This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="charizard1605"][QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"]Why should developers have to avoid certain topics? Is it wrong to see both sides of a conflict now? Would world history be benefited if we ignored the German motives for WWII and just labeled them as monsters? Knowing the motivations for an action is the best way to understand that. Without knowing the "terrorists" side and only knowing one side, no understanding will ever happen, and the violence will only increase. If anything, we need more things to get us to think globally about issues.SpruceCabooseWorld War II, fair enough. But why do develoers want to depict terrorism through the terrorist's side? If they want to depict it, fine, but can't they at least be a bit more sensitive about it? I think not only that they can, but that they should. Seeing only "our" side is terribly lopsided. I am sure the terrorists feel that they are in the right, just like we feel that we are in the right. Take for example the occupation of Iraq by the US forces. Sure, the US sees itself as a police force for good in Iraq. I am sure that some of the people we would label terrorists would likewise call the US troops terrorists and they likely see themselves as a liberating force fighting oppression. Understanding that conflict from all sides is the best and only way to learn about the conflict and work towards fixing it. Obviously all such tasks are going to be delicate (see Six Days in Falluja), but I think it should not be taboo to tackle that subject matter. And you REALLY think that there can be similar justifications provided for, say, 9/11, or London or Mumbai???
Yes, we should spend precious time and energy getting worked up over video game content. It's so worthwhile spitting feathers over a gameconsidering the lack of real attrocities going on in the world today.
Everyone should get all offended and ban it I say, that's sure to fix the worlds problems and i'm convinced they have all stemmed from video gaming :roll:.
[QUOTE="NoRussian"]Yeah, you're presumably right, since this is from the CoD wiki: " * Makarov says "No Russian", so nobody will know that they are actually Russian (by speaking it), not Americans. The authorities would find Allen's dead American body, assume they were all Americans, and wage war on the U.S. "SaudiFurybut see the thing is, we all know the US's CIA and Russian intelligence are always exchanging information back and forth. I believe the US could of comprehensively explained the Russian's what was going on, and what just happened. but then again America needed more proof and that was the second campaign, which was trying to clear America's name. still i'd imagine the US would of put up their defenses and buy themselves enough time to prove to the Russians what was going on. eh...but if that was the case, we wouldn't have a game.
Plus they would not just find Allen's dead American body, but also the bodies of the two other members of the team Allen was with. Two members of the team was suppose to die at a point in the level. So that would give the CIA more credit, and also you can not shoot anyone, so with the, I didn't, the security cameras would of seen that. The level is pretty neat, but is one huge plot hole when you get down to it.
From what I have seen from videos, "No Russian" seems like an empty level. All you do is massacre citizens and fight off a few counterterrorism response teams. All of this could have been easliy explained and/or shown in a cut scene.
but see the thing is, we all know the US's CIA and Russian intelligence are always exchanging information back and forth. I believe the US could of comprehensively explained the Russian's what was going on, and what just happened. but then again America needed more proof and that was the second campaign, which was trying to clear America's name. still i'd imagine the US would of put up their defenses and buy themselves enough time to prove to the Russians what was going on. eh...but if that was the case, we wouldn't have a game.[QUOTE="SaudiFury"][QUOTE="NoRussian"]Yeah, you're presumably right, since this is from the CoD wiki: " * Makarov says "No Russian", so nobody will know that they are actually Russian (by speaking it), not Americans. The authorities would find Allen's dead American body, assume they were all Americans, and wage war on the U.S. "Chaos_HL21
Plus they would not just find Allen's dead American body, but also the bodies of the two other members of the team Allen was with. Two members of the team was suppose to die at a point in the level. So that would give the CIA more credit, and also you can not shoot anyone, so with the, I didn't, the security cameras would of seen that. The level is pretty neat, but is one huge plot hole when you get down to it.
