Mirroga:
Truly this might make me sound racist towards America, but I truly believe America, or majority of the authority and adults, is very sensitive about everything. Violence in videogames, depicting a destroyed America, Racism, Abusive usage of Justice (suing such trivial matters), etc. I know it's always good to be more protective than others, but wow, that's being way too sensitive for the matter. This is only my opinion though.

Speaking as an American, I can assure you its the dumbest among us who are unfortunately also the loudest, but they are merely a vocal minority. Well....at least, I like to believe that's the case, anyway, unless the urge to smuggle myself into Canada overwhelms me once more....

FallenJellyDoughnut:

mrfft:

People need to grow some thicker skin.

Or maybe just grow a pair.

A pair of thicker skins?

Wouldn't that be kind of hot?

Dyp100:
All I can read is: Modern Warfare 2 Trailer Critized For "Being Too Awesome"

I kid, I kid, but I think it's a bit silly, it's just a video game, if it was any other country I doubt anyone would cry out, but of course America is special.

I mean, it's not like America is the only country that has been attacked by terroist but now they make a big deal out of every single thing that comes there way, especially in video games.

I mean, it's not like your playing at the terrorist, unless there is a multiplayer map in the ruins of DC, which I would so love!

Personally I am DYING to play this game now, so I can see how the Fallout universe got its start...

;)

I wish we didn't all give so much credence to the ramblings of one random journalist who probably also felt disturbed when the White House was blown to smithereens in ID4. Sigh.

2 things. First, Christian Science is an oxymoron. Second, WHO F***** CARES?! It's a video game!

Cry me a river. This guy needs to get over himself. Of all the actually terrible things going on in the world you could complain about, you choose this?

what a perfectly over the top knee jerk reaction from someone that no one has heard about before now...

its not going to far, whats wrong with blowing up the capital building of a country just because its your country?
the article mentions that it isnt the house of a dictator being blown up...
so what?
if it was the house of a dictator being blown up it would hurt the feelings of people who liked that dictator (its not going to be a big list of people but thats not the point)

you know that once in a while the good guy takes a beating, in fact most cheesy american movies (like the rocky ones) show the american taking a beating then coming back to win, we dont know what happens after the white house gets wasted, maybe the remaining marines make a stand on the steps too the white house, each one comforted by a billowing old glorie as they rally and marshal their strength before defeating the terrorists/invaders

as i said, a knee jerk reaction from someone just trying to make noise for no reason

What about Fallout 3...

Looks sick. They can fuck off. Not like they're going to change anything.

And yet another ambulance chaser goes after gaming as a whole. Ho hum. When will people get it? Gaming is here to stay and you can't do anything about it.

Why are people so touchy nowadays it's just a game, why do non-gamers have to get all agro because a game has a story they don't like

paragon1:

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?

No. My point is that it isn't the bildings or flags that are really sacred. It is what they represent.Hence, showing the White House getting blown up isn't much worse by my standards than showing a trailer park getting blown up. Such things are nothing more than symbols.

Logically, if the United States were to get attacked by a SERIOUS opponent, then D.C> would get leveled. How is it possible for them to portray the United States as being truly threatened without that happening? Is it so bad for an opponent to actually pose a threat to us, that an enemy in a fictional story having a serious chance of winning is too much?

All I hear from this guy is "whine whine whine."

D_987:
Trailers can be pretty deceiving.

If the actual game is even a quarter as interesting as the trailer lets on, I might even buy it.

RelexCryo:

paragon1:

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?

No. My point is that it isn't the bildings or flags that are really sacred. It is what they represent.Hence, showing the White House getting blown up isn't much worse by my standards than showing a trailer park getting blown up. Such things are nothing more than symbols.

Logically, if the United States were to get attacked by a SERIOUS opponent, then D.C> would get leveled. How is it possible for them to portray the United States as being truly threatened without that happening? Is it so bad for an opponent to actually pose a threat to us, that an enemy in a fictional story having a serious chance of winning is too much?

All of which doesn't answer my original question about your first statement of "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 had no relevance and made absolutely no sense from what was being shown in the trailer. The idea you expanded on in your most recent response (which I think most people would agree on, btw) was only your last sentence. I was asking about the first two.

Perticular Elk:

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

Could you explain this?

