I've played the mission a few times and I still find it fine. There are air port officers that try to stop you but the lead gunman mows them down as they run out and "try" to stop you. You're body armor is more than enough protection against anything they put up against you in the airport. If you play it again you will see new things you may have missed the first time [like the officer fighting with the lead gun man] not to mention it adds a good bit of story and feeling into it rather then just showing us a clip of it. They choose to let players be in the middle of it and I think it was done well. I might go play it again because you see new stuff everytime. Great death animations.
Yeah i noticed that every time you play it there arent always people wounded on the ground trying to get away (because people dont always just wound them). and i think watching the people crawl away makes it better, and more, powerful i suppose.
I liked it. It was something much different that what Infinity Ward typically does, depicting you as a just soldier killing for the sake of the United States (or another country), justice, and peace. Also, I feel like that was the first time in any game I played that I got to kill so many AI bots at one time. It was very empowering as a player to be able to do that. Also, if you were too trigger happy to ignore the intricate storyline: Spoiler you were actually an undercover soldier trying to get close to Makarov. You were NOT ACTUALLY A TERRORIST, even though you did kill those innocent Russians.
Lol, you kill innocent civilians and in the end, not only does it not work as your cover, but you get blamed and a war starts over you.
if you read the rest of the thread i dnt think we care if theres worse out there. and im not sure if the war started over you. wasnt there already some conflict going on?
No the invasion started over that level exclusively. It was probably the only element of the plot that was repeatedly hammered in. And you missed it. Congratulations. But really.. You go to watch a horror, thriller or even drama film for the emotion and intensity, and a part of you wants to push itself to the limits. We are constantly learning human beings, and we are always discovering new things about ourselves. What is our limit when it comes to shock or emotional horror? In no way does this level differ from one of the biggest elements of the film industry, apart from the fact that you are in complete control, and the gaming industry is far superior. I played the level through without firing a shot or killing a single person. Now how does this scenario differ to witnessing and taking part of the death of 30,000 U.S. soldiers in the first game, or did somebody miss that.
It's simply because the Russian government cannot handle anything that demotes Russia in any way. Other countries have done the same thing, Germany to be the most prominent in these actions (because of all the WWII games).
I had no problem with it what so ever... and I'm surprised when I hear my friends over Xbox LIVE going 'oh, this is horrible, as if you have to kill these people, I can't believe it, this is disgusting', even though most of my friends have no problem mowing civilians down on GTA, I understand Aces point about 'people desperately crawling away for their lives and people dragging other injured people away to safety and you are just killing them mercilessly' but I don't think that this makes the mission any more 'out of line'.
well seeing that i dont have the game id say that you should stfu. and weve already covered this. soldiers are different from civilians because they take lives blablabla.
That's not how both of our governments and media broadcasters see it. When did you tune into CNN and listen to a report about Iraqi civilian deaths? Not for a while. I bet you saw more than 20 times more reports on the some 2976 victims of 9/11 than you do in victims of the iraq war, and yet there are more than 20 times more victims of the iraq war than of 9/11 and soldiers who have died at war for their country in iraq. I hope nobody takes me, the foreigner, touching on your matters personally, but i'm only displaying the numbers here. I am not denying that all of this was a travesty, but some things tend to be difficult to bring across, hence why most avoid these matters. Ok, so first you acknowledge you have not experienced this, which makes your opinion both invalid and irrelivent, then you ironically tell me to stop posting because apparently this discussion is over? Lets get this straight i'm not promoting this in games, i am just trying to bring across why things like this are everywhere in our modern lives, and how it is of major benefit to the plot and experience, as IW have tried to explain. If you don't like it, then IW was kind enough to give you a menu option where you can skip the mission, and continue blindly killing people without any motive or just cause.