HArdly a plot hole... the cia agent was still with them, and knew about the planned attack without warning the russian authorities, this makes the CIA liable.[QUOTE="charizard1605"][QUOTE="NoRussian"] That's like saying 9/11 was like the airport scene, and that it should be banned in America. What was so identical to Mumbai, taking into account the places were entirely different?NoRussianReally, we're going to discuss this further? Sigh, ok. Take any example you want, then. 9/11? Fine. Mumbai? Fine. London? Fine. I say Mumbai because Mumbai affected me the most, but if you want to use a different example, go ahead. My point is that the way the developers depicted terrorism in the level was in very bad taste, and they really should be careful in future, or they'll end up treading on some very important toes, more than they should have. No, we don't. It's OK if you don't want to, or if you find the airport scene offensive (although that makes you a bit girly :) , but you said it mirrored the Mumbai attacks without providing any evidence or so, and that's what bothering me. :P
how exactly does that make you girly :|....i dont think its worth discussing this issue, some people find it offensive and some people dont so just let it be.
[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="charizard1605"] And you REALLY think that there can be similar justifications provided for, say, 9/11, or London or Mumbai???Birdy09Absolutely. There was justification for Hiroshima and Nagasaki wasn't there? I'm glad that card was played. because that is by far the biggest act of terrorism. it wasnt terrorism it was a war crime which is much worse
But then you wouldn't be able to experience it, and that's what it's all about. ;)From what I have seen from videos, "No Russian" seems like an empty level. All you do is massacre citizens and fight off a few counterterrorism response teams. All of this could have been easliy explained and/or shown in a cut scene.
ragek1ll589
[QUOTE="Chaos_HL21"][QUOTE="SaudiFury"] but see the thing is, we all know the US's CIA and Russian intelligence are always exchanging information back and forth. I believe the US could of comprehensively explained the Russian's what was going on, and what just happened. but then again America needed more proof and that was the second campaign, which was trying to clear America's name. still i'd imagine the US would of put up their defenses and buy themselves enough time to prove to the Russians what was going on. eh...but if that was the case, we wouldn't have a game.Birdy09
Plus they would not just find Allen's dead American body, but also the bodies of the two other members of the team Allen was with. Two members of the team was suppose to die at a point in the level. So that would give the CIA more credit, and also you can not shoot anyone, so with the, I didn't, the security cameras would of seen that. The level is pretty neat, but is one huge plot hole when you get down to it.
HArdly a plot hole... the cia agent was still with them, and knew about the planned attack without warning the russian authorities, this makes the CIA liable. There are some, though. Plot Holes * It would seem rather strange that the terrorist attack would be blamed on the Americans as Lev and Kiril, two Russians, should have been found dead. ( It is possible that Makarov used political influence to overlook this detail, or they had fake American ID). * Security cameras should have captured all of the attackers, including Makarov, making it obvious that he was the terrorist behind the attack. However, it is very possible Makarov and his men disabled the cameras before the slaughter.[QUOTE="Chaos_HL21"][QUOTE="SaudiFury"] but see the thing is, we all know the US's CIA and Russian intelligence are always exchanging information back and forth. I believe the US could of comprehensively explained the Russian's what was going on, and what just happened. but then again America needed more proof and that was the second campaign, which was trying to clear America's name. still i'd imagine the US would of put up their defenses and buy themselves enough time to prove to the Russians what was going on. eh...but if that was the case, we wouldn't have a game.Birdy09
Plus they would not just find Allen's dead American body, but also the bodies of the two other members of the team Allen was with. Two members of the team was suppose to die at a point in the level. So that would give the CIA more credit, and also you can not shoot anyone, so with the, I didn't, the security cameras would of seen that. The level is pretty neat, but is one huge plot hole when you get down to it.
