People looking to avoid Modern Warfare 2 spoilers should not read on. A remarkable video (below) of what’s purported to be the beginning of Modern Warfare 2 has appeared. It’s in French, and we’ve obviously no idea if it’s definitely real at this point, but it seems to be showing the first level of the game, in which you play a terrorist mowing down innocent civilians in an airport.
It’s a useful gaming device: put you in the enemy’s position for a glimpse of the other side. Interestingly, however, it’s one that Infinity Ward never opted to do in the original Call of Duty WW2 games, avoiding letting you play as the Germans despite showing different nations’ perspectives on the conflict. Putting you in the position of a terrorist killing civilians is clearly a very controversial decision. It could be designed to give the player a horrible view of those they’re fighting against, but if this is the case it will be a contentious way to start the game. All speculation for now, clearly. Here’s the video:
Related Stories:
The whole scene really is unhealthy and unsettling. I’m intrigued.
We get that kind of trope on TV all the time, it’s only natural that storytellers would try to adapt it to the interactive medium. And since we’ve recently come to the observation that games as an Art form are finally mature enough to purposefully elicit the whole spectrum of feelings, from good to horrible (see: The Void), how can anyone be outraged?
Though it is surprising that a major studio making an AAA title would go for it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmRi60EOMCY#t=1m48s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnHmskwqCCQ
You know what to do.
Thank you, John Walker, for putting the “spoiler” part of your post in the pre-jump section. I totally appreciated accidentally reading about what The Moment this year was going to be. That was really neat.
Fucking hell.
What part of “People looking to avoid Modern Warfare 2 spoilers should not read on” wasn’t clear?
To be perfectly fair, there are people who read a little bit faster than they process (Myself included). Leaving the spoiler in the first paragraph does put such people at risk. Though considering this clearly happens very early in the game, treating John Walker like the Spawn of Satan seems a bit overboard.
Aye, I’m fairly certain spawn of satan don’t cry :P
The headline says “footage leaked”
What did you expect?
I really don’t see what the deal is with this footage though. Nuking megaton and talking to the irradiated survivors in Fallout 3 is way more fucked up, not that it matters. It’s not real and if I thought of any part of a game that involved killing people as real then I’d be repulsed. Games about killing people don’t have the luxury to make statements about killing people because they trivialize killing people. It just doesn’t work
Spoiler warning:
Rosebud is a sled.
http://hellforge.gameriot.com/videos/Modern-Warfare-2-Airport-Controversial-Opening#play
Thank you Alan Au for the link.
I loved that part where it says ‘this video has been removed’ can’t wait for part 2.
Actually to be fair it has got play the GTA trump card:
The guy playing it was a moron.
Watch the vid again.
He didn’t have to shoot the civs at all.
He chose to.
He even chose to shoot the wounded!
“Actually to be fair it can play the GTA trump card:”
The guy typing is a moron.
It’s pretty obviously the objective of the mission to shoot the civilians.
prepare for this to be banned in Australia
Hmm, that link seems broken. The one on the front page seems to work though
http://hellforge.gameriot.com/blogs/Hellforge/Modern-Warfare-2s-Controversial-Opening
Looks like they were originally hosting the video and removed it.
SPOILER ALERT:
The guy you play is an undercover CIA agent, he dies at the end of the mission, so there’s karma for ya :P
I don’t like this. It seems too much to me like sensationalist violence porn posturing at being art. Reminds me much more of, say, Postal, than the opening sequence of Modern Warfare 1.
I think my reaction if I were playing this would not be the presumably intended reaction of thinking “oh my god I can’t believe I’m doing this.” Rather, the way it is presented in a typical FPS attitude is the glorification of violence by giving the player the objective: go shoot some dudes. I don’t feel like I’ve done a very good job of explaining my feelings, but I don’t believe I’m getting the message IW (presumably) intended with this sequence.
I disagree. A glorification of violence isn’t supposed to induce a visceral and shocking response like this part of gameplay is. I think the purpose of the sequence is to put a tough choice in the hands of the player, which is to decide to shoot or to look on. It’s probably going to be one of the most powerful and meaningful moments in a war/combat game.
NOOOOO! I was too late! “This video has been removed from MetaCafé.”
