Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So I think it's cool to fight the russians, but I just cant seem to comprehend the campaign. Russia vs USA bascially, there was a european soldier in it so that covers that but were was Canada in all this? If Russia invades USA like that, there's just no way Canada will sit back and do nothing. Anyone got any comments on this matter?

...Wrong forum?

Video Games is one up.

oh I didn't even know there was a video game forum o.O thanks

The absence of Canadian support was your problem with the campaign?

If you're tracking an evil Russian guy and he's just attacked an airport, why not just shoot him? Instead you're tasked with walking around with him, machine gunning civilians. When the Russians find that US spec ops was complicit in killing Russian civilians and soldiers they've got every right to be pissed.
That said, the Russian response was just plain goofy. Airdrop troops into the suburban US, then bring in BT-7s to drive up and down mainstreet. Were the Russians just shooting stuff up in retaliation, or did they actually think they could occupy part of the US? Seriously, when Red Dawn is more plausible you've got problems.
Why did Brazilian mobsters start a running gun battle with special ops? Seriously, what was in it for them that they were willing to take a hundred odd casualties?
The plot actually reads that a Brazillian arms dealer under torture told the spec ops guys that the villain's nemesis is in a prison in Siberia, and without bothering to find out who the prisoner is or how he'd be useful spec ops commit a massive number of troops, choppers and strike fighters to attacking the prison. While the US capital is in Russian hands...
The prisoner is Cpn Price, from the first game. Despite being captive for three or four years, Price is immediately returned to command of the spec ops group, he then leads the team on an attack on a Russian sub. This allows him to launch a nuke at Washington to set off an EMP and stop the Russian attack. Fortunately no Americans seemed concerned about the launch of an ICBM at the US during wartime...
The final reveal was both utterly predictable and completely incoherent - Shepherd's plan was to implicate the US in the attack on civilians at an airport, in the hope that the Russians would attack the US and cause a horrendous number of casualties, all so that people would care when soldiers died.

Seriously, somebody got paid to write that.

Every day can be a Red Dawn.

Dialogue and characters, brilliant. Story, insanely OTT plotholed nonsense.

But what do you expect. If 'Modern Warfare' was realistic to modern warfare, it would be boring. It's obvious the creators thought about levels/locations/gameplay first then jammed the story around it. And that's fair enough in my eyes. It's not like Hollywood action films do any different.

edit: "If 'Modern Warfare' was realistic to modern warfare, it would be boring." case in point, rainbow six vegas 2's storyline.

I think some of the disappointment is the MW was able to keep it plausible, even killing one of the characters in a horrendous way, whereas MW2 turned it into a B Action Movie.

Yeah I had similar problems with the MW2 plot... Suddenly Russia has the resources for a gigantic stealth invasion fleet (which somehow NOBODY NOTICES making its way to the US west coast) and then spends all these resources invading... McDonalds?
I think they were attempting to get some shock factor from US players, like 'OH MY GOD THIS IS JUST LIKE WHERE I LIVE!' - Did anyone even get a slight twinge of that?

I think more realism would have been present if they'd just had a horde of insane gun-nuts looting and raping everything in sight, while Russian troops just look on in disbelief. Since the only thing on mainland US soil I can draw upon as a reference to the confusion caused by land invasion is the Hurricane Katrina mess.

I'm sorry if this post gets any US patriots riled... I know the vast majority of you are lovely, guns or no, but I'd still be more terrified to be in your country in the event of a disaster then anywhere in Europe.

Controversially yours,
CR.

Yes the plot was horribly cliched and contrived but even as a Brit, I felt a little bit of a twinge walking through bombed out and ransacked US suburbs - so I can imagine it would hit the mark with our colonial friends even more.

This is better then most Video Game threads though. They usually start out, "ZOMG!!!!1!!! How duz dis gunz werk?" or "WTTTF? Dis gamez is stoopid!!!!!1!!!"

JEB_Stuart wrote: "WTTTF? Dis gamez is stoopid!!!!!1!!!"

Stop quoting me on Dragon Age!

I didn't mind the storyline. I thought overall the campaign was very well done.. acting, graphics, gameplay, etc. yeah the story was a little silly in a bunch of parts, but it's a video game where you have to run around and shoot stuff, not citizen kane.

