Why don't religious groups stop trying to persuade society to their morals? In fact how about they stop reviewing anything mainstream out of their venue?

The fact that it's a religious organization which uses the word "Science" in their name already discredits all their opinions. The fact that they're hypocrites also doesn't help their case.

So it's alright to have games where we blow up other countries, but when it's their own, it's bad? Even if in the game we're basically saving or protecting it? People get blown up in other countries everyday and they're ok with that, but if you do it in their country, suddenly it's bad. :'(

First off, we're not destroying it. Secondly, it's a freaking game, it's not real. Third, it's not the twin towers and it's not even the same city. Get over it.

don't ya just love that in fallout 3 the white house was hit by a F**KEN NUKE its all ok, but as soon as someone starts shooting a gun thats going to far.

j0z:
All of America was in ruins in all of Fallout games, with the player actually in a pretty accurate (post-apocalyptic) Washington DC. I can't tell you how many times I have destroyed America in the Civilization games (I like playing as the Romans and Germans).
Numerous strategy games have conflicts in America, WiC, EndWar, Red Alert, etc.
And besides, would it be a big loss if DC blew up?

I hated the Americans in that game. You'd think that when they own an entire half of north America and the U.N.s already been established that they wouldn't demand you give them all your money and oil just because you aren't powerful.

I liked the trailer. It was great, but the graphics looked kind of weird. It wasn't that they were bad, but they seamed off.

Hmmmm so its not to bad if its Eastern Europe thats burning. Somebody needs to grow some thicker skin.I mean its a game, its not real!

Anyone else remember "Medal Of honor: Rising Sun" we have seen stuff like this before. remember when the Arizona was blown to hell and bodies littered the surface of the water. I don not see why this is a big deal. hell, if anything, its gonna make the game more personal and exciting to play.

ps.: hey, Americans are no longer one single hive mind to everyone. coolio

Malygris:
Modern Warfare 2 Trailer Criticized For "Going Too Far"

The Christian Science Monitor has taken issue with the shocking imagery of the "Infamy" trailer for Modern Warfare 2, suggesting that the events depicted in the video and the game might be going too far.

(If you haven't seen the video and want your Modern Warfare 2 experience to be completely unspoiled, you may want to stop reading now. Consider yourself warned.)

As expected, the Modern Warfare 2 trailer that debuted on Sunday night was gorgeous and action-packed; somewhat less expected, I would guess, was the depiction of a blasted and burning Washington D.C. as a battleground upon which U.S. forces were struggling against an unknown foe. To me, as a gamer (and a confessed non-American), it was frikkin' awesome, but Andrew Heining of the Christian Science Monitor has a somewhat less enthusiastic take on it.

"In the upcoming Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2... the gallant mansion reduced to rubble doesn't belong to some crazed separatist dictator hellbent on all kinds of nefarious acts. Instead, it's the White House," he wrote. "The scenes of post-apocalyptic scenes of carnage play out not in some fictional town in eastern Europe, but in Washington D.C. itself."

He admits that this isn't the first time that D.C. has been blown up in the name of entertainment and, with an obligatory swipe at Grand Theft Auto IV, suggests that Modern Warfare 2 may not actually be any worse than anything else put out by the gaming industry these days. "But this is one of the first times such striking imagery has surfaced since 9/11, when the idea of widespread destruction on US soil was suddenly thrust into reality," he added.

"Games based on current events are seeing something of a surge," he continued. "But something tells this writer there's something of a difference between a cartoonish Flash game where the object is to try to hit George W. Bush with a shoe, and one in which the destruction of a major U.S. city - in near photo-realistic detail - plays a central role."

Of course, this isn't the first time the U.S. capital has been blown up in "near photo-realistic detail" in a videogame, either; as numerous people have pointed out, Fallout 3 let players tromp all over the "Capital Wasteland," including a lead-n-lasers quickie tour through the crumbling remains of the White House. But Fallout 3 was set in the aftermath; only Modern Warfare 2 will, presumably, let you fight in the city as it burns. Is that going too far? Is the depiction of Washington D.C. in the throes of destruction inappropriate or is it merely, as the author himself put it, "striking?"

