Comments on: Call of Duty 4: Considering the story

by: Nicholas Hearst

Thu, 22 Nov 2007 16:29:17 +0000

That was a brilliant review. While playing Call of Duty I certainly felt an attachment to the characters and the intense battles provided an extremely involving experience. The only time I felt either distant or even irritated by the game was when I thought about the political implications.
I have a certain level of political awareness and morality so for me it was simply a matter of recognizing where topical matters ended and adrenaline fueled entertainment began. Unfortunately it has come to light that not every gamer has this ability and after talking to some friends who also played the game it became increasingly apparent that the game has to some extent furthered Cold War tensions against Russia and post 9/11 Middle-Eastern worries.
The obvious argument is that COD4 is ultimately just entertainment however, the game does draw a fine line. Although some scenes, such as the final nuclear launch sequence can be comical, other levels come too close to current concerns to play without treading on the player’s political beliefs.
One of my friends who played it with me has now joined the army and although being a lovely soul lacks any kind of topical awareness. This may seem like a dangerous paradox for a future soldier to find himself in but what was even more worrying was how much of the game did not phase him. After watching the amazing yet shocking nuclear bomb scene I just made a comment on the fact that there was no mention of any civilians that might have died in the explosion, whereas later on in the game the developers decided to simulate an attack on America going into detail of the civilian casualties. My friend came away with the impression that a) majority of the Middle East want to nuke America b) all of American military forces have the worlds interests at heart and c) that Russia is just out to destroy democracy and peace.
Now whether or not you agree with these ideas is beside the point, the fact is that although it may be just entertainment it seems to have an effect on peoples view on the world. I would argue that thats mainly due to the amount of naive and impressionable people in the world but clearly there are too many. For when I went to read reviews on the game by customers who had bought it on various sites I was faced with arguments involving extreme nationalism, racism and violence. Don’t get me wrong I love the game, as a game. It is amazing in so many respects and yet I have a disturbing image of someone playing while nodding along and saying ‘You know this stuff is happening right now’
As blockbuster entertainment, media such as games and films shrug any moral responsibility (just look at Rambo) but once a game or film becomes too serious to now bestow some kind of political or social opinion on the viewer it becomes impossible to not address the impact it has. This is the point that was made previously, once Call of Duty becomes too serious or too topical it becomes hard to ignore the implications, and balancing between two genres is not something that it does well. The message is confused by the end, I wasn’t sure whether it was appropriate to just switch off the console and walk away by the end of the game.

by: Moostache

Wed, 21 Nov 2007 02:25:36 +0000

I think that COD4 is as close as a game has come to playing “like a movie”. Ironic that as Hollywood continues to adapt games into film (like the impending “Hitman” movie and the recent Resident Evil movies) that the games industry continues to move towards games like COD4 and Drake’s Fortune…eventually a hybrid form of entertainment is going to be birthed here.

by: Sean

Tue, 20 Nov 2007 23:48:45 +0000

I just finished the campaign this morning, and I’d agree with most everything that has been said. The death of Jackson was a terrific narrative choice simply because player characters NEVER truly die in FPS games; they just reset. I also appreciated having to crawl out myself before dying on the street- it won’t go over as well my second time through the campaign, but it was grim viewing this go around.

I had the same response to the ending as well, as I put the full clip into the primary target my first try before going back and doing it the way IW wanted me to.

Just an excellent, excellent single player campaign. Far better than Halo’s (although I don’t think the multiplayer is as good).

by: Chase

Sat, 17 Nov 2007 03:17:08 +0000

Yea I would definitely say there was more a connection with Soap than with Jackson, but nonetheless still didn’t grip me like it did with you I suppose.

And no problem Shawn, I could point out one or two others if you want.

by: Shawn Drotar

Fri, 16 Nov 2007 22:41:48 +0000

Thanks for the typo alert, Chase - it’s fixed.

by: David

Fri, 16 Nov 2007 22:26:38 +0000

Those are some good points, Chase. Although, I did get somewhat attached to the characters. In the final scene where Soap watches one fellow soldier go down in slow motion, I felt some definite emotion, and when the captain is being given CPR at the end, I felt compassion.

Also, on seeing a “user” character being killed, towards the end when Soap is down and he is pretty much in the same state Jackson was before his death (minus the nuclear effects), I said to myself, “No, not him too.” that’s just me, but I did have a feeling of not exactly knowing what was about to happen. When the captain slid his gun, that’s when things came together. What a great ending!

by: Chase

Fri, 16 Nov 2007 21:38:14 +0000

Oh yea, one last thing:

I think while at times I felt I should be in cover, COD is all about moving and acting quick so a cover system really wouldn’t fit. Especially since the idea of being able to shoot through objects is now present, it really is all about never stopping, and instead always moving in some fashion.

by: Chase

Fri, 16 Nov 2007 21:31:16 +0000

So a few things to add:

1. I don’t think the killing of Jackson holds that much value, because you don’t care for the character. How you interact with the character as he dies becomes irrelevant since it almost becomes a case of “what’s the big deal?” Much like in all of the COD games, you don’t really care for any of the characters so you more are in it for the actual gameplay experience then the story elements. COD is all about putting you on that fixed path with set pieces there there and there and giving you the opportunity to experience it.

2. If you are going to talk about the death of a character in this game, I think the president of the middle eastern country is the better one to talk about. It’s a very good way to open up the game as you can look all around you at the chaos of people being shot, fighting back, and being overrun by the new leaders — ultimately ending with you as the president receiving a bullet to the dome. A well done intro and honestly I think it holds more value as a narrative device than the Johnson death. On that same note, the gunship sequence probably has the most impact on gamers. The cold calculated video game element to death which is essentially simulated here really is true to life if you’ve ever seen any real-life military videos of these things in action. Having just fought in the insanity below and now making jokes from a mile above really makes you feel very uneasy about how inhuman it all feels.

3. If you do look closer, the middle eastern country being overtaken is Saudi Arabia, I guess Infinity Ward just wasn’t allowed to say it. So looking a bit below the surface it does try to do that part a little more seriously, and does maybe try to make the good/evil a little less defined considering the US relations with SA.

4. I would agree that the pacing of this particular COD tram ride is one of the best single-player experiences I’ve had this year. The set pieces are all chock full of COD goodness, and besides some few things that still carry over from the past games such as highlighted automatic objectives (why can’t I blow up a turret with a grenade, why must I shove a C4 on the glowing spot?) and the very linear path, it handles the single player in a very nice way with big highs and lows. This time around there were some more stealth and low-key missions and I think that really shows IW now more than ever gets pacing is key, and it no longer has to be one sustained massive coronary.

5. I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect your other main character to be killed if you mess up shooting the main terrorist at the end. I don’t think gamers would accept that. So while it may be a bold choice, the mass market that this game appeals to would be angered I think — having to play a whole game over just to have the one guy live and not die this time around. Plus as I mentioned above about their linear attitude, it would be completely out of character for IW to do this since they have always been very specific about planning out the exact route which they feel will be the best way to tell the story.

6. Sorry the grammar person in me has to say this. You spell gun “jun” when talking about the final gameplay sequence…Just saying.