As far as the OP goes... Does canada have a military? or were you talking about the mounties?

The plot was defintely OOT. But it gets you really involved in the game which is great.

I also think that the Russian-American war was just an excuse to kill Russians...

Ahtman wrote:I think some of the disappointment is the MW was able to keep it plausible, even killing one of the characters in a horrendous way, whereas MW2 turned it into a B Action Movie.

This is the thing, it doesn't have to great art, it just has to make enough sense and provide a little context for all the violence. MW1 had a terrific story, it stretched the boundaries (Muslim extremists and Russian nationalists working together?) but nowhere near as far as MW2, and more than that it actually made sense. Event A was properly explained and related to event B, which naturally led to event C. MW2 doesn't just stretch the boundaries, its just plain ridiculous and very poorly told, almost incoherent really. You're best off ignoring the story and just making up your own as you go.

Which is a shame, because when I heard the game was about fighting a Russian invasion of the US I was really keen.

Indeed, it's like the plot was written by Michael Bay...

Or CS Goto.

Captain Roderick wrote:Yeah I had similar problems with the MW2 plot... Suddenly Russia has the resources for a gigantic stealth invasion fleet (which somehow NOBODY NOTICES making its way to the US west coast) and then spends all these resources invading... McDonalds?
I think they were attempting to get some shock factor from US players, like 'OH MY GOD THIS IS JUST LIKE WHERE I LIVE!' - Did anyone even get a slight twinge of that?

I think more realism would have been present if they'd just had a horde of insane gun-nuts looting and raping everything in sight, while Russian troops just look on in disbelief. Since the only thing on mainland US soil I can draw upon as a reference to the confusion caused by land invasion is the Hurricane Katrina mess.

I'm sorry if this post gets any US patriots riled... I know the vast majority of you are lovely, guns or no, but I'd still be more terrified to be in your country in the event of a disaster then anywhere in Europe.

Controversially yours,
CR.

Actually...the "stealth invasion fleet" was explained in the mission "Cliffhanger". That satellite ACM module? The Russians were able to figure out how to fiddle with our satellite/radar tracking systems from it.

I mean I'm not sure exactly how an ACM works in relation to satellite/radar tracking systems...but wars have been won or lost based on breaking the enemy's technology wide open beforehand.

Kanluwen wrote:Actually...the "stealth invasion fleet" was explained in the mission "Cliffhanger". That satellite ACM module? The Russians were able to figure out how to fiddle with our satellite/radar tracking systems from it.

I mean I'm not sure exactly how an ACM works in relation to satellite/radar tracking systems...but wars have been won or lost based on breaking the enemy's technology wide open beforehand.

Which is where the 'incoherency' criticism comes in - it never tells you the box you recapture was related to a downed satellite, never mind that that box was actually cracked before you get it and that allows the Russians to invade. I'm willing to ignore plausibility* to get a Red Dawn scenario, but you should at least explain your scenario. It probably wasn't as badly explained as Captain Price deliberately setting off the nuke - the game never explains that he set it off to detonate an EMP, never explains why he didn't bother to tell anyone else, doesn't explain why the Russians were preparing to launch it before Captain Price got his hands on it...




*Never mind the idea that a single captured satellite box would disable an entire satellite network, which in turn would be the only air defence measure of the most power military in the world. Or the logistics of flying aircraft across Russia to the Western US, to drop a squad of paratroops one at a time...

They did tell you the box you recapture was related to a downed satellite. Heck, the hangar you find the ACM in has the downed satellite in it.

But, I'm almost wondering if the ACM's cracking allowed the Russians to disguise their transports with standard airliner codes or maybe even US IFFs.

Cause remember, in the Wolverines! mission you get told that the only things able to actually fire on Russian equipment are direct controlled C/UAVs or standard fighters and equipment.

It's part of why the Russians had so much armor on the ground.

Kankluwen, your logic still misses many important factors... like the MK1 eyeball. How much shipping - civilian and military - is there off the US west coast? Factor in all the Cold War acoustic listening stations, civilian and military shipping anywhere between the Russian bases and the US west coast, non-electronic intelligence, and the fact that modern governments are always keeping an eye on each other, and the justification for the stealth land invasion goes back to what is always was - stoooooooopid.

