Slashdot Mirror
Russia Recalls Modern Warfare 2
eldavojohn writes "You may recall much ado over some questionable footage in the latest Call of Duty game. Well, that footage has led to a recall of Modern Warfare 2 in Russia. Seems the Russian government was none too happy about the portrayal of Russia in the game and decided to yank it from stores. Infinity Ward has responded with a patch that removes the 'No Russian' mission (the content in question) from the storyline. Before you overly criticize the Russian government, there may be some truth to the claim that the game's story line overly demonizes Russians as just terrorists as the Russian site GotPS3.ru alleges. Is cultural sensitivity becoming an overly played card in the gaming world? Not too long ago, Wolfenstein was recalled in Germany for containing Nazi symbols."
> Before you overly criticize the Russian government, there may be some truth to the claim that the game's story line overly demonizes Russians
Oh, I guess that makes it okay, then. The Russian government has every right to make up your mind for you.
When are the Vietnam missions coming out where a villiage gate opens and you have to pillage and rape all the civilians? That's right, nobody is stupid enough to do it for the same reason.
Oh boo hoo. Russia has a bad history, it should expect criticism
While we Americans were sitting on our rears eating bon-bons, more Russians died than in all of America's wars combined fighting Adolph Hitler. Love them or hate them, forced by circumstances or not, the Russians did more to save Western Europe from Nazism than anyone else.
This is my sig.
In 'No Russian', you play as an American CIA agent, and you, as an AMERICAN agent, lay round after round into the innocent populace, alongside the Russian antagonist. I think the even larger message Infinity Ward sends with this mission is the atrocious things the American government is willing to do for the sake of 'National Security'.
Does anyone else see the hilarity in this? Not to mention their foreshadowing of American soldiers torturing an informant via electrocution! Each side of the geopolitical spectrum gets demonized in their own right.
But hey, lets just hate on the game that shows the gritty reality of the world.
'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
How many sales do software companies even make in Russia? Russia is notorious for hacking, pirates, and spam; not a place where a lot of sales are to be made.
You'd get bitchy people, but an attempt to ban it would probably lead to the ACLU taking whatever level of government that tried it to court..
There is a difference between disliking something and having a system that actually allows you to outright ban it.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
What does this have to do with history?
If you have played the game, its clear it makes Americans seem as the true, innocent heroes fighting against bad bad Russia. Even after so long after Cold War Americans still have the type of thinking that Russians are The Evil.
The war is started by Makarov's set up, but its clear the whole game romanticizes Americans.
The problem Russia's Ministry of Internal Affairs had with the mission is not with how the Russian villain is portrayed (although that probably didn't help the game get a positive reception), but with the fact that the mission is about killing innocent Russian civilians. It does not matter whether the villain is Russian or French or American or Martian - killing civilians at an airport is, according, to a Ministry spokesman, "propaganda of terrorism" and hence illegal.
See http://www.gotps3.ru/article/call_of_duty_modern_warfare_2_zapretjat_v_rossii/ for more details.
The article isn't specific on whether the infamous airport scene is being removed because of its portrayal of Russia, or whether it's being censored because it's an unpleasant part of the game. Most other countries have had uproar about this scene and I'd expect to see it refused classification in some places (e.g. in Australia where Left 4 Dead 2 recently encountered problems). A national classification body refusing to allow a game to go on sale does, effectively, constitute the government disapproving of something - but it's a very different situation to central government stepping in and banning something directly for political reasons. Maybe this is happening behind the scenes but the article *doesn't say*.
It's certainly suggested that the Russian gaming public weren't all overjoyed to see the portrayal of their country in the game. That's hardly surprising, though - I expect most gamers from other big markets such as Europe, the US and Japan would also be quite easily offended if their unpleasant past was dredged up. People don't like to think of their country ever being the villains and yet pretty much every country in the world has been villainous in the past, often surprisingly recently.
You mean those long 5 months? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molotov%E2%80%93Ribbentrop_Pact
Seriously, Stalin let Hitler attack Britain & Poland. They were double-crossed. The Soviets did sacrifice a lot, but let's be honest. They were bastards.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
A good percentage of games and media made in the U.S. portray the U.S. government in a bad light, and yet they don't get yanked. (pun merely fortuitous)
Shouldn't the story here be about censorship rather than game content? Make a game that portrays Americans in a negative light and sell it here -- I doubt our Government will feel the need to prevent our people from buying it.
I really doubt there would NOT be any problems to release a game where you're an Iraqi fighting against the invading your country by American soldiers, trying to protect your country from the "bad". To give some extra perspective to the game, the American soldiers could be raping your families and completely destroying your country (interestingly that's not even made up story, as it's real). Or where you would be designing terrorist attacks against USA. Do you really think that would be allowed?
But there's no need to think what would happen. It would be banned for obscene material and the creators sent to jail, like in earlier case:
Extreme Associates and owners Robert Zicari, also known as Rob Black, 35, and his wife, Janet Romano, aka Lizzie Borden, 32, pleaded guilty in March to a felony charge of conspiracy to distribute obscene material through the mail and over the Internet and got over an year in jail time.
