@GeekDown said:

Sure it might be taking it a bit too far, but shit like this does happen in real life. So, I don't mind it.

Was kind of thinking the same thing. And this being an MW game, you know something bad was going to happen with that scene.

Also, the airport scene from MW2 was shocking, but also absolutely made the story. The middle east has declared jihad for much lesser offenses, but I can see enough outrage over a tragedy like that being pinned on the US to make an invasion by any nationality almost plaisuble.

That was actually really tame. I thought No Russian was more interesting since it gave you choice. Nothing really happens here. I mean, it'll be a bit disturbing if the child's head flew towards the camera or something but as I said, there's nothing at all.

Whether you take this seriously, or do a virtual lip-fart at it in the digital world, this needs to be in context..what was MW3 trying to do here? What would real life be where you by accident and circumstance were just far enough from the detonation to survive, and saw the bits of flesh, gore and such blown around..maybe some on you. One reads these accounts all the time, that of the survivors to some lucky news journalist who gets there 15 minutes later to see the ppl. fumbling about loading bodies into cars and such, and the Crater.

So we read this all the time or see the aftermath vid on the Internet, we already have distance on it. Well then here is a simulation folks. And for me, I personally do tie to the ppl. in games. They look like ppl., even act like ppl. if the dev is good. Even if they jerk around like they are plagued with St Vitus disease like in Deus Ex-Human Rev. I know they are not real, but there is an unconscious emotional investment that still goes on. I hear the words' Don't Mean Nothing' but things like this may affect on a more subtle level then your immediate experience of real...

So context will be interesting. Not because of this, but the other footage going around has me thinking it will be a decent maybe better-looking version of MW-Insert Numeral.

That was so goddamn corny.

I didn't even see any body getting blown up, I just saw an explosion.

Well seeing as developing a CoD game consists of checking boxes at this point, it's no real surprise that this is in there.

Pretty messed up, but you see it coming a mile off.

I'm hoping that MW4 has a level where you walk into a kindergarten and stab all the children in the face.

I would be more incensed if they killed a dog.

@TheMartino said:

I would be more incensed if they killed a dog.

That's the Mike Vick DLC Perk. Oh sorry *Spoilers*

@PhilESkyline said:

Again, My concern is that scenes like this help us not bat an eye at the real thing. While many will claim "it's only a game" or "they do that in movies too" doesn't make it at acceptable. Others will joke and say "I don't play the single player so I don't care."

What's next? Virtual people getting raped in games or children getting molested? Is that also acceptable?

Yes, your concern is well founded. Since I watched that clip I have now blown up several small children. Can I count on you, as a trained psychologist, to present a witness statement that it was not my fault? It was Infinity Ward.

@PhilESkyline said:

Again, My concern is that scenes like this help us not bat an eye at the real thing. While many will claim "it's only a game" or "they do that in movies too" doesn't make it at acceptable. Others will joke and say "I don't play the single player so I don't care."

What's next? Virtual people getting raped in games or children getting molested? Is that also acceptable?

Is it interactive? No

Is it Graphic? Nope A girls is there, then there is an explosion and she dissapears.

Is it gratituous? No

It's a classic and in some ways lazy way to make people react to a situation, where was the controversy around the dead Island trailer? Nowhere because it was well done and obvious fantasy. There is nothing controversial about this, they are trying to give you an emotional reaction to a situation. A chemical weapon goes of in London, big whoop. a chemical weapon goes of in London and you see from first person the effect it has on an innocent child. If it makes you think "That's horrible". Then it's done it's job, you are supposed to think there is bad stuff going down.

Move along, no controversy here.

I would be more incensed if they killed a dog.

Anyone who is "offended" by this is a goddamn idiot. This kind of shit is in countless movies but put it in a video game? AND EVERYONE FREAK OUT!

I'm tired of these kind of scenes. No Russian was stupid, and this is even worse.

That wasn't that bad. Stuff like this doesn't bother me when its in a video game because no one real is being killed, If I saw this on the news in real life, thats a dfifferent story.

Fuck anyone who says this is wrong. It's not like you're forced to kill her or something. This is NO DIFFERENT from a child dying in a movie.

And people who say "They are trying too hard" are COD haters who have nothing better to do than undermine everything the series does. It also makes no sense... Please give more input on why they are trying too hard, please? They are obviously just trying to get through to the player that civilians are getting blown up in major cities and that you should feel threatened because you're no longer fighting in some 3rd World Country, but in your own backyard. How the fuck is that trying too hard? They aren't looking to add shock value... they would have made more money if "No Russian" wasn't in MW2. This is about making the game more realistic for players, nothing else.

Not as bad as No Russian but...BOOM KID KILLING!

Was not that bad. Looks really cartoony. Also, real life is still worse. Also, why are people bringing up slippery slope arguments? That's dumb.

I think its just them trying to hard to stir up a bit of controversy. To be fair kid deserved it scaring away those poor pigeons.

Trying too hard. You can't just throw in a dead kid to your game and hope everyone goes 'Oh it's so deep and emotional', the game has to earn that praise by having a consistent tone throughout the whole game.

@Wraxend said:

I think its just them trying to hard to stir up a bit of controversy. To be fair kid deserved it scaring away those poor pigeons.

I laughed. Actually, those pigeons are on Makarov's payroll..