I agree, please expand on this assertion. I assume you are talking about the middle ages. Even the Wikipedia article describes science in the middle ages as quite the vibrant place, indeed many of the leaders in the field were friars and monks, and even included a pope.

If you are going to bring up the Galileo affair.....it's more complicated than modern stories like to tell it. Some of the problem stems from Galileo himself, he seems to have been a rather blunt person. He alienated quite a few people during his lifetime. Whether he did it unwittingly or maliciously (most modern scholars tend to the former), when you are commissioned by arguably the most powerful person in the world to write an impartial discussion on the pros and cons of heliocentrism and geocentrism, you don't call your patron a moron and say 'my position is right, and you are all stupid to believe otherwise'.

Indeed, from what I have read, the initial injunction against the copernican model was not to ban it outright but to stop being presented as fact, only hypothesis. debate on the way the earth moves had been going on for 60 years at that point, and people like Galileo were still free to discuss the hypthesis so it's not like the Church suddenly jumped on this upstart new idea and denounced it as heresy. Ultimately, the Church and Pope Urban VIII felt it was unprovable. Of course, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems did not help Galileos situation.

Er so it's ok for other places in the world to be battlegrounds but not America? Hmmm....

Typical.

I can see why he is upset (US troops dying on American soil) and it SLIGHTLY offends me seeing the US being destroyed, but the game will sell billions of copies, make a bunch of money, and be number one in online play so few are going to care. I wasn't going to buy this game anyway, since I know alot of what was in COD4 wouldnt happen (Nuke blowing up) it kinda killed the whole Modern Warfare thing.

ssgt splatter:
He's overreacting. Besides, if this game takes place in 2016 then we got a lot of time to live.

ya we will all be dead by 2012 so it really doesnt matter
(joke)

Man, game developers can't do a damn thing without pissing someone off these days.

ae86gamer:

The Christian Science Monitor.

Their name alone is reason not to listen to them.

Also, if it was any other place getting attacked they would have no problem with it.

JediMB:
Personally I'd love to play a game that took place in a post-apocalyptic (or just plain apocalyptic :P) version of my home town.

Oh my gosh! So would I. Thats why I'm waiting for I am Alive to be released. Apocalyptic Chicago = Awesome.

Yes to both but sadly I doubt there will ever be a game about a apocalyptic Ireland. :(
In my opinion I think we should just ignore the person who made that article. We already have enough idiots running around on the internet.
I'm still annoyed from the last time in which someone accused left 4 dead 2 of being racist.

Why couldnt people complain about that fucking annoying Chekov'esque voice the villain has? Its the most fucking annoying voice Ive heard in a long time, and thats got nothing to do with it being Russian, and everything to do with it being fucking annoying. I simply cannot bloody stand it.

As for the actual subject in question, just like being unable to take religious criticism means the religion in question is weak, being unable to take fictional depictions of your country being attacked and destroyed shows a weakness of a nation (or more specifically, some of its population).

It's still all white to blow up foreign countries in video games, yeah? Whew! That's a relief. For a second there I thought the Chrisitan Science Monitor had failed its core readership.

ZahrDalsk:

SomeBritishDude:
Female Penis Model

I don't see the problem with this.

You need a penis to model one.

FIRST AMENDMENT! Case closed. Thank you, come again.

Chad Brumfield:
Cry me a river. This guy needs to get over himself. Of all the actually terrible things going on in the world you could complain about, you choose this?

I was trying to think of a phrase to sum up my feelings, I guess "cry me a river" must have been it. :) Best just to let these people throw their hissy fits until the cows come home, while the rest of just enjoy the game.

It's just ridiculous. This guy should actually be praising the bloody game, because I'm pretty sure that there's a section which involves blasting to the White House (taken over by evil ragheads of course) and escorting the President to Air Force One during which segment you shoot 10 billion terrorists while the president goes to the bathroom and you must defend the door with a sidekick who keeps babbling: "God, it's taking forever" (Half-life 2 anyone?). The guy should be blue-eyed with patriotism for the game's depiction of "heroic deeds for the country of US and A".

Summary:

It's ok for any other culture/nation to have their key buildings depicted as under threat, but Americans are superior to everyone so we can't have the same treatment.