HArdly a plot hole... the cia agent was still with them, and knew about the planned attack without warning the russian authorities, this makes the CIA liable.He was deep cover, and has no contact with the CIA. It also wouldn't call of an invasion of the US. PLUS the attack was on an International Airport so other Civilians from other countires from around the world would of been there. Probably a number from the US. The FBI could of come in to investigate... The CIA would get into deep stuff, but it wouldn't call of an attack on the US, where it seems the Russians are targeting civilians.
[QUOTE="Birdy09"][QUOTE="Chaos_HL21"]HArdly a plot hole... the cia agent was still with them, and knew about the planned attack without warning the russian authorities, this makes the CIA liable. There are some, though. Plot Holes * It would seem rather strange that the terrorist attack would be blamed on the Americans as Lev and Kiril, two Russians, should have been found dead. ( It is possible that Makarov used political influence to overlook this detail, or they had fake American ID). * Security cameras should have captured all of the attackers, including Makarov, making it obvious that he was the terrorist behind the attack. However, it is very possible Makarov and his men disabled the cameras before the slaughter.Plus they would not just find Allen's dead American body, but also the bodies of the two other members of the team Allen was with. Two members of the team was suppose to die at a point in the level. So that would give the CIA more credit, and also you can not shoot anyone, so with the, I didn't, the security cameras would of seen that. The level is pretty neat, but is one huge plot hole when you get down to it.
NoRussian
Maybe russians thought americans planned it with the help of makarov.....
HArdly a plot hole... the cia agent was still with them, and knew about the planned attack without warning the russian authorities, this makes the CIA liable.[QUOTE="Birdy09"][QUOTE="Chaos_HL21"]
Plus they would not just find Allen's dead American body, but also the bodies of the two other members of the team Allen was with. Two members of the team was suppose to die at a point in the level. So that would give the CIA more credit, and also you can not shoot anyone, so with the, I didn't, the security cameras would of seen that. The level is pretty neat, but is one huge plot hole when you get down to it.
Chaos_HL21
He was deep cover, and has no contact with the CIA. It also wouldn't call of an invasion of the US. PLUS the attack was on an International Airport so other Civilians from other countires from around the world would of been there. Probably a number from the US. The FBI could of come in to investigate... The CIA would get into deep stuff, but it wouldn't call of an attack on the US, where it seems the Russians are targeting civilians.
True enough, but wasnt shepard the one that planned all of this? using makarov. the idea that the agent was identifiable was probably intentional on his behalf.[QUOTE="Chaos_HL21"][QUOTE="Birdy09"] HArdly a plot hole... the cia agent was still with them, and knew about the planned attack without warning the russian authorities, this makes the CIA liable.Birdy09
He was deep cover, and has no contact with the CIA. It also wouldn't call of an invasion of the US. PLUS the attack was on an International Airport so other Civilians from other countires from around the world would of been there. Probably a number from the US. The FBI could of come in to investigate... The CIA would get into deep stuff, but it wouldn't call of an attack on the US, where it seems the Russians are targeting civilians.
True enough, but wasnt shepard the one that planned all of this? using makarov. the idea that the agent was identifiable was probably intentional on his behalf. Makarov planned it. You're a CIA agent, your mission being to earn his trust. Not to be exposed, but you are in the end. Getting shot.[QUOTE="Birdy09"][QUOTE="Chaos_HL21"]True enough, but wasnt shepard the one that planned all of this? using makarov. the idea that the agent was identifiable was probably intentional on his behalf. Makarov planned it. You're a CIA agent, your mission being to earn his trust. Not to be exposed, but you are in the end. Getting shot. ... thats the small picture, Shepard planned the ENTIRE thing, including that to spark the war knowing he would have the unlimited resources to deal with Makarov after. Makarov is a hired gun, I was under the impression by the end of the game that it was infact shepard that hired him and planned the airport attack (hence why he kills roach and ghost..... and cleans house) .... Makarov was a pawn.He was deep cover, and has no contact with the CIA. It also wouldn't call of an invasion of the US. PLUS the attack was on an International Airport so other Civilians from other countires from around the world would of been there. Probably a number from the US. The FBI could of come in to investigate... The CIA would get into deep stuff, but it wouldn't call of an attack on the US, where it seems the Russians are targeting civilians.
