I still follow the gaming press though I play about 2 hours of computer games a month right now – and that only when I visit my folks and load up Guitar Hero. There’s a bit of a buzz around about Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2. Specifically, an early level which features some fairly “disturbing” content.
First up, folks – SPOILER. Don’t read on if you’re waiting for the game and want to be shocked by this bit. On your own head be it if you continue past this point.
Now, I’m pretty laid back. I see a game as it is. A game. But then, I’m not mental. And neither, very importantly, am I a parent. Some kind soul has uploaded a complete video of the offending level of the game. It is available from this linky-bit here. Again, don’t go and watch it if you’re bothered about spoilers.
The first thing that struck me is how incredible the gaming experience has become since I last bought a title for my PC. As I’ve been using laptops for the last 4 years or so, I’m not used to 3D graphics of that standard. When I did use my PC, I was topping out on the likes of GTA3. Graphics have come a long way in three years. Remember that the PS3 and Xbox 360 didn’t come out until after I’d packed all my stuff away and gone backpacking.
So what’s the furor about? Basically as part of one of the missions you have to shoot a lot of civilians. A lot. A whole airport full of them. With guns and stuff.
Now is this so bad? I mean, it’s fake isn’t it? Is it any worse than watching a disaster movie, or someone going on a rampage in a town in some violent film or other?
To me, the answer is no. But would I want a 12 year old to play the same game as me? Not in this instance, no. I may be getting soft in my old age, but there is a point where fantasy is obvious and this isn’t it. The game in question is grisly and this level in particular completely blurs the line between fantasy and reality.
I’m all for the likes of war games where you’re a soldier fighting other soldiers. With the atmosphere possible in today’s gaming environments it’s almost educational and the fact that teamplay and communication starts to enter into it actually appeals to me as far as providing them to kids is concerned. When your actions have consequences and there are reasons for performing them then it can pass on some kind of moral message – even if that message is “attack my country and I’ll shoot all your soldiers”.
However, running rampage in an airport from a terrorist’s viewpoint isn’t really conducive to a balanced view of life. While it’s still “just fun” it does cloud that moral viewpoint that sees to be hard to instil these days.
I’ve watched that video right through and all I can say is that it looks like a fun blast, but they still haven’t solved one flaw that’s been in games for ages – “living” characters just walking through corpses on the floor as if they were ghosts. I know it’s a nightmare if you make each corpse “solid” as they you have to jump/dodge round them. But how about some animation for just stepping on or around them that doesn’t involve the player having to hop around like a pogo stick?
I guess that’s the limit of my personal issues with it. The game has an 18 certificate. It’s there for a reason. It’s adult scenes and adult subject matter so it should be played by adults – or younger kids with parental discretion.
I really don’t see what the fuss is about.
Mate- I am buying this game (not the £120 version with the NV goggles).
It looks awesome.
It looks like Soldier of Fortune with (much) better graphics. Oh, how I remember shooting people with the machine gun so they danced and never fell down.
I don’t see what the fuss is all about but it’s great publicity for the game! 12 year olds shouldn’t be playing a game that has an 18 certificate – they should stick to games they can legally play eg on the Wii or Nintendo DS. If a parent buys this game for their child, then it’s their responsibility that little Timmy is of sound mind and will not go on to copy what he sees on his pc.
I had a boy in class today say that his copy had arrived in the post this morning – he’s in S2 so about 12 years old.
The thing is, the ratings on games/films in the UK are *not* legally binding. They are recommendations so the responsibility regarding who gets to see them lies with parents, guardians and the like. It is not illegal to show an 18-rated film to a 12 year old nor provide a game rated as such to a kid of that age.
Of course the issue is how much do parents care? We’ve been granted a freedom to make this decision. Some parents will fail in this and let children who aren’t mature enough see/play it and the some muppet from the Daily Mail will start screaming blue murder and demand that all games from now on feature cartoon animals running round mazes with soft edges where the player can’t lose in case it demoralises them.
Well, if the boy’s copy arrived in the post, then someone over 18 ordered it by credit/debit card online.
The nanny state perpetuated by certain Daily Mail readers is annoying but I can see why they continue to try their luck when there are irrresponsible muppets for parents around. Granted that some children are mature enough…a 15 year old playing the game, probably ok but a 12 year old? (unless balls dropped already and got a moustache…)
One thing I’m curious about is whether there’s any bad language in the game. It still amazes me that parents will happily let their 12 year-old watch someone being eviscerated in an Aliens film, or shot through the face (twice) in a computer game – but Heaven forbid that they read or hear the word “****”.