And for every link I click it seems like Activision has been there and removed it… Damn they were fast to get rid of every trace.
I think this really needs context to have anything meaningful said about it, and it doesn’t have context in the current footage.
Looks fun.
That hellforge page’s comments section has turned into a shitstorm pondering the nature of good and evil, right and wrong, all because of the OP calling the mission ‘art’.
I agree though that the context of this mission is rather important; was it created solely for shock value, or is there commentary of some kind? How much of the story builds up to this, if at all?
Reading the comments helped me understand the motivation behind it, sort of. Also, you get to see one fool being pwned by the poster in the thread.
Honestly, unless there’s some huge backstory to this mission that was skipped, I really don’t see how it is much more than shock for the sake of publicity. If someone could sum up for me why they think the content of that video should even be mentioned in the same sentence as the brilliant intro to MW1, I’d appreciate it.
To be quite honest I am not too sure about the Call of Duty franchise tackling something like this. The problem is the past games of the franchise are more akin to a Jerry Bruckheimer film then to something like a Saving Private Ryan or a All Quite on the Western Front. If this truly is one of the first levels in the game, then Call of Duty has a responsibility to make sure this is not just another well polished shooter with cool explosions. Infinity Ward can’t have it both ways.
Working video link:
http://www.viddler.com/explore/Destructoid/videos/1102/
Also, its a fucking game.
The fact it might be reaching for an emotional response besides “fun” is something to be lauded. Clearly this sequence is reaching for something beyond “fun”.
I found the scenes disturbing, but thats actually a good thing.
I find all this nay saying pretty ironic, considered how much flak the CoD series gets for being bland and formulaic.
This is almost as dumb as movie audiences who bitch about “unhappy” endings because it makes them feel bad. Sometimes media can engage on deeper levels than “fun” and “happy”.
A game about graphically torturing and killing little kittens would produce a ‘non-fun’ emotional response in most people. Not sure I would regard it as massive progress towards ‘games as art’.
I agree, I’m glad that IW feels they can take a liberty like this.
I don’t know what you mean by ‘it’s a fucking game’.
It does genuinely look fun though.
The idea that the only things its okay to shoot in games are Zombies and Nazis (cause all german soldiers where evil card carrying nazis, its not like there was conscription and execution for deserters), is exactly the attitude thats keeping gaming from being viewed as a serious platform for art.
Its the movie equivalency of comparing All Quiet on the Western front, and Dambusters.
Just because some narratives allow you to feel good about people being killed, doesn’t mean they’re better, and generally they’re far less subtle and complex if they’re going for “goodies versus baddies” formula.
You know, I think you’re on to something. Art challenges us to think about things in different ways. This game is not promoting or romanticizing terrorists (unlike GTA which glamorizes life as a thug). I’m not sure yet what it’s trying to say, but maybe it’s something along the lines of “You cannot know a man unless you walk a mile in his shoes.” You know, know your enemy.
Agreed, I’m into this post.
I don’t get what the uproar is – How is this much different from, let’s say, GTA IV?
I remember being ordered to kill plenty of unarmed civilians in that game: Take out my rival there, eliminate that lover over here (e.g., given the choice of executing Dwayne’s ex-girlfriend) and so on. MW1 has you shoot the unarmed and even sleeping / drunk sailors on board of the freighter on the very first level as well. Oh, and let’s not even talk about the millions enslaved or murdered in Total War (SACK VILLAGE) / Defcon / etc.
What’s the outrage? Just because it’s larger in scale / more detailed, or because the player isn’t one of the good guys?
The naiveté I’ve seen from some people over this matter is absurd – The game labels the player a good guy, and it’s A-OK (MW1, GTA, tons of other games), but if you label the player a terrorist it’s suddenly the most disgusting thing?
@Baris: Because it puts you in a role that is not enjoyable at all, and one that is totally unexpected (Just as in MW1).
It also forces you to make a decision about the relationship between you and your character, similar to, let’s say, playing on the Dark Side in Knights of the Old Republic (Add that one to the list above, you can do some really nasty stuff in KOTOR). Will the players continue to act along in such a situation and keep up the game’s masquerade, or will they refuse the mechanics of the game world?
You say that they need a huge backstory beforehand to make this mission good, I claim the opposite: The effect on the player would be greatest if that is the very first scene in the game.