NoRussian
No, we don't. It's OK if you don't want to, or if you find the airport scene offensive (although that makes you a bit girly :) , but you said it mirrored the Mumbai attacks without providing any evidence or so, and that's what bothering me. :P[QUOTE="NoRussian"][QUOTE="charizard1605"] Really, we're going to discuss this further? Sigh, ok. Take any example you want, then. 9/11? Fine. Mumbai? Fine. London? Fine. I say Mumbai because Mumbai affected me the most, but if you want to use a different example, go ahead. My point is that the way the developers depicted terrorism in the level was in very bad taste, and they really should be careful in future, or they'll end up treading on some very important toes, more than they should have.sikanderahmed
how exactly does that make you girly :|....i dont think its worth discussing this issue, some people find it offensive and some people dont so just let it be.
If you get offended by digital killing, then you're remotely girly, yes. :)No Russian testament to Iward's poor job at establishing a powerful, meaningful narrative in a game. That's about it really. Such wasted potential. skrat_01This.
It has possibly one of the most idiotic transitions I've ever seen. You go from a James Bond movie type level to......Steven Spielberg's Munich? WTF?
It was ridiculous.
[QUOTE="miless"]The Russian government removed the level from the game, so I don't think so. ;) But did that stop most Russians from getting the US version. Did Rockstar removing Hot Coffee stop us from getting it?Yeah touchy Americans get more offended by "No Russian" than the Russians themselves.
Weird.
NoRussian
[QUOTE="NoRussian"][QUOTE="miless"]The Russian government removed the level from the game, so I don't think so. ;) But did that stop most Russians from getting the US version. Did Rockstar removing Hot Coffee stop us in that manner Never said that, but they were quite offended.Yeah touchy Americans get more offended by "No Russian" than the Russians themselves.
Weird.
miless
This.[QUOTE="skrat_01"]No Russian testament to Iward's poor job at establishing a powerful, meaningful narrative in a game. That's about it really. Such wasted potential. heretrix
It has possibly one of the most idiotic transitions I've ever seen. You go from a James Bond movie type level to......Steven Spielberg's Munich? WTF?
It was ridiculous.
What's wrong with some variety?[QUOTE="heretrix"]This.[QUOTE="skrat_01"]No Russian testament to Iward's poor job at establishing a powerful, meaningful narrative in a game. That's about it really. Such wasted potential. NoRussian
It has possibly one of the most idiotic transitions I've ever seen. You go from a James Bond movie type level to......Steven Spielberg's Munich? WTF?
It was ridiculous.
What's wrong with some variety?When it has no context it fails. They might has well transported you to The land of OZ. And given the turn of events in that game it would have probably been more probable.What's wrong with some variety?When it has no context it fails. They might has well transported you to The land of OZ. And given the turn of events in that game it would have probably been more probable. Why wasnt there any context? you played as roach during the "james bond level" you played as a 1 time character in russian airpot, you play as the american soldier defending america and you play as SOAP once roach kicks the bucket, all around the same time in different locations.. how is that hard to comprehend?[QUOTE="NoRussian"][QUOTE="heretrix"]This.
It has possibly one of the most idiotic transitions I've ever seen. You go from a James Bond movie type level to......Steven Spielberg's Munich? WTF?
It was ridiculous.
heretrix
U mean u bought it bcause u want to kill russians!?amareen18
RUSSIAN HATER!!!
Back on topic, yeah the game is good, not amazing, but it's plain fun.
