MW2 - Violence Criticism by Keith Vaz

nheather · 10-11-2009, 5:55 PM

I read this article

BBC - dot.life: Vaz v Watson - Modern Warfare 2

yesterday, and was quite dismissive at the time. I thought he was just another one of these evangelists spouting that violent games are the root of all evil.

He comments on one part of the game where the player has the option to kill unarmed civilians. Again I was quite dimissive, thinking has he even played it or is he just spouting what he has heard.

But I played the level today (level 3 I think) and I was utterly shocked by it. I couldn't take part in any of the civilian killing and just left it to my AI team-mates.

There is a warning at the start of the whole game (not the level) asking whether you wanted to skip disturbing parts but I imagined this was akin to turning blood and gore on or off.

I was even more horrified when my son and his mates thought the level was a laugh and didn't think twice about mowing down civilians.

Just wondering what those of you have played it thought? Personally I'm fine violence in computer games but I thought this level was one step too far and unnecessary.

Cheers,

Nigel

Singh400 · 10-11-2009, 6:08 PM

I plan to blast through SP soon, but I don't see how this is any different from say mowing down random people in GTA? As long as you are clear on the difference between real life and video gaming it is fine in my opinion.

Bill Hicks · 10-11-2009, 6:09 PM

Haven't got that far into the game yet (Still immersed in MP) so I can't really comment.

But after all this talk about it I can't wait!

nheather · 10-11-2009, 6:14 PM

Quote:

I plan to blast through SP soon, but I don't see how this is any different from say mowing down random people in GTA? As long as you are clear on the difference between real life and video gaming it is fine in my opinion.

I hear what you are saying and I can't really answer why I don't have so much of a problem - but the level in MW2 I just found sickening.

Be interested to know what you think when you get there - whather you can open up on a packed crowd trying to run away with something like an M60.

Worst for me was seeing individuals trying to run away or cower and the terrorists just singling them out and gunning them down.

I guess I found it too realistic whereas, GTA is animated in a more comedy way.

Cheers,

Nigel

**IronGiant** · 10-11-2009, 6:20 PM

It was mentioned on the News today, they added the option to turn that bit off after some complaints (presumably at beta).

Dave

nheather · 10-11-2009, 6:23 PM

Quote:

It was mentioned on the News today, they added the option to turn that bit off after some complaints (presumably at beta).

Yes the option is definitely there. Appears when you first start the game. And it does mention distrurbing scenes - but to be honest I thought it was there to keep the PC Police happy - you know, the usual there is shooting and blood and people get killed.

Cheers,

Nigel

sunnybacon · 10-11-2009, 6:26 PM

How does the violence in this game compare to the violence in World at War?

nheather · 10-11-2009, 6:34 PM

Quote:

How does the violence in this game compare to the violence in World at War?

It's not so much the violence it's the humanity.

As far as shooting other soldiers it's pretty much the same as best I can recall.

The difference for me is mowing down crowds of unarmed and scared civilians who are just trying their hardest to run away or hide.

Cheers,

Nigel

Miyazaki · 10-11-2009, 6:35 PM

What makes me LOL is how violence in films only attracts a 15 rating, yet any sexual content is rated 18.

Sex is perfectly natural, where as violent murder is not...

Bizarre how the authorities rate games/ films.

Singh400 · 10-11-2009, 6:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nheather

I hear what you are saying and I can't really answer why I don't have so much of a problem - but the level in MW2 I just found sickening.

Be interested to know what you think when you get there - whather you can open up on a packed crowd trying to run away with something like an M60.

Worst for me was seeing individuals trying to run away or cower and the terrorists just singling them out and gunning them down.

I guess I found it too realistic whereas, GTA is animated in a more comedy way.

Cheers,

Nigel

Might kill some, might leave some. Depends. Don't know if you have ever had the pleasure of playing Bioshock. But in that you are given the option of "saving" or "harvesting" (aka killing) these little girls. Now, why oh why wasn't a fuss kicked up about that? Hell, I distinctly remember playing a Die Hard game on PS1, and you could kill anyone and anything. I clearly remember blowing up the taxi driver and his cab.

I'll let you know when I get to that level. Not gonna be for a while though, I'm currently hooked on Machinarium & Borderlands.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sunnybacon

How does the violence in this game compare to the violence in World at War?

WaW was a pussy game. Complete spray and pray. Kinda of boring, hope this gives me a challenge. And little or no real violence.

*gavan* · 10-11-2009, 6:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nheather

It's not so much the violence it's the humanity.

As far as shooting other soldiers it's pretty much the same as best I can recall.

The difference for me is mowing down crowds of unarmed and scared civilians who are just trying their hardest to run away or hide.

Cheers,

Nigel

You get disturbed with the digital representation of civilians being killed but yet you find mowing down similarly digitised representations of 'bad guy' human beings to not be disturbing?

IMO that's a bit more worrying as you clearly identify what you are seeing onscreen with reality yet can apparently kill 'people' without remorse so long as they are identified suitably.

nheather · 10-11-2009, 6:50 PM

For me it is because the killing has no reason.
Most killings have a reason however, trivial - vengance, robbery, war, self defence, protecting your own interests etc.

Even in Bioshock you could reason whether to kill the little girl or not - their were potential benefits to the player whichever route you took and you had to way up which benefit you wanted most and what was your playing style (RPG stuff) - guess I more Paladin, so no, I never killed any of the girls.

But in this level, there is no reason - it's closer to genocide than to anything else.

Yes there is a weak political reason given at the end but it didn't need to go anything like as far to acheive it's aim.

Cheers,

Nigel

Quote:

IMO that's a bit more worrying as you clearly identify what you are seeing onscreen with reality yet can apparently kill 'people' without remorse so long as they are identified suitably.

Could I kill someone that was trying to harm me or my family. Of course I don't know for real but my concience says "Yes I could".

Could I walk into a room and kill 10s of people I don't know, who have never done me any harm and are of no threat to me. "Absolutely not".

That is the distinction I make.

**IronGiant** · 10-11-2009, 7:04 PM

I don't know if there is any truth in it but the suggestion on the News was that the level is there for a single player mission where you are a CIA infiltrator who has to decide whether to kill the civilians in order to prevent your cover being blown, something like that anyway...

Dave

Edit: developers statement:

"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.

“Players have the option of skipping over the scene. At the beginning of the game, there are two ‘checkpoints’ where the player is advised that some people may find an upcoming segment disturbing. These checkpoints can’t be disabled.

“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.”

nheather · 10-11-2009, 7:15 PM

That's the scene and you do have the option to skip - I thought it was at the beginning of the game but it may have been at the beginning of the level.

Anyway, I didn't skip it because I just assumed that it was being over protective - but I agree the warning is there.

Though I imagine no-one will skip now because they will want to see what all the fuss is about.

It would be interesting to know if you do take part in the slaughter whether the level ends differently.

Cheers,

Nigel

*gavan* · 10-11-2009, 7:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nheather

Could I kill someone that was trying to harm me or my family. Of course I don't know for real but my concience says "Yes I could".

Could I walk into a room and kill 10s of people I don't know, who have never done me any harm and are of no threat to me. "Absolutely not".

That is the distinction I make.

I haven't played MW2 yet but going on MW1, most of the time your character was in various locations around the globe killing random enemies who had no direct connection with the protagonist(s) or their families.

I just find it a little puzzling that if the digital representations of people in games are so realistic to you that you feel disturbed by killing some of them in the game, you have no hesitation in killing massive numbers of others of them?

It's like you have become desensitised to killing as long as the people being killed are nominally tagged as bad guys.

nheather · 10-11-2009, 7:34 PM

Perhaps I am too soft or desensitised.

Let me know what you think when you have played the level. Be particularly interested to know if you choose to join in with the slaughter or not.

Cheers,

Nigel

themilkman23 · 10-11-2009, 8:05 PM

I don't see the problem - They have warned you and asked you if you wanted to see shocking scenes, then asked you again and then asked you again.

You said yourself that you assumed they were just being over protective. So it's an 18 rated game designed for adults and they ask you 3 times if you want to see shocking content. Apart from taking the scene out they have done everything they can to protect delicate minds.

I was shocked when I was dropped into it but can understand it in the grand scheme of the outstanding blockbuster style storyline.

What are your thoughts on the Saw movies just out of interest?

krish · 10-11-2009, 8:23 PM

I stopped taking Vaz seriously 20 years ago when he called for a ban on the publication of Rushdie's Satanic Verses to appease nutters in his constituency; he's also very much a professional cock of the highest order based on his proven and alleged bad behaviour and corruption over the years.

Bill Hicks · 10-11-2009, 8:33 PM

I'm surprised by my reaction, but...........

I have just played the level in question and my thoughts are mixed.
It starts off fairly casually with a little lift sequence, but as soon as you exit the lift it is carnage!

The way the characters amble along gunning down masses of civilians (And Police) that they come across is kinda reminiscent to what I would have imagined the horrors of the Columbine school massacre must have been like.
Maybe a little too realistic for my liking.

But another side of me says that it's only a game. But I would imagine a similar scene/scenario in a Hollywood action film would probably cause a lot of controversy and maybe would be pulled at the conceptual stage.

Seeing hundreds of men & women (No children thank god) running screaming for their lives and seeing wounded people crawling away doesn't sit comfortably with me in a video game that is noted for it's realistic graphics.

Thumbs down to Affinity Ward on this one.

MichaelGL · 10-11-2009, 8:44 PM

It added to the story in my opinion. I can see why some people don't like it but its no worse than what you would see in a film. It gives you the option to disable it and also lets you skip it at any point during the level. I didn't take part in the slaughter but I did take part in the firefight with the police.

Wild Weasel · 10-11-2009, 8:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by krish

I stopped taking Vaz seriously 20 years ago when he called for a ban on the publication of Rushdie's Satanic Verses to appease nutters in his constituency; he's also very much a professional cock of the highest order based on his proven and alleged bad behaviour and corruption over the years.

Yeah, I find Vaz and his put-on posh accent incites more violence in me than any computer game.

neal666 · 10-11-2009, 8:55 PM

i thinks its a good level which fits with the storyline, im not however going to run out and mow a shopping center full of people down.

its an 18 cert
it askes you if you want to see the content
its a shooting/war game (civiliens die in war as well)
it askes you again if you want to see it

what more do you want in a game? gta never give you the options

from me

maybe you should trade in your copy for scrabble or somthing

PJTX100 · 10-11-2009, 9:03 PM

I wonder what proportion of games sold today are being played by under 18s?

I'd guess a majority.

I wonder what proportion are being played by under 14s?

I'd guess over 25%.

nheather · 10-11-2009, 9:05 PM

Quote:

I don't see the problem - They have warned you and asked you if you wanted to see shocking scenes, then asked you again and then asked you again.

I know. I guess it was because I played it before I was aware of the true nature of the sequence.

I'd heard so many complaints about video games before, complaints that I didn't agree with, that I just put it down to being over-PC - also guilty of tapping the green button too quickly to get on with the game.

Quote:

I didn't take part in the slaughter but I did take part in the firefight with the police.

I was exactly the same. The distinction for me is that if I just stood there the crowd wouldn't try and hurt 'me' - they would run away from 'me'. But when it came to the police, if I just stood there they would try and kill 'me' - a peaceful arrest was out of the question - it was them or 'me'.

I think we all compartmentalise deaths even real ones, into different categories of acceptablity - some we just accept and some we abhor. Take WWII - people are not generally bothered about 24M Soviet fatalities but the much smaller 6M Jewish deaths is a different matter.

Cheers,

Nigel

anTTony · 10-11-2009, 10:03 PM

I shot everything that had a heartbeat..its a video game on a disc in a machine on a TV...its not real life

*Haggler* · 10-11-2009, 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by anTTony

I shot everything that had a heartbeat..its a video game on a disc in a machine on a TV...its not real life

Therefore it had no heartbeat, which makes it perfectly acceptable to shoot it.

There are too many do gooders in all walks of life nowadays left to them we wouldn't eat anything, drink anything or say anything, we may as well bang ourselves up indoors and wish the end to come quickly.

Like the poster above has said it's a videogame! i remember not too long ago people used to moan that in all fps that you could never shoot npc's.

anTTony · 10-11-2009, 10:25 PM

Plus ive always thought: If people are that messed up to kill people, they will do it anyway.... regardless of a video game! Its just a convenient thing to blame! Take a look at their upbringing, not the games they play!

BamBamMickey · 13-11-2009, 2:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by anTTony

Plus ive always thought: If people are that messed up to kill people, they will do it anyway.... regardless of a video game! Its just a convenient thing to blame! Take a look at their upbringing, not the games they play!

Exactly.

*gavan* · 13-11-2009, 2:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nheather

Perhaps I am too soft or desensitised.

Let me know what you think when you have played the level. Be particularly interested to know if you choose to join in with the slaughter or not.

Cheers,

Nigel

I have now played it. Can't say it was particularly shocking as of course I know it was coming. Might have been different if I'd been completely unprepared for it.

Some thoughts: They prevent you from really getting into the shooting by making your character slightly slower than the others as they all amble along so a lot of the massacring has already been done.

Also, there's no real reason for that to be in the game at all as a cut-scene would have done the job and there's no challenge to shooting the civilians. Plus there are no consequences for not joining in the killing.

In any case, it's not really any more violent or amoral than what you could already get up to in the GTA games which have been out for years so it's hardly some shocking new development in videogames.

I suspect the level was included because they wanted to court controversy and get even more publicity. And probably because they had pretensions of making the game 'serious'.

arthurdentpc · 18-11-2009, 2:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PJTX100

I wonder what proportion of games sold today are being played by under 18s?

I'd guess a majority.

I wonder what proportion are being played by under 14s?

I'd guess over 25%.

About 95% of those that have consoles in my kids class (aged 12/13) have MW2. The vast majority of these have non-gaming parents, i.e. they buy them the games that they want with no real idea of the content.

I might let my kid play 18 games, I might not. But I play them first to know. For example, I have no problems with him playing GOW2, because the gore is very cartoon-based and he can easily handle it. COD5 I would only let him play with the filter on though. I haven't let him play MW2 yet, and he's asked me to let him about 25 times now ......

Those without kids might take a very black and white view - if you're under 18 then you shouldn't play an 18 game. It's a very different story when all their friends play the game concerned though, and they see no reason why they can't do the same.