It begins like any other FPS, you and your “squad” start out in an enclosed space and then enter a huge, noisy place.
Many first-time players react to that by clinging to their AI mates – But what if those suddenly open up on unsuspecting travelers? What will the reaction be? And what does that tell us about the influence not just of our games but also about group pressure and power?
I just hope they collect player reactions like Valve do, because I sure want to know how many people actually throw down the controller and return their game in that instant, as many love to claim.
Of course I can’t be certain that this isn’t just some huge publicity trick by IW (maybe even a IW-made fake leak created for that purpose), but it’s certainly bloody well done.
Perhaps I was too hasty in judging it.
I do agree that the reaction it would elicit from people seeing the level for the first time when they boot up the game and assume they’re being thrown into a generic good guys fight terrorists is interesting. However, I’m not sure I follow you on it forcing you to make a decision about the relationship between you and your character. Unless there’s an option to turn on your terrorist buddies or there’s a backstory explaining how your character started out as a normal young man and became a terrorist I can see reactions simply being “Well that was bullshit, why the hell did the game just force me to play a boring mission that I didn’t even have the satisfaction of being the good guy in?”. Which is quite similar to the reaction I expect I would have.
GTA4 usually gives you the choice before shooting unarmed people and innocents, such as Dwayne’s girlfriend. The game doesn’t require you to kill indiscriminately; its even possible to shoot only to incapacitate rather than kill in most firefights, excluding when fighting key characters.
I think that a lot of the controversy has to do with the fact that it’s in an airport, which presumably people will think is insensitive.
Also, in GTA, killing innocents isn’t part of the narrative.
What happens if you kill all your terrorist friends?
That is exactly what i was thinking. Why not just shoot them as you exit the lift? Most likely nothing will happen but i’d like to see things go a different way from the events in that video.
The game will end “Alyx died, and is needed to save earth” or something like that. I suppose.
You can probably kill one of the terrorists before the others mow you down (inevitable death).
Can’t help but think it’s a poor decision to include that level… simply because it has nothing interesting from gameplay standpoint. A snail pace escort mission with very little else but shooting helpless targets with few of them fighting back while clearly outmatched? Really, is that it?
The whole thing is hanging on the initial shock value, and when that goes away some 10-15 seconds into the experience there’s nothing left. Makes one wonder if the rest of game also relies on such gimmicks and how much of actual game is really there.
It’s real. Clips of the level can be seen in the MW2: Infamy trailer on Steam.
The people should poop themselves after they die.
It’s realistic and too many games ignore because they’re afraid of offending the religious right, or the PC police liberals, i forgot which.
BARF!.
People, THIS IS NOT THE OPENING LEVEL. The video clearly shows it is the fourth mission in Act I after what appears to be the icy cliff level (going by the image next to the mission). I’m sure there will plenty of context.
Also, it’s not a terorist. The video clearly shows it’s Bobby Kotick after what appears to be the MW2 boycott. I’m sure there will be plenty of context.
Hm. An actual terrorism simulator.
What’s interesting about this level is that while you’re not required to shoot the civilians, it’s psychologically engineered to make you. Your “allies” start shooting, and you reflexively start shooting too.
The really interesting thing is that this is “in character” for you. You’re supposed to be in deep cover trying to fit into the terrorism outfit.
But no matter how many civvies you massacre, I somehow doubt that you can change the ending script and keep from being executed outed as a mole at the end. So I think the message there is muddled- you gain none of the promised profit from the atrocities you commit, so what’s the point in asking the ethical question in the first place? Is the moral of the story, “don’t compromise your beliefs to try to fit in, because you’re going to get executed anyway”?
I wonder what happens on that level if you start shooting your allies (specifically, the guy who executes you).
Very good points.
Although if you cap the guy who shoots you then the single player campaign would be pretty short.
I can’t say I was bothered by it in any way. In fact I wish more games would use an angle like this. Collateral damage as well as playing a sequence where you see the game from the antagonist’s point of view are both criminally underused as a storytelling method in gaming (let alone shooters). It would also make enemies slightly less faceless/red shirt-esque when you see the rationality for what they’re doing first hand.