[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="charizard1605"] Really, we're going to discuss this further? Sigh, ok. Take any example you want, then. 9/11? Fine. Mumbai? Fine. London? Fine. I say Mumbai because Mumbai affected me the most, but if you want to use a different example, go ahead. My point is that the way the developers depicted terrorism in the level was in very bad taste, and they really should be careful in future, or they'll end up treading on some very important toes, more than they should have.charizard1605Why should developers have to avoid certain topics? Is it wrong to see both sides of a conflict now? Would world history be benefited if we ignored the German motives for WWII and just labeled them as monsters? Knowing the motivations for an action is the best way to understand that. Without knowing the "terrorists" side and only knowing one side, no understanding will ever happen, and the violence will only increase. If anything, we need more things to get us to think globally about issues. World War II, fair enough. But why do develoers want to depict terrorism through the terrorist's side? If they want to depict it, fine, but can't they at least be a bit more sensitive about it?
The terrorist side is important to understand, you lived in India, so you probably are aware of the Tamil Tigers, I lived for just under ten years having to be careful which roads I take because of a chance of bombings, have had friends caught in glass showers from blown up buildings. I also saw the racism that went both ways. The way the "police" would treat tamils, the way the army treated (read as kill) the civilians near Jaffna. If you read up about the conflict you will see both sides, one can be more right then another, but terrorists to one, are freedom fighters to another. You may not agree with the means, but it can be important to understand where they are coming from....
.
On that note though, No Russian has nothing to do with depicting an accurate representation of the terrorist side. It is much to black and white. Slaughtering civilians does not = understand the motivations and emotions behind terrorist activities...
[QUOTE="heretrix"]When it has no context it fails. They might has well transported you to The land of OZ. And given the turn of events in that game it would have probably been more probable. Why wasnt there any context? you played as roach during the "james bond level" you played as a 1 time character in russian airpot, you play as the american soldier defending america and you play as SOAP once roach kicks the bucket, all around the same time in different locations.. how is that hard to comprehend?Do you even understand what context means? Why would a undercover operative take part in a massacre of innocent civilians? It makes no goddamn sense.Context would be:[QUOTE="NoRussian"] What's wrong with some variety?Birdy09
Undercover dude is under for too long, falls under the influence of Makarov and decides to switch sides or gets really confused. Does a bunch of stuff leading up to the conclusion in the airport. Makarov finds out or already knew and blam.
That's context. Not some stupid cutscene with a couple of seconds of dialog and a general saying "You're gonna lose a piece of yourself son.." Then BOOM! You are in an airport killing people. The game was so damn short that they could have had a better transition to that event. There was no REASON for that to happen the way it did.
It was supposed to be a serious event. This was the thing that started an invasion on the US and it was treated like a minigame.
Why wasnt there any context? you played as roach during the "james bond level" you played as a 1 time character in russian airpot, you play as the american soldier defending america and you play as SOAP once roach kicks the bucket, all around the same time in different locations.. how is that hard to comprehend?Do you even understand what context means? Why would a undercover operative take part in a massacre of innocent civilians? It makes no goddamn sense.Context would be:[QUOTE="Birdy09"][QUOTE="heretrix"]When it has no context it fails. They might has well transported you to The land of OZ. And given the turn of events in that game it would have probably been more probable.
heretrix
Undercover dude is under for too long, falls under the influence of Makarov and decides to switch sides or gets really confused. Does a bunch of stuff leading up to the conclusion in the airport. Makarov finds out or already knew and blam.
That's context. Not some stupid cutscene with a couple of seconds of dialog and a general saying "You're gonna lose a piece of yourself son.." Then BOOM! You are in an airport killing people. The game was so damn short that they could have had a better transition to that event. There was no REASON for that to happen the way it did.
It was supposed to be a serious event. This was the thing that started an invasion on the US and it was treated like a minigame.
Maybe you haven't played the game. It clearly says that before you click to start the mission, and you can read about it. :) And I think it is good that it's included. It's not something every developer does and it was a fun level, and if you find it boring or uninteresting, you can just skip it. You won't lose any achievements, so why complain?Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment