Videos
(121)Screenshots
(93)Cheats and Walkthroughs
(112)
Videos
(120)Screenshots
(93)Cheats and Walkthroughs
(119)
Videos
(120)Screenshots
(88)Cheats and Walkthroughs
(116)
Since everyone is talking about or playing or buying extra copies of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 right now, Adam couldn't let this week's Soapbox go by without talking about the controversial "Airport Scene" we've all been hearing so much about.
While this video is fairly light on spoilers, if you haven't finished the single-player campaign in the game, you might want to wait before you hear what the Sess has to say on the subject. That being said, how did playing through that scene make you feel? Or did you skip the level, expecting it to be gratuitous and offensive? Let us know what you think, but again, please keep the discussion intelligent and civil.
Update: Adam did not go on Fox and Friends. It was his decision, and it was due to scheduling.
Subscribe to G4's Sessler's Soapbox Podcast by clicking your preferred service:
Comments are Closed
Comments
Displaying 121–140 of 247
612345678910…12138
KDollaz
Very Tru Mr. Sess
DefineDefyDeny
one thing that adam sessler pointed out was that it is not a simulation or an encouragement to kill. It is a scene within a video game(which i personally consider an art form).
great show adam, if you go on FOX i'll be rooting for you
backerman
That's why Obama White House don't like Fox News.
RORYFISHERSC
Really Great Soapbox
Props to you Adam
napkinshower
i wasnt offended, i was.....shocked. i do acknowledged what they were trying to do and comprehend what was being elaborated upon. basically i was shocked but in a good understandable way. aka a good movie ending or etc. (more or less basically)
IamtheBat
HEYYYYY!!!! AM I THE ONLY PERSON THATS HAS NOTICED THAT COD:MAW 2 Online Multiplayer maps, are the same designs as the COD 2 maps, seriously, The train station, the sub pen, They seem like reworked COD 2 maps, with modernized stuff, you can notice how the ones I am talking about have Trenches, WTF
rayx2times2
ha I loved this stage, and i maybe evil or sick or twisted but the first time i played this stage (while shocked) i jumped right in, killing as many people as possible. I loved it so much that I restarted the mission just to do it for a second time. The only real rational behind my feelings to want to do this, is that (like many of you have mentioned) you never get to be "the bad guy" in videogames. I actually relished in the realism of this scene, because yes this could happen and yes this is a part of modern warfare. It felt good and different to actually play the game from a different prespective. My advice to IW for the next one, and im sure there will be a third part to it, is to let the player choose to play as both the evil war criminal and the good armored corp.
surferdude89
I understand some people's feelings about this scene, it can really hit your feelings. That being said, I was not one of them. Partially because of the media about this, it really ruined the impact. Although I am curious why most people feel that IW should not have done this at all. This is a video game, not that video games should cross certain lines (too some this may very well be that line), but IW really just brought a sense of reality with this scene. Your character is simply doing his job of being "deep undercover", this means he has to do what ever he has too so that he can take down a greater evil, which would say 100 times the amount of people that you helped to destroy (keep in mind that he wouldnt have had to actually kill any civilians, like in the game you are not actually forced too). This is not a fictional situation, it may be an extreme, but rather a situations that could and may very well have taken place at one point in history.
I do agree with Adam in the fact that this is a form of art, and like most other great art it pushes limits and barriers, not just technology wise but societies' believes and morals. By doing this IW most likely knew that they would caught some grief over the scene, but also knew that it would be a pivotal point in the game for the users' experience and came to the conclusion that the users' experience out weighed the negative media that the company would have to encounter.
Personally I did play the mission (twice since I played the campaign twice so far), and both times I did shoot the civilians. The first time I cut everyone I saw down, not because I enjoyed the idea of this happening or because I thought this should really happen, because of all of this media coverage of this scene. I wanted to just see what everyone was so upset about, why it was such a big deal for a video game to do what some other games have done. The difference from this game and others like GTA where you can shoot anyone, is that MW2 gave your character a label of "terrorist group" (keep in mind that the game never actually says to shoot the civilians). It seems like people are more scared that this will spark the idea for some group to do something like this, but this is a flawed concept since when ever a new movie like Saw # comes out no one is upset that it may give a person the idea to copy what happens in the movie.
In short, this is a video game made for Mature audiences. If you can not handle/find this bad taste/or just wish not to play the level, IW has given you the full option to simply skip the level. If you are worried about your children playing a game that shows this kind of idea, then your child most likely shouldn't be playing it in the first place (and most likely wouldn't be old enough to even buy the game, at which point brings to mind the question "Why are you buying your children games that are not fit for their age groups?"). No one should be giving IW grief over this scene, if anything the gamers should be thanking them for giving them a great experience full of emotion and not backing down on its art because society does not approve of it.
derekgerig
There he is! The Adam that we knom and love! Well put about the issue in its entirety. I agree with all that you said. Oh, go to Fox News an stick it to the man when you get the chance. There is no better time or place to lay witness to the defence of video games. Get people to focus on something important like teen suicide or drugs.
noonan1223
The on thing I disagree with is your definition of the character's role in the scene. Terrorists instill fear in civilians through torture and murder, so for that 10 minute period, your character IS A TERRORIST. His intentions are good, because he needs to infiltrate Makarov's inner circle, but the character commits an act of terrorism. He is not exempt just because he is doing it for the greater good, which I believe he is. He is just as much a terrorist for that period of time as Makarov is, or any of his henchmen for that matter.