Also; Independence Day

Also; Hitman

Sorry if I'm only repeating others (short on time and 12 pages of comments is a lot!) but MW2 is fiction. The same as any film (Independence Day anyone?), book, etc. The complaint is fucking ludicrous.

As if we've never blown up another nations capitol in media? I'm a American I don't even really mind that much. Sure it was surprising but it's a video game.

Has anyone actually sided with this dude or is he some scientist paid for smoking certain substances and seeing what theories he can come up with while under the influence

killereddy:

killer-corkonian:

killereddy:
Personally I think this is what it will look like trying to get Obama to give up the white house in eight years, hopefully 2 (impeachment). They aren't terrorists fortified in the white house, it's Obama's zombie followers.

EDIT: back on topic, I dare anyone to even try to take over America with war. Most people take their right to bear arms VERY seriously. It would simply be stupid to attempt all out war with America. Not to mention that if it got too bad I would hope that someone launches a nuke at their home country. The game is fictional any way does it freaking matter?

EDIT 2: Oh, I hope they include the IRS building! I'll stand there with a rocket launcher and just flip them off....Once I'm out of ammo.

I don't know why loads of you Americans are so annoyed at Obama. What the fuck did he do to you? Surely he's better than Bush. Who would you prefer to lead the country. And don't say anything stupid, like "A better country is one with noo leadarz loool."

I'm not saying he's better or worse than bush. In fact I think the last several elections have been a toss up between a giant douche and a turd sandwich (see the South Park episode), but that's beside the point. Obama won because he brainwashed every idiot into his believing him with his monosyllabic sayings, well I just HOPE I have some f*cking CHANGE when he's through.

and now that I have you angry and replying to the joke of my post I just have to say...
"I win"

EDIT: I realize now that I am off topic, I am really looking forward to this game. just wish I had the money to buy it.

Alright, alright, I wasn't angry. I was just wondering.
From a sham-feen to a pure langer like,
killercorkonian.

paragon1:

RelexCryo:

paragon1:

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?

No. My point is that it isn't the bildings or flags that are really sacred. It is what they represent.Hence, showing the White House getting blown up isn't much worse by my standards than showing a trailer park getting blown up. Such things are nothing more than symbols.

Logically, if the United States were to get attacked by a SERIOUS opponent, then D.C> would get leveled. How is it possible for them to portray the United States as being truly threatened without that happening? Is it so bad for an opponent to actually pose a threat to us, that an enemy in a fictional story having a serious chance of winning is too much?

All of which doesn't answer my original question about your first statement of "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 had no relevance and made absolutely no sense from what was being shown in the trailer. The idea you expanded on in your most recent response (which I think most people would agree on, btw) was only your last sentence. I was asking about the first two.

I already told you: No, I have no reason to think that it would be a rebellion against a corrupt America, but by the very nature of the fact those buildings are nothing more than symbols, and by the very nature of the fact that an opponent has to pose a serious threat to us for their to be real tension, I don't think it is anywhere close to going to far.

Fuck Christian Science Monitor. There are dozens of games set in the burning eastern settings and I can't see anyone raising any concerns about the portrayal of eastern cities and population in such games.

Caliostro:

Malygris:

The Christian Science Monitor [...]

Aaaaaaaand, I stopped caring here.

It's kind of like posing a highly difficult quantum physics problem to a 3rd grade "special needs" class and expecting anything useful to come out of it...

Lol, I literally laughed out loud at that one :D

OT: Yes, this is overreacting in it's finest form. Can only agree with many people on here that it's hypocritical to say this only because it's played out on American soil etc etc. I just think that this person tried to get a name for himself like other wackjobs do all the time, through the bashing of games.

wow, why do they seem so surprised and offended? im amaerican, i dont mind, in fact ill be picking this up at midnight if i can

but as the article said its not the only game to have dc in shambles
fallout three for example,
you may defend that its a global apocalypse but then you'd be saying "well you can have the US devastated , but... u have to hit the rest of the world too"

also its an M rated game which means people old enough to play it should be able to figure out that it is indeed that... A GAME, it wont effect anytime in the real world unless you get all picky and say a kid dies cause he played wow non-stop
but releasing a game where America gets attacked by terrorists and dc is sacked, doesnt mean its gonna happen a week later on November 17th