instead it just came across as a cheap excuse to be controversial while at the same time actually being pretty boring aswell.

[jFND90]

No Russian is overrated. In all seriousness, the feeling of emotional detachment between you and the victims don't really help either.

[Rocket Sauce]

Yeah, maybe we can shoot up a school or an old folk's home next time

[Jsynn7]

I think they did this as a selling tool or a way to get this game more attention to sell more. I generally agree with the people who say this part was unnecessary. There are other ways to get people talking about something then have them, interactively, mow down innocent people with a machine gun. They took extreme liberties with the "it's only a videogame" philosophy. Now, let me play devil's advocate for a moment. If your of a mature age and mind, you'll see that this is only a game and, once you restart the game, you'll see the same people you killed will be alive again so your not killing real people. The gaming industry (and the entertainment industry in general) will always use things like this to get people talking which in turn will get people to pay money to see what all the fuss is about. Plus, these kinda shock tactics are protected be rights and amendments (in the US anyway) so there's really no way anyone could stop this no matter how many people complain or petitions about it. That is just the way of the world.

My real concern about this is kids (meaning 13 and under) or mentally underdeveloped/disturbed people who are still unable to understand the differences between right and wrong, fiction and non-fiction. The parents of these kids should definitely either prevent their kids from getting this game or explain to them that it's only a game and that sort of behavior should never be repeated in the real world. I hate when parents go after the gaming industry to try to turn it into a rated G wonderland just because they suck as parents and don't want to deal with explain to their own kids what they should or should not do. I'm not going to going to suffer and play kiddie games the rest of my life because there are parents out there who are too lazy to ACTUALLY BE PARENTS and have the media raise their kids for them by getting the government to abolish violent games. I am an adult hardcore gamer and I could play games like this and GTA but I know not to go out on the street and kill random people as do a lot of you out there (at least I hope so). These things just need to be regulated and it doesn't start with the government, entertainment industry, or retail stores, it starts with the PARENTS!

If you play this mission and kill everyone you see, it doesn't make you a bad person and, if you skip the part altogether, it doesn't make you a hippie sissy. As long as you know that, in the real world, this is unacceptable and your not planning on reenacting it, then it's ok. I could play this mission and shoot all those people, and know that I'm not actually killing real people so it's whatever to me. I know it wrong in general to do that and I would never do that in real life. I do, however, believe this part was unnecessary and just a ploy to get people talking and help sales. I just hope this game does not end up in the hands of children or the mentally unstable who were not taught properly (or at all) the differences between right and wrong, fiction and non-fiction. That's when the world really has to worry.

[Jamaicangmr]

If you have no problem plowing through a crowed of citizens in GTA while doing a mission or evading the cops. Or worst going on a rampage and don't lie we all do it. Why are you'll making such a hugh deal about this mission in MW2? Farther more you have the option to skip it, so if you choose not to skip it stop complaining.

I hate when everyone bashes something just because everyone else is. This is no more an act of terrorisim than GTA. Beating down civilians with chainsaws, baseball bats, katana's, chain gun, RPG just for the hell of it is no different.

So to all you'll who have a such a hugh moral issues with this particular mission in MW2 i'd like to know how you feel about GTA.

[BlackTar187]

and i disagree killing civilians in GTA that look cartoony don't look anything like real people other then the obv. body design and the way they react in gta all this stuff takes away from your point to me. in mw2 they put you in direct 1st person where people who look close to real in a real looking airport and dialog more involving then GTa is the difference. your opinion is not wrong and mine is not right just opinions

[Unicron]

I have to agree. Beating hookers is funny and okay.

Shooting up an airport is bad!

Now let's go watch 2012 where BILLIONS die!

Just feels overly hypocritical.

[White-Sharingan]

@Jamaicangmr- I agree with you 100%

Everyone in here is such a hypocrite, they can shoot down people because they are armed, they can kill one innocent bystander in the game by mistake, they can plow down hookers on GTA, they can kill innocent people in God of War to receive HP or so, but they hate this level? Im sure that if it weren't in an airport it would of been more welcomed, not by all but by more people. Why even complain anyways? its a damn optional level, doesn't even affect trophies/achievements. Personally I loved the level, was basically a new perspective for me, never played a game with that role. But have in mind that because I love the level doesn't mean I will be going to an airport and start busting some cap.

@Blacktar- realistic? have u even seen those graphics...nowhere near realistic wtf there wasn't even any gore, the most I saw was a line of blood on the floor. No body parts off, no super realistic graphics. Now God of War III....thats another story (epic game as well).

Oh well, there will always be hypocrites in this world. Personally I wouldn't mind if other games had these types of levels, as long as they maintain it as a M rated game of course. If you can't handle a M rated game, then don't buy it, no one has forced you.