Just my 2 cents
mrSlacker81
please sess, stick it to fox news and their so called unbiased reporting!
jkoz191
Seriously, why couldn't you have gone on Fox & Friends?!?!? Now I do not watch Fox News but given the topic I did make an exception and went to view the tape of the conversation. The guy who, in theory, was on there to discuss the game was clearly rattled by being on camera. He knew what he wanted to say but could not formulate even so much as a complete sentence!!! This is NOT helping the cause of gamers looking like intelligent consumers ready to embrace a more complex and intellectual subject matter!
As far as the question of whether this was right or not, I don't ever hear this being discussed on TV when shows like "24" (which I thoroughly enjoy) have similar topics and issues. Heck, the same pundits who are condemning this game reference "24" as proof that torture works! They defend any restriction of freedoms or liberties as a necessary evil to fight terrorism. This was the same logic being used by the game. (Note: It didn't work out that well so this is actually even an argument AGAINST doing such a horrible thing!!!)
In the end, I do hope people will take it for what it is worth and debate the morals and ethics involved. Topics such as whether the ends justifies the means are good topics. I have my own opinions which are likely not going to be swayed by a game or any other form of media, but if it stimulates an intelligent conversation on the subject, it is a positive influence, and I hope this game will at least get some people to have a serious conversation about this sort of topic.
kydbuu101
I don't really mind the scene, as long as it serves a point. I personally skipped it, just because I didn't feel like dealing with it. My problem comes when people gloat about how much fun it was to kill civilians. I think Infinity made the best possible choice for the direction they went in
thekingdom195
What amazes me most about this issue is how much video games have become respected as a form of media to have these freedoms with what goes into the game. In the early gaming years, games like Mortal Kombat and Grand Theft Auto III were causing controversy on Congressional proportions for violence and gore. Today, in our post- 9-11 world, a game company designs a level where the player commits an act of terrorism in an airport and the mainstream media is too busy to scare everyone about swine flu to give the issue its full attention.
StupendousFriar
When it comes to this particular scene in Modern Warfare 2, I believe that it was a good thing that Infinity Ward and Activison left it in the game. It was a very powerful scene, and it did get the point accross that the situation was going downhill quickly. In my opinion, the level shocked me as much as the choices that you had to make in Splinter Cell: Double Agent.
On the other hand, I do dissagree with Adam when he says that books and video games cannot be classified as "moral or immoral." I believe that whenever a game (or any form of media and literature) depicts a lifestyle of drugs and sexual explicitness in a gloified state, that it is wrong and should be classified as "immoral."
FuzzyHammer
give 'em hell on fox news!
mrincubus88
I'm semi confused here Mr. Sessler, on one hand you talk how IW made a mistake by using the acronym F._._.G.S yet you sit here and defend their "Artistic ability" to put a section in a game that is all about killing innocent individuals in a airport.
The problem that I see with this is you are using something called "Double Think" (See the novel 1984 by George Orwell). You say they should have known what they were doing when it came to using that acronym and then killing innocent people is okay. I don't follow this logic at all. I for one think they could have went about this scene in an entirely different manner.
IW has made some poor choices in this game (Why can't I party chat and play team dm?) and we know they did but playing favorites and making sure you voice it is just plan idiotic. Sessler you seem to be a man that loves to cause division in a society. The only reason that the acronym is offensive is because you are saying it is. I'm sorry you have become desensitized to the killing of innocent people and find hateful words so damaging to society. Maybe it is time you take your own advice that you preached during your past "SoapBox" Sessler. Society should not be desensitized to killing at all ... never.
I think you need to go and rethink this logic because you are going down a slippery slope and I feel that America will slip further and further away from a great society to something more sinister where people are tried and punished for saying they hate someone or even refusing to serve them. I have my freedoms just like IW had theirs when they made this scene just as they did when they made the PA.
Oh and If you want a debate I am available upon request and I would love to see you explain this logic further.
DSwat
good luck adam... cant wait 2 c the clip
Raurik
Oscar Wilde FTW!!!
I wish I could absorb half of what I read as well as you do Sessler. Epic~
pmc_soap
MW2 was the best single player experience ive ever been a part of i didnt start shooting until i was shot at though i dint participate in the murders of the innocent civilians
Displaying 121–140 of 247
612345678910…12138