If I had my way, every gamer who thought they knew game design would be banned from purchasing games.Originally Posted by TheJare
If I had my way, every gamer who thought they knew game design would be banned from purchasing games.
The nice thing is that if you design them stupidly, it turns out you don't need a ban to keep people from buying a poorly designed game.
Why, examples abound!
That'd be like banning football fans from watching football.
Have we pondered whether or not shooting the people is necessary? Or what you're terrorist buddies will think if you shoot them in the kneecaps, instead of mowing down innocents with them? Maybe you can give the civilians some of your magic medpacks when their backs are turned.
Somehow, I don't think we have the full context for the scene.
not necessary.
The civilians are zombies? Democrats? Uninsured? What?
Wow, 11 pages already. I suppose being controversial works sometimes.
What if this sequence helps the Republicans in 2010?
I agree. Timed missions are grounds for ball punching.(If I had my way, every designer that decided to put a timer on a mission would be fired on the spot)
"You will have fun when and how we say you will have fun."
Confirmed and a response
http://www.vg247.com/2009/10/28/conf...h-checkpoints/
Thank God we still have an open platform like the PC to fight this kind of game developer fascism.
It's too bad they're sticking with the childlike Russian ultranationalist angle. It's always seemed like that was the bad guy for pussies in the 21st century who don't want to go all out with an Islamic terrorist head honcho. Maybe next decade?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.
Last time it was an Arab military leader being manipulated by a Russian ultranationalist. Maybe this time the Russian ultranationalist will turn out to be being manipulated by an Arab military leader. Or by Hillary Clinton. Or IKEA.
Last edited by Bahimiron; 10-28-2009 at 09:55 AM. Reason: Not that it matters. Tim's quote still contains my revealing typo. Oh, Hillary, how I burn for you.
Dedicated server farm operators. Their cold-blooded evil prevents a smooth experience for casual gamers.
Isn't AO the only rating that actually means it's rated for 18 and up?Modern Warfare 2 is a fantasy action game designed for intense, realistic game play that mirrors real life conflicts, much like epic, action movies. It is appropriately rated 18 for violent scenes, which means it is intended for those who are 18 and older.
I asked you an earnest, straight up question, Cliffski. I asked you to specifically define your fears. Is there some reason that you chose to snark instead of doing so? Are you unable to specifically define exactly what subconscious effect you fear this game will have, or something? Otherwise, it should be pretty easy for you to just explain yourself. I'm not insulting you, despite your rude response - I'm just continuing to ask you to clearly explain the danger you see to our subconscious here. Are you capable of doing that, Cliffski?
Infinity Ward isn't marketing this clip. It was leaked by a french douchebag, and Infinity Ward - or Activision - has been repeatedly DMCA'ing the thing wherever it turns up on the internet, as fruitless as that is. They've specifically been doing the opposite of marketing it.
Weren't you one of those jackasses who liked the last bits of Halo 1?
Yes. The M-Mature rating is "17+"
That was the first thing I thought when I read that, too. So unless the rating will be AO, even Activision doesn't know what they're doing.
As in, like, practice?
Anything is better than global media magnate.
I believe we can prove the link to video game violence and real life violence. Here is my logic:
1. Infinity Ward creates a sequence in MW2 where the player kills innocents.
2. Frenchy uploads a video of the sequence online.
3. Thread starts discussing the sequence on Qt3.
4. I read the thread.
5. I have an overpowering urge to hit someone.
Thats pretty well proof, though you can blame the game, frenchy or literacy as the primary catalyst.
VG247 is based in the UK, so it was likely a Activision UK rep responding. Here there's an 18 rating.
-
I think he's assuming association implies causation. However, after two decades of being told to eat Big Macs, I never have and never will. If advertising worked at all like cliffski is implying, we'd be dead as a culture and society. Personally, while I feel that someone replaying this scene over and over again is obviously unhealthy, the only people to be "damaged" by this scene are already fucked up. Playing MW2 is not, statistically or realistically, going to make me into a murderer.
But it worked so well for James Bond!
Stamper!!!!
This whole deal is just a big shrug for me. While I get why some people are disgusted/pissed off etc. by this, you can skip it apparently. I read far more things every day that go on in the real world that piss me off that at times I've needed a "violent" outlet to vent frustration. Say like when reading about a grandma who gets shot to death by the cops during a no-knock warrant because she dared to grab her pistol in the dead of night to defend herself against an unknown assailaint (who sadly were cops), all because the cops got the wrong address on a suspected drug dealer. Or say, federal hate crimes legislation (blatantly tagged onto a spending bill) that put one group as more important than others or the Hofstra and Duke false rape horror shows.
Hell, goatse or tubgirl disgust me more than this.
Wow, you've never had a Big Mac? That's impressive if you live in the US.
Complaining about the timed mission with respect to difficulty in MW requires an absurd level of detachment from what constitutes intelligent scaling of challenges. The game is a grenade-spamming, absurd-health bar enemy spawning catastrophe in that sense, and "pacing" is the least of its problems.
It is? Then I must be an impressive person. I sense a future QT3 poll.
Huh, I can't seem to find a link that hasn't been removed. Can someone post a working link so I can see what I'm supposed to be outraged about? I don't want to read the thread and get prematurely biased.
Edit: Nevermind, I lightly skimmed the thread and found a link.
Last edited by slikster; 10-28-2009 at 05:36 PM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote