Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[umiman]

SUPER MEGA SPOILER ALERTS prevent me from actually putting what the leaked footage was about... or not. Here's what happened:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

You're put into the shoes of an undercover CIA agent. In fact, you're undercover as one of the guys in the first Modern Warfare 2 trailer, where the terrorists are getting ready in an elevator. You come out of the elevator and slaughter a couple of hundred screaming, terrified, and very lifelike civilians in an airport before you kill the bloody shit out of all the police that come to help. You're given an LMG from the looks of it with a grenade attachment with plenty of ammo. Along the way, you slaughter civilians stuck in an elevator before you blow it off its cables, sending it plummetting down and exploding, kill people trying to rescue their husbands / wives, shoot the legs off of people dying on the floor, etc.

Activision said you also have the option of skipping the scene. Now personally, I'm really looking forward to it. In fact, I'll probably replay it repeatedly much like the AC 130 mission in the first Modern Warfare. But understandably, the very much calm and never impressionable internets is up in arms over this. Arguably, this makes sense. How about you guys? Do you also see it as horrific to slaughter innocents by the truckload or do you also have no soul?

Edit: the discussion is about whether this is actually marketing one step too far or just people overreacting again. You might be asking: but how is this different from the overreacting with Mass Effect's "leaked" sex scene, Resident Evil 4's racism or GTA's series of controversy? Well, see, this time, the general internet is not on the "it's just sex" or "it's just a game" side.

We're seeing a reversal of roles here. What does this mean? Would this be handled any differently?

[Sensei]

Leaked my ass, this is marketing.

[Aqizzar]

Other Games is a couple sections up.  I know you know this umiman.

Anywho, I was rather disappointed with Modern Warfare.  It's the only Call of Duty game I've played, so I don't know how indicative it is of the series, but to me, it wasn't really a FPS.  It was a collection of shooting-gallery style minigames, each with their particular gimmick from scene to scene.  While the idea of swapping sides (as it were) and gunning through a crowd of townies does appeal to my picaresque sympathy for the Devil in us all, I suspect I'll have all the fun I can have about 2/3s through the game.

And yeah, it was "leaked" intentionally to generate free advertising AKA buzz.  Nothing is ever organic anymore.

[Wooty]

Kind of a weird way to market, it seems like the added "controversy" would lose them as many sales as they gain. Don't forget that a third of the people who want this game are going to have to ask their parents to buy it for them.

[Gunner-Chan]

I really think they are going the wrong way with this game, first the PC fuckery and now a mission made to turn moral guardians heads... IW has lost it.

[umiman]

Aqizzar: Since you know that I know that, maybe you should've considered why I didn't put it there? Anyway, that's essentially what FPSes are, a collection of shooting gallery type missions. What kind of FPS do you play this isn't essentially, that? No wait, don't answer that. Not interested and it would go off topic.

Anyway, for those of you slow to the clue train, the discussion is about whether this is actually marketing one step too far or just people overreacting again. You might be asking: but how is this different from the overreacting with Mass Effect's "leaked" sex scene or GTA's series of controversy? Well, see, this time, the general internet is not on the "it's just sex" or "it's just a game" side.

We're seeing a reversal of roles here. What does this mean? Would this be handled any differently?

[HAMMERMILL]

This just sounds like viral advertisement to me.

Killing crowds of civilians is nothing new in the video game world. How is this video game any different from any other video game, like Grand Theft Auto?

Slightly better graphics?

[JoshuaFH]

So wait, shouldn't the undercover agent by trying to STOP the killing of civilians, and not helping them? Shouldn't he backstab them at the last moment to save lives?

[Aqizzar]

I would guess that his objective is to get even deeper into the organization to strike at it's core, ergo he has to ingratiate himself in the mid-level operation.  If that means killing civilians to earn their trust, well, when in Rome...

[JoshuaFH]

While not based on any credible info, something tells me that someone didn't do their research in this game...

[Shades]

So wait, shouldn't the undercover agent by trying to STOP the killing of civilians, and not helping them? Shouldn't he backstab them at the last moment to save lives?

That was my thought too, but maybe your just really bad at your job

[redacted123]

-

[IndonesiaWarMinister]

So wait, shouldn't the undercover agent by trying to STOP the killing of civilians, and not helping them? Shouldn't he backstab them at the last moment to save lives?

That was my thought too, but maybe your just really bad at your job

Maybe he's realised that terrorists have more fun.

This.

[Shades]

So wait, shouldn't the undercover agent by trying to STOP the killing of civilians, and not helping them? Shouldn't he backstab them at the last moment to save lives?

That was my thought too, but maybe your just really bad at your job

Maybe he's realised that terrorists have more fun.

So... more fun, better pay and unless your taking out more than quarter of a million people a day you'll never run out of targets....

I don't see a downside?

[andrea]

I am with aqizzar, probably he is trying to get deeper in the organization