Permalink

I'm American. No, it isn't going to far, if our government becomes corrupt and oppressive, slaughtering innocent people, and we cannot overcome that through peaceful means, then it is our obligation to blow it up ourselves.

It's not buildings or flags that are sacred, it is what those things represent that are sacred- freedom, human rights, equality.

gbemery:
Why don't religious groups stop trying to persuade society to their morals? In fact how about they stop reviewing anything mainstream out of their venue?

Why doesn't EVERY alarmist group on the face of the earth stop reviewing things they know nothing about? Why should just the religious groups stop?

Aethists in Communist China mass murdered innocent Buddhists because they had been brainwashed by Marxists into believing that religions like Buddhism simply enslaved the poor.

Aethists in Communist China had kids sent to camps designed to end their "addiction" to internet and games- and kids were literally beaten to death in these camps, even after the grous advertised that they did not use beatings. All because of anti-video game alarmism.

How about ALL ignorant alarmists just stop talking about stuff they know nothing about?

mrfft:

People need to grow some thicker skin.

Or maybe just grow a pair.

gRiM_rEaPeRsco:
"Christian Science Monitor"?? not too long ago christians murdered hundreds of scientists most of who were devout christians.

I think they're monitoring science to bash it or something...

RelexCryo:

Malygris:
Modern Warfare 2 Trailer Criticized For "Going Too Far"

The Christian Science Monitor has taken issue with the shocking imagery of the "Infamy" trailer for Modern Warfare 2, suggesting that the events depicted in the video and the game might be going too far.

(If you haven't seen the video and want your Modern Warfare 2 experience to be completely unspoiled, you may want to stop reading now. Consider yourself warned.)

As expected, the Modern Warfare 2 trailer that debuted on Sunday night was gorgeous and action-packed; somewhat less expected, I would guess, was the depiction of a blasted and burning Washington D.C. as a battleground upon which U.S. forces were struggling against an unknown foe. To me, as a gamer (and a confessed non-American), it was frikkin' awesome, but Andrew Heining of the Christian Science Monitor has a somewhat less enthusiastic take on it.

"In the upcoming Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2... the gallant mansion reduced to rubble doesn't belong to some crazed separatist dictator hellbent on all kinds of nefarious acts. Instead, it's the White House," he wrote. "The scenes of post-apocalyptic scenes of carnage play out not in some fictional town in eastern Europe, but in Washington D.C. itself."

He admits that this isn't the first time that D.C. has been blown up in the name of entertainment and, with an obligatory swipe at Grand Theft Auto IV, suggests that Modern Warfare 2 may not actually be any worse than anything else put out by the gaming industry these days. "But this is one of the first times such striking imagery has surfaced since 9/11, when the idea of widespread destruction on US soil was suddenly thrust into reality," he added.

"Games based on current events are seeing something of a surge," he continued. "But something tells this writer there's something of a difference between a cartoonish Flash game where the object is to try to hit George W. Bush with a shoe, and one in which the destruction of a major U.S. city - in near photo-realistic detail - plays a central role."

Of course, this isn't the first time the U.S. capital has been blown up in "near photo-realistic detail" in a videogame, either; as numerous people have pointed out, Fallout 3 let players tromp all over the "Capital Wasteland," including a lead-n-lasers quickie tour through the crumbling remains of the White House. But Fallout 3 was set in the aftermath; only Modern Warfare 2 will, presumably, let you fight in the city as it burns. Is that going too far? Is the depiction of Washington D.C. in the throes of destruction inappropriate or is it merely, as the author himself put it, "striking?"

Permalink

I'm American. No, it isn't going to far, if our government becomes corrupt and oppressive, slaughtering innocent people, and we cannot overcome that through peaceful means, then it is our obligation to blow it up ourselves.

It's not buildings or flags that are sacred, it is what those things represent that are sacred- freedom, human rights, equality.

AMEN, from a fellow American...

RelexCryo:

gbemery:
Why don't religious groups stop trying to persuade society to their morals? In fact how about they stop reviewing anything mainstream out of their venue?

Why doesn't EVERY alarmist group on the face of the earth stop reviewing things they know nothing about? Why should just the religious groups stop?