I highly doubt IW will use the fact that you’re undercover for any real character depth or exploration. It seems more for shock value than it is to make us question the ‘heroes’ actions in these situations (especially given the ending of that video). It’s obviously more a means to make the villains seem all that more worthy of having several clips emptied into them and the special forces as unquestionable heroes, like any other shooter.
I would gladly be mistaken, but I doubt I will be.
I doubt this’ll be it, but it’d be interesting to have something (anything really, a tv drama, a movie, whatever) that actually realistically showed the terrorist’s perspective.
most movies, tv shows, etc… show them as either crazy fanatics, or intelligent masterminds…but they rarely actually have them explain WHY they’re doing what they’re doing. The only movie i remember getting close was The Siege… and then it totally blew it by resorting to the “evil terrorist mastermind” stereotype at the end.
I don’t mean they should justify their actions of course, but it’d be nice to explore why they’re so willing to die and kill innocents for their cause… what made them come to that stage, etc..
Can anyone provide a rough translation of the briefing at the start of the video?
I have to say (again?) that this video make me sad, but I choose to respect IW (even with my feelings of vengueance after the dedicated server fiasco).
Tecnical comment:
It seems since the game is highly scripted. Much like a interactive 3D FMV game. That some scenes don’t make sense at all. We see survivors running TO the terrorist. People “saving” other victims moving it.. TO the terrorist.
I suppose this is because these script sequences are designed so the players is somewhere else, and may make sense, but that this player is moving out of that imaginary linear trail “ruining” the sequence.
If that is false, the whole thing is poorly done, in a way. Since If people shot in a mall, most peple will run to the doors to exit, and a pile of bodys will form there, tryiing to escape… before the terrorist get to the doors, theres will be none, but about 60 persons on the door, on the floor, killed / wounded by other victims tryiing to escape.
This fictional “victims” seems to wait in the interior of shop and EXIT these shops just wen the terrorist come. It don’t make sense at all.
Continuing with my tecnical comment, I don’t like what IW is doing with scripted sequences. A scripted sequence where a copter explode in a expectacular way, is impresive, but one that meet the player but become rapidly a inmersion breaking factor is bad use of scripting sequences.
So, wen you are playing MW2, are you playing a videogame, or “moving forward” a 3D movie? It looks to me like MW2 is almost into FMV territory.
Also, what replay value have a game full of scripted sequences? sure, is fun the first time, but once you know everything is scripted It will totally chocking to see people die the same way, the same “casual” events. It will be like that movie of Bill Murray… ,”Groundhog Day”.
On the other hand, scripted events tend to be far more memorable than random happenstance.
Man, Groundhog Day is great!
I’ve seen it lots of times.
There is literally no evidence that this event has to be played through the same way each time.
“There is literally no evidence that this event has to be played through the same way each time.”
Scripts events are like tiny “3D movies”, more this ones that maybe use motion capture, so the logical conclusion is that these “events” will reproduce exactly every time. Non-scripted stuff will be random, but scripted events, like a truck derrailing and breaking a pilar (non in this video) will be exactly equal in every way.
Good news: If the game is full of these tiny scripts events, maybe you will miss some, so these will be “new” to you on the next replay.
More good news: Half-Life2 game is built using some of these script events, and is awesome, but on the other part Valve somehow know how to use these events, and are administered for a reason. Here looks like are just “eyecandy, for the sake of eyecandy, and because we have a budget the size a small country”-sake.
I remenber a event in HL2, where a door is break by a soldier with the foot. If you open such door before the soldier enter, the soldier still “use the foot” on the invisible door.
Maybe MW2 will be a “Just don’t think, see and feel” game…
The leaks that happen to showcase controversial things like the 3rd person gameplay and the first sequence could also have been set up to create buzz as a counter to the drop in interest by PC gamers because of the dedicated server issue, but that’s a dumb idea.
I guess IW doesen’t like to play with a (commercialy at least) winning formula.
I liked Cod4:MW, but I said at the time the formula, endless respawning enemies, totally scripted sequences, near total linearity, hadn’t changed since the original and is getting old.
I’d be willing to stake my life on the fact that if you decided you were morally opposed to this action and decided to shoot down your “team” instead, the mission would end saying “Friendly fire will not be tolerated!”