EDIT: And what about Doom 3, you slaughter dozens of babies there, yes they are possessed but who cares? they are babies!....somewhat

[BlackTar187]

where i said close to real if your saying that GTA is life like or more so or equal to the intentions or depiction of the said people in COD you need to have your eyes checked. Graphics arnt my spill here i said close to and GTA no matter what you say is not meant to be life like or really depict life like sprints of people they are all clearly a jab not meant to replicate real life real people like COD has.

Why don't you Google a GTA 4 character and compare them to COD and then why don't you take the GTA story and compare it to COD.

I have stated i don't mind these levels. I simply stated that comparing the 2 games is pretty retarded one is meant to not be real in anyway except the to share likeness so you can relate it to real life and they use exaggerated story lines and exaggerated everything driving everything. To say that not that great of graphics take away from them trying to realistically depicts the character is about the dumbest thing i have ever heard . In GTA they went for realism in a non realistic way. Sorry but again i will say i don't think this level should be banned but the comparison is just stupid.
As touchy as you accuse everyone you seem awfully touchy yourself. I mean you say its not realistic because the Graphics arnt AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA is about as dumb as it gets its mood, depiction , overall ambiance of the situation and the game and wait does COD take place in real world locations and for the most use real world guns groups and Current events? Does GTA do any of that. thats the difference. ohh wait GTA does the guns got me there

There is some freaky Japaneses games out here related to sex and they are from the Nintendo so does them not having really good graphics take away from the feeling you get while playing? May be a stupid thing to add on my part but i hope you read it as im thinking it. Graphics are only a part mood story association to reality all need to be considered. and like i said GTA only depicts shells of real world so you can relate they don't use all i stated above that are present and constant in todays world and associated heavy with modern day issues and news cast and feelings.

http://t1.gstatic.com/image... http://foodcourtlunch.com/w...

http://www.wiihotties.com/w...

your right such terrible graphics automatically makes me disassociate the characters from said time period and piece that we are discussing. All my thoughts etc all went away when i saw the jaggie on john doe leg.

I wont respond to the doom one since it was lame and sounds like you noticed it while typing it

And to make a comment like no blood no body parts all that doesn't have to be there for one imagination to take off. Kinda silly rebuttal man

AGAIN I BELIEVE WE HAVE TO THE RIGHT TO PLAY THESE LEVELS BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN I TURN MY BRAIN OFF TO THE FACTS THAT ARE PRESENTED AND USED TO FIGHT FOR THE BAN.

I'm against a ban and think it should be illegal to ban creativity but again doesn't mean im naive either and think everything is apples to apples

[White-Sharingan]

Whoah, didn't know it was that time of the month.

So basically your saying that because GTA doesn't go for "realism" it automatically makes it okay to kill? So basically having cartoons kill each other in a gory way is okay, yet when a game tried and do """realism" ;"" then its not okay, and yes I know you havent mentioned cartoon but I've mentioned it for the purpose of cartoon vs realism. You say GTA tried to achieve a reaslism thats not realism, huh...so basically becaus of your personal opinion, it all makes it true right? some people may seem to take it as realism, while others (like you do not) just as I see MW2 as not realism while you say it does, its all a matter of personal opinion since devs have not stated otherwise. Call me dumb, call me blind, shows how much you cannot take of others thoughts. I do agree that putting real world names in a game will make it more realistic but even so, some people got offended by GTA4 as well, mainly the new york police department, so again its all a matter of opinion. You state "no blood, no gore" doesnt make it less of a problem, yet you say realism vs not realism does make a difference, huh I see...very interesting. Ill leave it like this for now, seems all your doing is rampaging over graphics for a total of 5+ paragraph, cheers!

[PotNoodle]

I thought the reasoning behind that mission was actually pretty clever.. shallow in its execution, but pretty clever.

But still, it does kind of scream "We want GTA type exposure!". Because you know, every time a GTA game comes around - the media cry about it, more people know the game is coming out and it sells more.

In the mainstream media, regarding games - the phrase: "There is no such thing as bad publicity" applies here.

[Gago]

I thought it was innovative and shows what can be done with games.

[devilhunterx]

Fire up the Jack Thompson signal!

Where are you JT? The hypocrites need your support.

[JQ]

Do we?

[kneon]

No, innovative would have been if I had a choice in what happened. I could go along with it, go along but don't shoot, or just shoot the terrorists. If they had done that and my decision affected the way the rest of the game played out then that would have been innovative.

As it was it seemed it's sole purpose was to shock and generate publicity through controversy.

[Dirk Benedict]

Russia says "Hi"
http://www.n4g.com/News-427...

[lancer8869]

What most people fail to realize is that this mission sets up the BIGGEST plot point in the game. Once the Russian FSB discovers a CIA agent at the scene of a massacre, Russia then has grounds to declare war, which was makarovs intention. By skipping this mission, you would never understand why Russia was at war with the US.