Aethists in Communist China mass murdered innocent Buddhists because they had been brainwashed by Marxists into believing that religions like Buddhism simply enslaved the poor.

Aethists in Communist China had kids sent to camps designed to end their "addiction" to internet and games- and kids were literally beaten to death in these camps, even after the grous advertised that they did not use beatings. All because of anti-video game alarmism.

How about ALL ignorant alarmists just stop talking about stuff they know nothing about?

And AMEN to that too... (the last sentence mostly)

I just can't get over that. When it is set in an Eastern European country (like the one I live in) it is perfectly okay, yet when it goes to D.C. we've suddenly crossed the line (I have to remind you that the first Modern Warfare depicted a fucking nuke!). Maybe we'll attack Cloverfield too? Didn't it decapitate the Statue of Liberty?

I love the name of this magazine...with all the "Christian" and "Science" within one line.
Too bad that they are known for packing screaming bullshit under cover of their "Science", so this man's argument is already invalid.

D_987:
Jeez, a bit quick to complain before we even know anything about the game...?

Trailers can be pretty deceiving. Besides which, why is it ok to let players engage in realistic battles in "photo-realistic" world war 2 fights, but not ok to produce a modern replica of a fictional battle?

EDIT : 4444 th post =)

You think they would have learned after the pandemonium following Mass Effect.

I don't think they're going too far--it's Activision's prerogative to come up with a new and interesting plot, and frankly with all the games out today this is one of the precious few that go into uncharted territories.

I watched the whole trailer looking for something "going too far" and I saw nothing. So it's the White House, who the hell cares, it's a game.
"Christian Science Monitor" - wow, doesn't that sound trustworthy? yeah..

That trailer actually made me want the game. Before, I had no interest in it. Now after seeing that I want to buy it day one.

So it's alright as long as the game takes place in some Eastern European or Middle Eastern town, where it's their people being hurt or killed. Their homes and icons being burnt to the ground and decemated...just as long as they don't portray scenes of carnage on American soil. Fucking ridiculous!

Pride is a vice, you know. Just because it's in America doesn't mean it's some kind of attack on your country's values, or something. Besides, I thought this sort of things happened tonnes in movies. Watching some kind of natural disaster, giant monster or melevolent alien race tearing New York apart apart brick by brick is all fine and dandy, but controlling a group of valiant young soldiers defending the White House from a dastardly evil faceless villain is just "too far"?

I just wish there'd be a game where the opposing forces would try to blow up the Sydney Opera House or Canberra. It's kind of degrading to know that no-one thinks anything in Australia is worth blowing up, and it's even worse to have that train of thought confirmed by videogame developers. If they want some place to fight other than America, then there's plenty of room in the red centre. Go wild.

Whilst I care not a whit for the game, I do think it's fucking disgraceful that they're releasing it on November 11th, the commonwealth's day of rememberance.

So, it's OK to burn down virtual eastern european towns, it's OK to burn down middle east, but as soon as someone sets a game in your own back yard, it's too much? Hypocritical? It's either OK to burn down cities in a game or it isn't. You can't have it both ways...

megapenguinx:
That trailer actually made me want the game. Before, I had no interest in it. Now after seeing that I want to buy it day one.

Agreed, I had no interest in Modern Warfare 1 or 2 until seeing the trailer, went and purchased Modern Warfare and was pleasantly surprised by the fun I ended up having, not like the previous COD games I've played

Who's going to invade the east coast? Canada? There's an entire ocean in the way for everyone else.

and the remembrance day thing is pretty shitty.

So it's alright for you to go around destroying other people's cities in a video game, but the moment it's your own, it's too far?
Jesus fucking christ, go cry a river and piss off already. It's about friggen time, it's not like America is a holy saint that can't be touched.

[This probably makes no sense since things like this annoy me, which means I have to force myself not to use language I would naturally use, which can and does break what would be a normal(albeit dirty and nasty) sentence.]

