• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Archie hits a new low at hyperbole (MW3 spoilers)

Bollocks

Member
Feb 7, 2010
4,054
232
1,105
Zombie James said:
This is such bullshit. You've bought and you're playing an M-rated game, why the need to a) Tell users they're going to see disturbing content and b) Give them the option to opt-out?
Cause that's something people have not signed up for when they bought the game. Just because it's M rated doesn't mean you can go ape shit and expect customers to take it all.
People still have their moral boundaries even when they buy M rated games.
 

daviyoung

Banned
Oct 20, 2010
21,892
0
680
England
Bollocks said:
Cause that's something people have not signed up for when they bought the game. Just because it's M rated doesn't mean you can go ape shit and expect customers to take it all.
People still have their moral boundaries even when they buy M rated games.

It's up to the rating's board to dictate the moral boundary, not the developer.
 

EmCeeGramr

Member
Jun 25, 2005
38,451
0
0
shuri said:
I can't believe this thread is full of grown men pouring their eyes out about a videogame cutscene where a super cartoon looking polygonal little girl gets 'killed' (yet you barely see anything). This is set in the same game where you will personally kill hundreds of humans using assault weapons, rocket launchers, explosives in close combat.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=27289554&postcount=737
shuri said:
I'm gonna sound over the top but..

When Scorpion returned from hell holding
Subzero's
spine, the way his body language was PERFECTLY expressed his regrets and anger. It's one of the first time that I feel that a videogame character really expressed well an emotion.

Props to the animation team, they REALLY did a good job here.
 

Anton Sugar

Member
Jul 26, 2007
34,861
0
1,010
 

KittenMaster

Member
Nov 22, 2007
13,163
0
0
The footage was just a screamer vid. It doesn't even really show you war, it just shows you an evil bad guy doing something evil.

To stay on-topic: EmCeeGramr you are my hero. I'm gonna show post #337 to all of my friends.
 

.GqueB.

Banned
Dec 6, 2008
16,781
1
0
Zombie James said:
This is such bullshit. You've bought and you're playing an M-rated game, why the need to a) Tell users they're going to see disturbing content and b) Give them the option to opt-out?

This is one of the reasons why No Russian was so badly executed. If you want something to be controversial or, more importantly, want users to experience something moving/shocking/immersive/engaging, don't give them the option not to do it, especially in an M-rated game. With No Russian specifically, if they gave you a pistol or a regular assault rifle instead of a huge pray and spray machine gun, and your terrorist buddies killed you if you weren't doing your part, it would have made the entire thing a lot more memorable and emotionally engaging.
I find it odd that the option is "Im going to be offended". Typically, the person wouldnt know what said event is so how would he know whether or not he'd be offended? Such a silly question.
 

jsnepo

Member
Dec 5, 2008
3,947
0
725
I don't know what's so controversial about it. There are far more disturbing scenes in video games like the one in Homefront.
 

KittenMaster

Member
Nov 22, 2007
13,163
0
0
Oh man I just realized the greater significance of that link once I realized who he was responding to.

Legendary.
 

FStop7

Banned
Jan 8, 2009
30,629
0
0
Los Angeles
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
I still the mission where you are a government official shooting up civilians with no justifiable end game is still a lot worse.

It's the latest trend, though. Battlefield 3 emulates it in the campaign. The target gameplay demo of Rainbow Six Patriots does, too.

It's really lame stuff.
 

test_account

XP-39C²
Mar 22, 2007
23,612
2
1,130
I always thought that the airport scene from MW2 was unecessary and tasteless. It could easily have been a short cutscene instead. Pity to hear if there are something similar in MW3. I kinda suspect that they include this type of stuff just to get free PR, which really sucks. I'm looking forward to MW3 regardless though, but i'm pretty sure that the game would have sold just as much even without these special scenes.
 

butter_stick

Banned
Nov 23, 2007
5,979
1
0
test_account said:
I always thought that the airport scene from MW2 was unecessary and tasteless. It could easily have been a short cutscene instead. Pity to hear if there are something similar in MW3. I kinda suspect that they include this type of stuff just to get free PR, which really sucks. I'm looking forward to MW3 regardless though, but i'm pretty sure that the game would have sold just as much even without these special scenes.
If it was a cutscene it would have no impact. The game making you play it is what made it so incredibly moving.
 

jim-jam bongs

Member
Dec 5, 2008
20,457
0
935
Emerald City
test_account said:
I always thought that the airport scene from MW2 was unecessary and tasteless. It could easily have been a short cutscene instead. Pity to hear if there are something similar in MW3. I kinda suspect that they include this type of stuff just to get free PR, which really sucks. I'm looking forward to MW3 regardless though, but i'm pretty sure that the game would have sold just as much even without these special scenes.

I think it's less to drum up sales immediately, and is more of a long-term mindshare building exercise to grab sales down the line (e.g. Christmas). The idea is that mainstream consumers will hear "popular video game Call of Duty blah blah shocking controversial scene blah blah here's an expert to tell you it's bad blah blah" and as long as they remember the "popular video game Call of Duty" part the next time they walk into the games section of a store then it's good PR.
 
Aug 2, 2007
15,210
0
0
butter_stick said:
If it was a cutscene it would have no impact. The game making you play it is what made it so incredibly moving.

It had no impact on me because it didn't make you play the role. It was a matter of walking through the massacre feeling like a massive twat because there was no incentive to join in with the slaughter and you couldn't attempt to prevent it. It might as well have been a cutscene.
 

test_account

XP-39C²
Mar 22, 2007
23,612
2
1,130
jim-jam bongs said:
I think it's less to drum up sales immediately, and is more of a long-term mindshare building exercise to grab sales down the line (e.g. Christmas). The idea is that mainstream consumers will hear "popular video game Call of Duty blah blah shocking controversial scene blah blah here's an expert to tell you it's bad blah blah" and as long as they remember the "popular video game Call of Duty" part the next time they walk into the games section of a store then it's good PR.
That might be indeed. But i think that it isnt necessary since Call of Duty is already such a known franchice at this point.
 

test_account

XP-39C²
Mar 22, 2007
23,612
2
1,130
butter_stick said:
If it was a cutscene it would have no impact. The game making you play it is what made it so incredibly moving.
Personally i dont need this type of impact in games. I played the scene, but i didnt shoot a single civilian. Like with the CoD games from World War 2, i dont want to play a scene where i am a SS guard going around in a consentration camp killing prisoners. It would be shocking, and it is something that unfortunately happened in real life, but i dont want to play something like that.
 

BGBW

Maturity, bitches.
Jan 19, 2007
54,012
0
1,140
They call this game realistic and yet they're trying to tell me an unchained bike and an unattended football can be left outside without being stolen? HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA! The team probably didn't even bother coming to London to do research and just based it off Google Streetview or maybe not...

The news footage afterwards shows the bomb going off just down the road from the Palace of Westminster (Pro Tip: Big Ben is the name of the bell in side the tower so I'm already knocking of at least 7 from the possible 10 marks this game can get for making that mistake) on the Victoria embankment.

Which brings up the issue of where the hell were they. They clearly were looking at the tower and yet if you're on the embankment that would mean the River Thames is on your left. However they had a magically non ribbed bike on their left. How is this possible? There aren't that many places to get a good unobscured view of the tower like that so it's almost as if that whole location has been made up; as someone said earlier in this thread, a 3D collage of things people associate with London.