I’ve dabbled, but never really invested any time in. I’d argue there’s a difference between the cartoon silliness of GTA and the somewhat real looking but I suppose there isn’t. Yes, I know, I’m a massive weirdo because I don’t get a kick out of killing civillians, I understand.. there’s very little point me presenting my point of view.
I’m sure this whole terrorism thingy is very brave and artistic, but at the end of the day, I really don’t enjoy shooting cowering people in the head.
I’d join in in saying it’s a perfectly legit story telling scene if it wasn’t simply the fact that due to the style of game, the player is FORCED to do it. Where’s the option to say “To hell with my cover” and go down fighting to try and save people.. there isn’t one.. because it’s a FPS. I don’t find it disturbing or anything.. just not fun.. which is surely a perfectly valid viewpoint when giving an opinion on game?
Heh,
shooting guys with guns in a linear level = bland game
shooting civillians in a linear level = art eh?
Sorry.. no matter how.. *cough* artistic it is, still not my idea of fun. I play these sort of things to have fun y’see. Not to feel smug about how artistic the experience of being forced to massacre a bunch of people is.
@ Dain.
Yeah cause we all know if something isn’t fun its not worthwhile.
I mean whats Schindlers List all about? Whats fun about a bunch of jews getting killed? Why do people want to feel smug about genoicde? Give me High School Musical 2 any day.
to quote peep show
“Why’s everything got to be fun? ‘Hey, Watson and Crick have discovered the double helix!’ ‘Did they do it on a skateboard?’ ‘No.’ ‘Oh, well fuck off then, I’m not interested.’”
Games are not like films, no matter how hard they try.
I doubt I’d have enjoyed schindler’s list if it had required me, every few minutes to press a button in order to execute a jew. If your analogy was correct, we’d be able to produce a death camp management game and say “Look, it’s not mean to be fun, it’s ART.”
Games for me will always be about enjoying myself. Sorry, I guess I’m just not highbrow enough to appreciate the beauty of firing a large gun at cowering civillians.
Dain, have you ever played a GTA game?
“I doubt I’d have enjoyed schindler’s list if it had required me, every few minutes to press a button in order to execute a jew. ”
Actually, I’d like to see a Schindler’s List game like that. You have to pick the ones to save, and the ones to kill, and you have to kill them *by your own hand.* Not a cutscene, mind you. No, you’re in control the entire time.
MGS3 showed that forcing the player to kill someone they care about can be absolutely heartbreaking.
If you’ve played it, you know the bit. Press square to kill Boss.
http://www.liveleak.com/item?a=view&token=364_1256689255
I wonder why the airport? They could “do” a school, for example. Or a hospital. Preferably, a maternity ward. With flamethrowers, too. To only show that terrorism is baaaaad.
To those who asked about the translation: the context: the player seems to be a CIA operative undercover in Makarov’s band of terrorists. Makarov sends them to stage an attack on the Russian airport in such a way that the authorities would believe that it is the work of the westerners. I recon, this justifies everything: we do not want to blow our cover, do we?
I am the guy who half way through Sixth Sense blurted out "I think he's a ghost too" and then had to listen to people call me unpleasant names for the remaining half of the film.
Also this post was meant as a response to a comment that's up there someplace and it didn't work. So now I just look mentally ill. Again.
I think he’s got a valid point. If you went to see Schindler’s List but got served High School Musical 2 mid-way through you’d have an understandable reason to be disappointed, no? It works the other way, too.
Anyone who says this video raises lots of deep and complex issues [has a different opinion to me and gee, I just can't stand that] is an idiot. The first modern warfare was a simple man-shoot, this is going to be a simple man-shoot too. No “complex story” or any of that, it’s just a daft game with delusions of a good story. This video, combined with the price and no dedicated servers has made me positive I’m not buying the game. As another thing, the mass media will rip this game to threads now, and I actually don’t have a problem with that in this case. It’s a stupid premise for a level, and NOT one that will be regarded favourably.
So basically, you’re saying it’s Half-Life 2?
The idea is sound: take the perspective of a terrorist (you are a CIA agent, but you’re still seeing things from their eyes), the only problem is the execution of it.
