I love how the commentator crew consists of 2 guys screaming at each other, some kind of soccer weatherman at 2:15 (kidding - I know he's the analyst), and one guy slouched over who doesn't even appear to be conscious.
Oh dear god. Did that random guy just claim Carr's entire fanbase is comprised of a bunch of cowards who like to sit in the dark and anonymously laugh at everyone but themselves?
How much of standup is based on making fun of everyone - including the audience?
Well, no matter the videogame precedent this scene is going to catch a lot of heat - and I figure ActiBlizz likes it that way.
*Spoilers ahead*
*No, I'm serious*
We know the game will be wildly popular. We now know its first level involves the player controlling the shooting of a large number of unarmed civilians running in terror. That combination of popularity and opening-intro-controversy will get the Jack Thompsons of the world back on the news talking about the game which, again, is likely more than just a happy PR coincidence for the publisher. Furthermore, we know the Jack Thompsons of the world don't even need a coherent argument or slice of reality to bash the entire spectrum of videogaming. No matter what artistic statement Infinity Ward is trying to make or no matter how 'normal' such a scene would be in an R-rated movie, they know they're going to be slammed over this.
Anyway:
As a game concept and mechanic, ignoring for the moment the likely upcoming controversy? Not sure if I like it. To me personally there was something deeper about Modern Warfare 1's movement restriction in the 1st level where the player watches a military coup through the eyes of a deposed president. The helplessness in controls reflected the helplessness of the situation and afforded the player more observation; by not having to decide where to walk and being literally taken for a ride, the player was instead able to focus their attention on watching the scene that unfolded. The design choice felt purposeful and, to me, increased the emotional affect.
This issue of control, to me, is a key distinction with the prior title versus the opening of Modern Warfare 2. Modern Warfare 2 allows the player to gun down those civilians and in a sense encourages it by requiring the player to keep up with the other terrorists who perform the same actions. I reserve full opinion since I've only seen the shakycam video, but on a conceptual level it just doesn't seem as purposeful. Being placed into the body of a civilian? That would have been interesting from a design standpoint as well; not necessarily better or worse, but I think you could have conveyed the same gameplay message. To me, the official PR response that "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" does not justify the choice from a design standpoint.
Again, clearly this is just ruminating on the designers' decisions without getting deep into the moral or PR aspects of the level. However, I do wonder just how much backlash this is going to get as a result.
Dennis Kucinich Raises a Valid Point on Health Care
Rep. Todd Akin fails the pledge of allegiance
The most excitable football presenter ever
President Shares Story About Malia Obama's Science Test
Beer truck flipped on an overpass
(keeps driving)
Geek Channel changing owners (That is if the staff is cool) (Geek Talk Post)
Inside the Ikea Table Factory.
Zero Punctuation: Washington DC
Colbert Report 11/3/09: Nailed 'Em
Tooting my own horn and saying thanks... (Sift Talk Post)
Fans Support Comedian Jimmy Carr Over Troop Joke
How much of standup is based on making fun of everyone - including the audience?
R O T T E N S E E D (soory ladies) (Bravo Talk Post)
Sagemind Sells Han Solo For A Shiny Ruby! (Scifi Talk Post)
Leaked footage of a Modern Warfare 2 level as a terrorist?
*Spoilers ahead*
*No, I'm serious*
We know the game will be wildly popular. We now know its first level involves the player controlling the shooting of a large number of unarmed civilians running in terror. That combination of popularity and opening-intro-controversy will get the Jack Thompsons of the world back on the news talking about the game which, again, is likely more than just a happy PR coincidence for the publisher. Furthermore, we know the Jack Thompsons of the world don't even need a coherent argument or slice of reality to bash the entire spectrum of videogaming. No matter what artistic statement Infinity Ward is trying to make or no matter how 'normal' such a scene would be in an R-rated movie, they know they're going to be slammed over this.
Anyway:
As a game concept and mechanic, ignoring for the moment the likely upcoming controversy? Not sure if I like it. To me personally there was something deeper about Modern Warfare 1's movement restriction in the 1st level where the player watches a military coup through the eyes of a deposed president. The helplessness in controls reflected the helplessness of the situation and afforded the player more observation; by not having to decide where to walk and being literally taken for a ride, the player was instead able to focus their attention on watching the scene that unfolded. The design choice felt purposeful and, to me, increased the emotional affect.
This issue of control, to me, is a key distinction with the prior title versus the opening of Modern Warfare 2. Modern Warfare 2 allows the player to gun down those civilians and in a sense encourages it by requiring the player to keep up with the other terrorists who perform the same actions. I reserve full opinion since I've only seen the shakycam video, but on a conceptual level it just doesn't seem as purposeful. Being placed into the body of a civilian? That would have been interesting from a design standpoint as well; not necessarily better or worse, but I think you could have conveyed the same gameplay message. To me, the official PR response that "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" does not justify the choice from a design standpoint.
Again, clearly this is just ruminating on the designers' decisions without getting deep into the moral or PR aspects of the level. However, I do wonder just how much backlash this is going to get as a result.
TL;DR
DAY of the Dead Trailer (2008 Remake)
Curb Your Enthusiasm- No Tour For You
Left 4 Bed 2
Groping A Womans Breasts Cures Lockjaw
demon_ix Posseses Ruby! (Sift Talk Post)
Drax (Member Profile)
In reply to this comment by Drax:
In reply to this comment by Kevlar:
>> ^Sketch:
Who the hell even owns an icepick any more let alone drives around with one!? That's a red flag.
Actually, I think the question is more who the hell needs an icepick in Jamaica?
It's rare that I burst out into spontaneous laughter due to a comment...