Fuck anyone who says this is wrong. It's not like you're forced to kill her or something. This is NO DIFFERENT from a child dying in a movie.

And people who say "They are trying too hard" are COD haters who have nothing better to do than undermine everything the series does. It also makes no sense... Please give more input on why they are trying too hard, please? They are obviously just trying to get through to the player that civilians are getting blown up in major cities and that you should feel threatened because you're no longer fighting in some 3rd World Country, but in your own backyard. How the fuck is that trying too hard? They aren't looking to add shock value... they would have made more money if "No Russian" wasn't in MW2. This is about making the game more realistic for players, nothing else.

A few honest questions that come to mind after reading the responses.

Why haven't game companies added virtual people getting raped in games or children getting molested in games shipped to the US or UK? Is that also acceptable?

 
Because such a game would receive an AO rating, which is pretty much a death sentence to video games. Many major retailers disagree to sell such games.

How long can the term "it's only a game" be acceptable when depicting real life actions and scenes?

 
Always. Video games, and every other form of art for that matter, are a way of expressing oneself. A developer should be allowed to make whatever game he wants, and said game should include whatever content the creator considers necessary to be a part of his vision.

I don't care that some pixels that barely resemble a human child were blown up, I do mind that they are trying to use shitty controversial scenes like this to sell their game.

probably going to be the whole game to be maxtreme

I killed ALL the russians.

This adds literally nothing to the plot or to the game in anyway it's just there to shock and fails to do so.

@imsh_pl said:

@PhilESkyline said:

A few honest questions that come to mind after reading the responses.

Why haven't game companies added virtual people getting raped in games or children getting molested in games shipped to the US or UK? Is that also acceptable?

Because such a game would receive an AO rating, which is pretty much a death sentence to video games. Many major retailers disagree to sell such games.

How long can the term "it's only a game" be acceptable when depicting real life actions and scenes?

Always. Video games, and every other form of art for that matter, are a way of expressing oneself. A developer should be allowed to make whatever game he wants, and said game should include whatever content the creator considers necessary to be a part of his vision.

Just so I'm understanding you correctly.

Are you saying there is no limit to what a developer should be able to create/depict in a video game as long as it's apart of the vision? Any and all actions, including violence and sexual acts of any kind, are allowed and should be accepted?

@imsh_pl said:

@PhilESkyline said:

A few honest questions that come to mind after reading the responses.

Why haven't game companies added virtual people getting raped in games or children getting molested in games shipped to the US or UK? Is that also acceptable?

Because such a game would receive an AO rating, which is pretty much a death sentence to video games. Many major retailers disagree to sell such games.

How long can the term "it's only a game" be acceptable when depicting real life actions and scenes?

Always. Video games, and every other form of art for that matter, are a way of expressing oneself. A developer should be allowed to make whatever game he wants, and said game should include whatever content the creator considers necessary to be a part of his vision.

Just so I'm understanding you correctly.

Are you saying there is no limit to what a developer should be able to create/depict in a video game as long as it's apart of the vision? Any and all actions, including violence and sexual acts of any kind, are allowed and should be accepted?

@thehexeditor said:

@Wraxend said:

I think its just them trying to hard to stir up a bit of controversy. To be fair kid deserved it scaring away those poor pigeons.

I laughed. Actually, those pigeons are on Makarov's payroll..

I laughed because of the shit acting. I mean child actors are bad enough now digital child actors thats a whole new level. With exceptions like Uncharted3.

Good thing it was a good looking kid with pretty and respectably dressed American parents on a sunny day in a cute street with birds flying around and a family movie being taken. 
 
UGHHH 
 
Any more cliches I missed?

@imsh_pl said:

@PhilESkyline said:

A few honest questions that come to mind after reading the responses.

Why haven't game companies added virtual people getting raped in games or children getting molested in games shipped to the US or UK? Is that also acceptable?

Because such a game would receive an AO rating, which is pretty much a death sentence to video games. Many major retailers disagree to sell such games.

How long can the term "it's only a game" be acceptable when depicting real life actions and scenes?

Always. Video games, and every other form of art for that matter, are a way of expressing oneself. A developer should be allowed to make whatever game he wants, and said game should include whatever content the creator considers necessary to be a part of his vision.

Just so I'm understanding you correctly.

Are you saying there is no limit to what a developer should be able to create/depict in a video game as long as it's apart of the vision? Any and all actions, including violence and sexual acts of any kind, are allowed and should be accepted?

I am not watching this or reading anything here, but I'd just like to say that I'm glad they've made yet another scene like this. At least this time, I won't get spoiled concerning it before I experience it.

Am I the only one who thought that the No Russian level was over hyped? I honestly didn't feel like it was that effective at making me feel bad. This is coming from someone who plays good just abou 100% in fallout.

Bummer, that would've been effective if I didn't know about it. Time to ignore everything MW3 story related until I get mine.

I kind of agree that I can't feel sympathy for virtual people. It is shocking on a base level, since there are pretty obvious and easier parallels to car bombings in reality (see Meat Space) whereas the "No Russian" thing felt so over the top it seemed more Bruckheimerish (TM) and kind of less impactful.

But seriously.

LOOK AT THIS COP. ISN'T THIS EXCESSIVE FORCE

People be forgetting the Dead Island trailer... i thought that was worse.