okay, um, i never said i never played this level. i played this level several times, and befor playing the level, i watched it on youtube. i have experienced it. i never told you to stop posting, i never said you were promoting this in games. in fact i am. i like it alright. but "it was the only thing in the plot that was repeatedly hammered in". i dont have the game, it was a simple question, calm the hell down. arguing over how killing soldiers OR terrorists is different than killing civilians imo is completely irrelevant. the difference is clear to anyone that actually thinks about and/or isnt just trying to be annoying. and we're not talking about iran buddy boy. we're talking about russia. in a fictional event. im not really sure what your trying to say with those statistics about 9/11. if youre trying to say those were civilians taking lives, read the whole thread because we mentioned terrorism several times. which 9/11 was an act of terrorism therefore people view it differently, again, then innocent civilians. also stated previously, it is different because even if there are civilians who kill people, these civilians in the level were seemingly doing nothing wrong, and you are slaughtering them. might as well close the thread. Sarge Edit: There are so many mistakes and logical fallacies in this post I had to edit into it and comment on the matter. For your edification, your opinion (which was expressed in a rambling, retarded, illogical way) is NOT fact and will NOT result in the lock of this thread. Furthermore, stating that because you just mentioned something that in your own mind is so glorious and correct should result in a valid debate being closed demonstrates a lack of understanding about what a debate is. Point being, if you're going to try and dispute something, do it in a coherent, syllogistic manner (or some other easy logical reasoning) not some crude excuse for an opinion. Why did I edit rather than post? Because this is offtopic but needed to be shown anyway. Grow up. Fresh, remove this and you get another infraction. Being a dumbass lends you open to criticism, if you can't handle it, leave.
Aren't soldiers just trying to get on with their lives? Aren't they just trying to make a living doing something that they can do? A soldier also protects lives. Yet that makes his value in society less? Because he kills lives? And aren't a majority of terrorists put there for fear of their family, their lives or through propaganda. Do these things make their lives less then civilians. And both these groups have an interest in protecting the interest of their people. And just because taking the lives of others, their value as humans goes down? Does our society somehow believe that you're value as a human goes down when you take up arms? Does our society just believe that when a person can't fight back, it's too much but when they can, it's fair to kill them? I really don't believe that them being civilians is the 'cause for the 'over the top' claim. 1. The advantages to attacking civilians is debatable at best. Doing it to the US or Russia would incite outroar and even bring down the fury of the entire nation against you. In fact, very few nations would be cowed by such an attack. 2. Not really asking why it would be disturbing. Rather, I'm asking why the scene is over the top. Is it that it's in an airport? Is it unarmed people? Is it that they're civilians? What?
omg i never said it was over the top. i hear thousands of people on youtube and xbl at my friends saying how horrible it was. i wanted more opinions. i havent heard anybody on here saying that its over the top, or out of line. they all say its okay, thats why i said this might as well be locked. and, i dont really remember, ever saying the lives of soldiers, or terrorist are less than those of civilians. what i was trying to say (multiple times) is that players seem to have less of a problem killing "enemy" soldiers and terrorists, because through the media, and such, they are taught that enemy soldiers and terrorists are just trying to kill. and while the player is most likely a civilian, the player then feels differently for the people being slaughtered at the airport.
exactly. maybe the players mind subconsciously relates the fact that those people are civilians like you. i thought it was basic morals of right and wrong but according to sarge im a retard. so who knows.
Isn't the title of the thread, 'No Russian' Out of Line?' ? And over the top, out of line. Same thing, different wording. Hence, I said Society. Never said that you did. Gamers have proven countless times that they don't care about innocent people. And what I asked is what made people think that the scene was out of line? Not gamers, people. Society as a whole. EDIT: I apollogise for my lack of concise thought and being rather short.
like i JUST said. i didnt say that it was out of line. or over the top. notice the question mark in the thread title. that means its a question. asking your opinion. i have said, MANY times that i do not view this level as out of line, or over the top in anyway. but i can understand if people DO FEEL THIS WAY. also, gamers are people. and you cant assume that all gamers are emotionless towards the thought of killing innocent people. i know some (myself included) dont care. but there are many who dont like it. as for the question of why people may think it is out of line, i believe i said it 3 to 4 times previously.