It wasn't tasteless. Harsh and shocking, sure. But a necessary plot point nevertheless.

[kneon]

Yes it was necessary for Russia to declare war on the US but I find the situation wasn't really plausible.

The real issue is whether the scene needed to be playable, there was no point to doing so other than shock factor. If they couldn't come up with a more plausible trigger to instigate a war then they could have just made it a cut scene.

[omimasum]

TIMMY

[Knightofelemia]

I hated the scene my guy walked like a robot I could not figure out how it tied into the actual story of the game. And why shoot at something that does nothing in return the scene only got better when the cops were called and I had something shooting back at me. If Infinity Ward made a DLC with another mission like this one I would not get it its like shooting balloons at a carnival it was boring as hell if I hade a meele weapon that would hack and slash them then yes I might be interested in getting it.

[EdFry]

****(SPOILER)*****

Clearly "Red Dawn" was in mind when they were making the Invasion sequence so I'm actually surprised they didn't have a mission of you being a Russian solder attacking a high school(like Red Dawn), then fighting off a local militia.

Just be happy all they did was a cheesy "rail-shooter" airport scene where firing(and playing) are optional until you get to the FSB. I am always disappointing that every CoD never pushes the limit when they've got the chance, and why don't you ever get the option of playing the enemy's side in the campaign?

I'm with Paul on a few things, but i'm in favor of better parenting over "sensitized" videogames

[Kadajvs]

I think people forget it's a video game and Infinity Ward damn sure didnt force any of you that do not like the scene to buy the game. MW2 awesome game.

[ForTheFallen]

So it's just a video game huh? How many copies did it sell the first day? MILLIONS. It's a phenomenon

It's not just a video game, this is an idea, you could even call it propaganda, the way IW justifies killing innocent people and demonizes (once again) the Russians. And even if it is fiction, I doubt many sane people fantasize about gunning down the innocent.

We don't have games where we go hunt down black people and hang them.
We don't have games about planting explosives and detonating them in the towers on 9/11.
We don't have games allowing you to throw the switch of gas chambers.

THERE IS A REASON WHY.

[TheDesperadoKING]

If the industry wants to grow up, it has to abandon this childish crap.

[I_LOVE_MYSELF]

Nothing wrong with it... isnt there an option to skip the scene entirely? Dont like it then dont play it... All the moaners are nothing but a bunch of moral f@gs... Seriously just grow some balls and shoot up the damn airport

[Figboy]

i just thought it wasn't very fun.

it felt like i was on rails, and my character moved incredibly slowly unless prompted by the script to run or move faster.

it also felt insanely over the top for a game that is praised for it's "gritty realism" in terms of "modern warfare."

overall, i just didn't dig Modern Warfare 2 period. it wasn't just limited to the "No Russian" mission.

there wasn't enough build up for the mission beyond a mission briefing, so it didn't really have as much of an impact as i think the intention was.

aside from it being on American soil, i didn't connect with the events in any significant way.

also, considering how many people were slaughtered during the whole scene, and then murdering police and security to boot, it just felt too over the top.

a few well placed executions would have done wonders.

picture this, instead of just watching as 30 or 40 people get mowed down, what if the terrorist group you were a part of start targeting specific individuals?

such as an old man with his wife, attempting to flee the carnage? or a pregnant woman begging for you all to spare her, and you DON'T?

the level of slaughter in the scene was too gratuitous to be meaningful, and border-lined on the comical.

but to me, No Russian isn't even the start of the issues i have with Modern Warfare 2.

for me, at least, the brutal truth of the entire thing is that the game just isn't that good. it's the dirty little secret surrounding the game that no one in the gaming media wants to admit: it's simply CoD4 reskinned, and with gimped MP. i just didn't find the single player captivating in any way. honestly, to me, it just felt generic. like every other war FPS out there. at least the Resistance franchise has fun and unique weapons, and the Killzone franchise has it's gritty hard sci fi setting with unique locales. Modern Warfare 2 is no different from the plethora of other military shooters that have come before it.

it's not a terrible game, but it's not terribly exceptional either.

at least in my opinion.

[2EXS]

ppl would buy this bad game and think that it is so good?I bought it because my kids would not stop bugging me but to be honest, this game is a real desapointment.What I don't get is that games like Uncharted2 & killzone 2 that are better (to me anyway)don't sell as good as COD,I understend that Xbox fan would buy this game because they don't have any other game to play,but why PS3 fans would go crazy for this and pass on better games?

[silverchode]

they do give u the option 2 skip the level, idk why people are trying 2 stir sh!t up

[PS360dagreatest]

MWZ 2 is Great Game but if you go back and play Killzone 2 after playing MW2 like i did you will notice that MW 2 isnt on the same level as Killzone 2. It is funny that people forget how good Killzone 2 is.