In games, killing the bad guys is justified purely by the fact that we’re doing right and they’re obviously wrong. It’s the mainstream Hollywood way of doing things (as one poster put it). There’s no grey area and usually the bad guys are presented without any humanization at all. Often too many times this creates a biased stance towards the group that the archetypal antagonists represents.
When I first heard about this I was happy to see that IW was taking on a taboo subject in gaming, letting us play the bad guys, but then I realized the context and the audience of the game. Your average COD player isn’t going to understand the implications of his actions. There’s no humanization of the bad guys, no motivation, you’re just gunning innocent people down in an airport. We’ll have to wait and see what more IW does with this, but personally I see this as a cheap way of making the bad guys evil baby eaters.
Apparently this is exactly what the intention behind it was, yes.
http://www.vg247.com/2009/10/28/confirmed-leaked-mw2-civilians-vid-as-real-skippable-through-checkpoints/
“The scene establishes the depth of evil and the cold bloodedness of a rogue Russian villain and his unit. By establishing that evil, it adds to the urgency of the player’s mission to stop them.”
and this part is hillarious:
“Modern Warfare 2 is a fantasy action game designed for intense, realistic game play that mirrors real life conflicts, much like epic, action movies.”
Yes, the ‘epic action movies’ mirror real life conflicts in a realistic manner. Oh dear.
In case people haven’t seen this: http://gamepolitics.com/2009/10/28/leaked-modern-warfare-2-footage-shocks.
There is going to be a massive, massive wave of media and political anger of this. Watch this space…
lol@terrorists manually killing hundreds of victims with firearms without facing any resistance.
They use bombs. Or at least chemical/biological weapons.
This just seems so unrealistic and not plausible.
Look, they even faked a wiki site:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Mumbai_attacks
Oh no, that’s real.
Geez, of course they use firearms. Every terrorist must have an assault rifle.
But I mean, It’s not like THAT. This MW2 scene looks so fake, as someone already mentioned, these civilians are actually helping terrorists kill them.
I might discuss here the best ways of murdering masses and attack planning, but I hope there is no need for that.
Just because you’d do something differently in your head, doesn’t mean that’s how it works in reality. See above link for evidence – or watch an episode of America’s Stupidest Bank Robbers et al.
This is the official song for IW and Activision from all COD fans around the world.
Enjoy!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbN0g8-zbdY
DAIN:
Get off your persecution horse. I can not read 3/4 of what you have written because I keep stopping when you say things like:
Sorry, I guess I’m just not highbrow enough to appreciate the beauty of firing a large gun at cowering civillians.
Shut up. Just stop saying that.
When did ignorance become a virtue?
1980, at least in the US.
(that was a reply to Funky Badger)
Reagan?
Ive been doing this in every RPG for years.
Kill every civilian, ally and enemy in the level
Watching this video felt similar and a bit stale because of it.
Ive been doing this in every RPG for years.
*save game*
Kill every civilian, ally and enemy in the level
*load game*
Watching this video felt similar and a bit stale because of it.
Mumbai sim, Beslan sim, 9-11 sim. I’m not against slippery slopes but i don’t like standing on one myself.
Russians executing German prisoners (CoD5)?
Concur with Dracko… one of the most common complaints is no games “risk” anything or try anything different. And then one does…
Good, bring them on! The only reservation I have is that they might not be done with due respect to the subject matter. If it can be done in a realistic way that properly displays all sides of the issue (rather than just Civilian Headshot! +5 Exp!) it will help people to understand what irregular conflicts mean, what the mindset of religious extremists is, and further it will challenge our morality.
I think this particular scene is a tremendous idea because it allows one to choose how they will morally deal with the issue using normal FPS mechanics. If you believe that the interests of the majority will be served by going along with the terrorists to gain their respect, one might choose to fire AT, but consistently miss the civilians. But it remains to be seen what Activision will actually do with this scenario.
Welcome to asymmetric warfare. Enjoy your stay.
Besides, it’s a great counter-point to the first game’s intro.
Best comment I heard relating to the controversy:
Is that a 9/11 conspiritard quote?
No. Why would it be?
Except in WWI the western powers +Russia were the bad guys and the Central powers were fighting for truth and freedom against a gang of terrorists.
dumbass read the DONT READ SPOILER….. BEFORE YOU COMMENT….