You know what? When a video depicts your ruined,burning capital (not just some random town in Oklahoma,a CAPITAL) it can be pretty fucking scary - even if it's not real. I wonder,would all people here spew bile if it was London and English author,or Moscow and Russian author,or Deli and Indian author... Blowing up a capital of some nation will always be "too far" for people of that nation,because capital is supposed to represent their unity and strength. And if you don't care if you see your capital goes down in flames... well,not everyone is desensetized to that level. For some people,it's really disturbing.

I guess it's just sheer anti-americanism and misanthropy of these forums coupled with relative stupidity of the guy who wrote it.

Oh no! He's upset about fantasy violence hitting too close to home. Cross a name off the list of people who weren't going to buy the game anyways.

How sad :(

Its a game, people shouldn't get too worked up about it, it will be a lot of fun finally playing a war game on US soil instead on any country they seem to be stomping all over at the time. And there's always organisations that are against gaming

Kollega:
You know what? When a video depicts your ruined,burning capital (not just some random town in Oklahoma,a CAPITAL) it can be pretty fucking scary - even if it's not real. I wonder,would all people here spew bile if it was London and English author,or Moscow and Russian author,or Deli and Indian author... Blowing up a capital of some nation will always be "too far" for people of that nation,because capital is supposed to represent their unity and strength.

I guess it's just sheer anti-americanism and misanthropy of these forums coupled with relative stupidity of the guy who wrote it.

As an English person I can say without a doubt I wouldn't give two shits if I saw London burned to the ground. For a creative writing contest I even wrote a little story in which London was turned to dust (for one reason or another). In the film V for Vendetta we watched our very centre of government (the Houses of Parliament) get destroyed by what essentially was a 'terrorist'.

I'm sorry, I have to disagree with you. While the anti-Americanism may seem a bit strong, the point would be the same no matter which country this guy was from. For me, anyway.

Heck, I would relish the chance for more games to be set in Britain. Grand Theft Auto: Glasgow would go down a bloody treat.

oh this is ridiculous, all to happy to fight your way through a war torn berlin or the ravaged middle east but as soon as a game hints at american land being damaged its apparently too graphic?!! this is like the outcry over whether their should be a vietnam based medal of honour/call of duty (cant remember which!) game.

No offense, but they should get screwed with their 'goody too-shoo' attitude. I am sick to death of hearing all of this. They should go make their own small pitiful society. Just how I feel about the situation and I don't really mean it.

"But this is one of the first times such striking imagery has surfaced since 9/11, when the idea of widespread destruction on US soil was suddenly thrust into reality," he added.

Bullshit! If this guy was anything close to a smart man, he did some form of research that would have led him to Left 4 Dead(2). I'm not much for a Modern Warfare game, the trailers are impressive, but you probably will never do whats happening in them. Plus shooters aren't usually my thing, if they are realistic, Doom Half life and such are awesome.

So, the capital of Yankland has been blown to fuckery, and we get to butcher people in the still-burning ruins of the building we've all wanted to blow up for the past decade if-not-longer?

MW2 just got put back on the "may be worth buying" list.

Crap! The one day I leave my flame shield at home, this shit goes down! From the article and what I read of this thread, I'd say everyone just needs to take a great big chill pill.

RelexCryo:

I'm American. No, it isn't going to far, if our government becomes corrupt and oppressive, slaughtering innocent people, and we cannot overcome that through peaceful means, then it is our obligation to blow it up ourselves.

It's not buildings or flags that are sacred, it is what those things represent that are sacred- freedom, human rights, equality.

Okay, so where did you get the idea that trailer showed a corrupt U.S. government being brought down? All it did was show some famous D.C. monuments in a war torn landscape. They didn't actually say what was going on at all. Or are you aware of something about the game that you haven't mentioned?

It's just fiction, and besides rather than shooting up some small Eastern European or Middle Eastern town why not somewhere more interesting and original like Washington DC?

Hunderds of European cities where bombed and destroyed to oblivion in the war- London, Liverpool, Coventry, Berlin, Dresden Dusseldorf, Hamburg etc etc. I don't see why American cities have to be any different.

Yeah, $60 too far. HAR, HAR.

Ugh, this game is going to be a disaster for the gaming industry. And I for one watched it, and didn't enjoy it because every game trailer is trying to be Gears of War. Way too fucking pretentious, and overly dramatic.