It's not like we don't have a culture of denial here in the US. We wiped out the American Indians pretty remorselessly. That's pretty close to genocide, but it doesn't get taught that way in our schools. Every nation tries to overlook the terrible things its done in the past. People and countries are pretty much all the same, wherever you go.
Much of the modern legal systems in both Germany and Japan still contains elements that were dictated to them by the Allies after WWII. They did not choose this viewpoint entirely of their own accord, but accepted it as part of the peace agreements.
Any serious student of history sees their can be no moral high ground to look down on other civilizations. Each one has done terrible things in the past. Acceptance and understanding are what will prevent past travesties from being repeated.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law
I'm pretty sure I can see the headlines already, should Germany decriminalize the swastika: "Swastikas endorsed by German Government", "Germans are again flying SS symbols", etc.
I don't think there is a country in the world that works harder at self-flagellation than the Germans - nor is there any country in the world that is expected to self-flagellate that hard.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
I think you're confusing Germany with Japan. Japan gloss over their ww2 history with the atrocities they inflicted upon their neighbors and that is part of an on going problem to this day.
The Germans do not have a culture of denial. Time is spent covering this theme although it varies from instructor to instructor what material is covered. On average I would say anywhere from 3 to 4 months is spent studying but it is not a tabu thema.
Damals war es Friedrich is a book that is usually covered in class. The reason for the ban of symbols, greetings etc. are set in the constitution. Example: Imagine if you will that Democrats are outlawed - to be a member is illegal, the party is not official, the symbols are illegal. Fast forward 60 years and it becomes a big PC issue.
Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
Russians who believe they single-handedly took down the Nazis are as foolish as Americans who think they single-handedly took down the Nazis.
As any reasonable historian will tell you, it was a combined effort. The Nazis lost because they were outnumbered. Had the Nazis not invaded Russia (or at least waited until the UK fell) or Japan hadn't bombed pearl harbor, the war would have been quite different. It's a testament to both the Russian and US soldiers for what they had endured, but to say simply that the only factor was how awesomely great one army was over the other discounts the thousands of factors that go into modern warfare.
Oh and by the way, we didn't get a whole lot of help from the Russians in the pacific theater. You like to take a lot of credit over the Nazis and you forget that the Italians and Japanese were allied with Germany and someone had to deal with them, and it sure wasn't the Russians.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
I think they knew the game wouldn't sell original copies too much in Russia so they basically trolled with that "No Russians" level, predicting this or less would happen.
Income: PR, "Reds banning American game", Slashdot YRO story etc. It is far more than the game would sell in Russia.
We have several Holocaust memorial days, there is probably a documentary on the Third Reich and World War Two once week on the TV channel.
Only once a week? Man, the History channel must have really cut back on the WWII stuff over in Germany.
Here it's about 50/50 WWII stuff.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
How about a game where you assassinate the president?
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/jfkreloaded/index.html
Not as recent, but there it is.
It probably would fail because folks wouldn't buy it. That's quite different from the government forcing it to be pulled from shelves. One is simply market forces, the other is, well, for lack of a better word, censorship.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
but censorship by the masses is very alive and very well here in these United States.
Please explain to me how "censorship by the masses" is different from plain old "voting with your wallet." For my part, I see a huge, fundamental difference between the people saying, "No, we're not interested," and the government saying, "No, you will not be interested."
Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
I'm curious what America's response would be to their people being demonized. I'd love to see a game set in Iraq or Vietnam where America invades your country, kills your people and attempts to rest control of your homeland away from you.
You mean like a game where you play as a suspected American terrorist who murders hundreds of civilians in an airport of a superpower and then that superpower comes and fucks your country up? I played it this morning, it's called Modern Warfare 2, and we reacted to it by buying millions of copies. Any more questions?
"You'd get more than bitchy people."
Oh, really?
"You'd have the Fox News generation in arms,"
That would be "bitchy people".
"Glenn Beck screaming on the television"
That would be "a bitchy person"; subset of "bitchy people"
"an A/O rating from the ESA,"
The rating system being nothing more than a way for one group to tell others what they think of the game, that would be - you guessed it - bitchy people.
"you'd have a de facto ban from retailers afraid of enraging a bunch of teabaggers."
Individual business would make a business decision about what products they want to carry? Oh, the humanity! Whatever; still just people being bitchy.
"In reality, it'd be the same effect"
Well, not really. You don't need retailers to distribute electronic media, and in fact many things are widely available - at the click of a mouse even - in spite of the fact that no mainstream retailer would even consider stocking them.
"order it from specialty online stores, but that's probably the same thing happening in Russia."
You think there are online sellers defying a government ban? I doubt it, but let's assume so. That means everyone playing the game in Russia would be a criminal, as is everyone who provided them a copy to play. You really don't see how that's different from having to buy the game from an online store (but then being able to buy and play it without being a criminal)?
Freedom doesn't mean that there's always someone making it convenient for you to get what you want. It means that if/when you do get what you want, provided it's within the bounds of your freedoms, the government doesn't interfere.