Some context:
Wikipedia said:
Note: Russia was not directly involved in that war
War crime me if old
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Call of Duty Modern Warfare blames Russia for the Tariq Almawt' bombings (AKA Highway of Death)
- Thread starter Deleted member 51539
- Start date
Some context:
Note: Russia was not directly involved in that war
War crime me if old
This is the issue with going
"we want to create a grounded game that takes a serious look at the realities of war"
but then actually creating a shoot shoot bang bang, America #1 game.
I don't know why the developers act like they're actually getting serious if they're just going to do stuff like this.
"we want to create a grounded game that takes a serious look at the realities of war"
but then actually creating a shoot shoot bang bang, America #1 game.
I don't know why the developers act like they're actually getting serious if they're just going to do stuff like this.
OP
OP
Jingoistic war propaganda?
The least malicious answer I can think of, other than a mistake being made and no one checking it, is they thought having the people who are supposedly the good guys of the story you're supposed to relate to can't be doing bad things.
So it's directly referencing a real event, but then, since it's actually a fictional event (that references the real event) it's fine that the blame is placed elsewhere?
The game is a work of fiction, so yeah, if they want to change facts around to fit the game's story.
If the game were actually saying "this is how it happened in real life" then that would be another thing entirely, but it isn't.
uhh
At a certain point in the story you kidnap a mother and child and threaten to murder them to gain leverage on a terrorist.
They definitely cross a "maybe we aren't good guys" territory.
They definitely cross a "maybe we aren't good guys" territory.
But it's referencing an event that actually happened? Basically inserting something that really occurred into a fictional story to excuse the shifting of facts.
Interviewer: What's the story about?
Dev: A very relevant contemporary war story.
Interviewer: Is this game political?
Dev (with a straight face): No
Interviewer: Really?
Dev: No
Interviewer: Really?
Dev: No, we're just making games
Interviewer: That seems insane!
Dev (same straight face): It seems insane to get political to me
So you see, this game is totally not about a proxy war between Russia and US fought in the midst of a civil war in Syria. Because it's actually set in a fictional Middle Eastern country called Urzikstan, which is undergoing a civil war where Russia and US are fighting a proxy war and there's a power hungry Russian leader. But you see the leader is a military leader and not a political leader. So it's all 100% fiction and entirely non political obviously.
IW pls
OP
OP
Let me guess, it actually works and leads to the next plot point?
I mean one of the missions is literally a copy of the Benghazi incident. Doesn't mean they're blaming the bad guys from the fictional country for it.
It's clearly based off the real event and used as an inspiration for fictional even, then pinning the blame on Russia, while play as the good guys who actually took part in the very real event. I don't know if it's offensive, or tasteless, but it's just weird.
It does, but also
the gun isn't loaded at all, and they don't lay a finger on the family or the guy himself (as in hurt them). The dialogue also keeps stressing how the captive is a child killer and a bad guy. The captive breaks when the player character starts loading the gun and they leave after that. And it's kind of glossed over after.
It's basically "sometimes you gotta do some shit you don't like so that the world can sleep in peace" message, rather than "are we the baddies?".
Last edited:
MW takes place in the wonderful world where the US are the very good guys, fighting for liberty and all. Not even a single subtile hint of previous bad action from the US, like bombing civilians on a regular basis.
Russia on the other hand ? war crimes everywhere.
Russia on the other hand ? war crimes everywhere.
But not really.
Crossing the line would have actually been killing the mother and child. The Russians commit total genocide and kill droves of people. You're definitely still the good guys in this game.
I was shocked at how evil the Russians were in this game. They were on Nazi Germany, SDF and Federation level.
If this game was banned in Russia I would totally get it.
If this game was banned in Russia I would totally get it.
It's a very political game, the parallels to Russia and Syria make the game intentionally uncomfortable. Easily the best COD campaign to date.
What? Did you play the game?
There is only one good guy and its Price. The US in this even abandons their allies to die.
Not really that fictional...
Last edited:
Which is incredibly ironic given that they sold this game as a real world take on war. Granted that was always pretty BS btu none the less its still ridiculous that they ever asserted this.
Do they actually follow through with that threat? Because if not its pretending to do something that it isn't.
Lmao did they really?
I'm not trying to be condescending but this game takes a very huge deviation from the model you describe here. What you're talking about is a traditional COD game. What I played in MW was something totally different and I don't say that lightly.
You should play it.
Wow, this is pretty dumb. Coincidentally, I got a brief by a retired Marine Major about three months ago, who was there, and directed IDF on scene. US was definitely responsible. The problem with this is that someone who is not informed will just assume this to be part, or wholly true.
Let's be honest. They won't play it because CoD steps too far in their "principles"
I wouldn't be surprised if there's demand to ban all discussions for CoD just do they can sleep better at night
Urzikstan isn't a real country.Not really that fictional...
Interviewer: What's the story about?
Dev: A very relevant contemporary war story.
Interviewer: Is this game political?
Dev (with a straight face): No
Interviewer: Really?
Dev: No
Interviewer: Really?
Dev: No, we're just making games
Interviewer: That seems insane!
Dev (same straight face): It seems insane to get political to me
So you see, this game is totally not about a proxy war between Russia and US fought in the midst of a civil war in Syria. Because it's actually set in a fictional Middle Eastern country called Urzikstan, which is undergoing a civil war where Russia and US are fighting a proxy war and there's a power hungry Russian leader. But you see the leader is a military leader and not a political leader. So it's all 100% fiction and entirely non political obviously.
IW pls
But you see, the game is inspired by American Sniper to show real wars!