They'd be challenged, repeatedly, or spotted well before they got anywhere near the US. 'OH IT'S OKAY THAT BIG FLEET IN BATTLE FORMATION MOVING TOWARDS OUR COAST IS ONE OF OURS. EVEN THOUGH WE DON'T HAVE ANY FLEETS LIKE THAT AROUND HERE THAT AREN'T ACCOUNTED FOR. AND IT'S FINE FOR THERE TO BE 3 USS ENTERPRISES LOGGED ON THE DATABASE, HURRRRR.'

Actually, maybe the entire US military was running Vista.

Or perhaps Skynet decided to let it all happen?

'Modern Warfare 3: John Connor vs Captain Price'

WE'VE GOT CONTACTS COMIN' IN FROM THE TACO JOINT.

Greatest moment in any single player game ever. The entire game was just a setpiece trying to rationalize a fight against waves of russians in a strip mall. Glorious. Honestly though, the biggest issue with the whole thing is that there is no way the russians had the force projection to invade the u.s. a mere five years after a devastating civil war destroyed the vast majority of it's arms production and procurement capability. Everything hinges on an impossibility.

Yeah, but it's fiction

It really reminded me of the old red alert games.

Both CoD and RA are sweet game's though.

Shadowbrand wrote:Yeah, but it's fiction

That has never been a free pass. Writing fiction doesn't mean one can suddenly not have a coherent plot line and some form of internal reasoning. Red Alert works because we are set up to understand the goofiness of it: exploding cows! brainwashed squid! ect ect. MW is SRS BZNESS, as the game let's us know. It is projecting a certain verisimilitude but never really follow through on it in 2. It seems more like they came up with set pieces and tried to work a game around it instead of the other way around.

Captain Roderick wrote:Kankluwen, your logic still misses many important factors... like the MK1 eyeball. How much shipping - civilian and military - is there off the US west coast? Factor in all the Cold War acoustic listening stations, civilian and military shipping anywhere between the Russian bases and the US west coast, non-electronic intelligence, and the fact that modern governments are always keeping an eye on each other, and the justification for the stealth land invasion goes back to what is always was - stoooooooopid.

They'd be challenged, repeatedly, or spotted well before they got anywhere near the US. 'OH IT'S OKAY THAT BIG FLEET IN BATTLE FORMATION MOVING TOWARDS OUR COAST IS ONE OF OURS. EVEN THOUGH WE DON'T HAVE ANY FLEETS LIKE THAT AROUND HERE THAT AREN'T ACCOUNTED FOR. AND IT'S FINE FOR THERE TO BE 3 USS ENTERPRISES LOGGED ON THE DATABASE, HURRRRR.'

Actually, maybe the entire US military was running Vista.

Or perhaps Skynet decided to let it all happen?

'Modern Warfare 3: John Connor vs Captain Price'

Except it *wasn't* a land-based invasion. It was purely airborne.

The Soviet BTRs that you fight in the game was purpose designed to be airdroppable, the troops were purely airborne troops, and it looks like they secured DWI fairly early on(which let them land their heavier armour).

Callum wrote:So I think it's cool to fight the russians...

Statement wins the topic

sA

Kanluwen wrote:
Except it *wasn't* a land-based invasion. It was purely airborne.

The Soviet BTRs that you fight in the game was purpose designed to be airdroppable, the troops were purely airborne troops, and it looks like they secured DWI fairly early on(which let them land their heavier armour).

I'm fairly sure they did have a fleet, but if not, then it's even *more* ridiculous. They had jet fighters over the US west coast without carriers? Carriers are something the Russians lack anyway, in a Modern Warfare sense, so to connect with the economic and production issues pointed out by Shuma, they couldn't have got those resources into position. And getting a completely airborne force there FROM RUSSIA without anyone else in the world noticing it, with supplies and enough troops to do anything other than die pathetic, meaningless deaths? I can't be bothered to do the math-hammer, it's 4.5 thousand miles, check out this link for details of a long-range mission with just a handful of planes, and how much support the mission took: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Black_Buck

And therefore yes, it's theoretically possible, with perhaps a thousand transport and tanker planes, to get your first wave there unnoticed. Then all those planes are shot down, either on the return journey or the next time they try it, and all your troops have no supplies, so will surrender in about 2 days. As has been mentioned by in-the-forces members of this forum, 90% or so of military personnel are not front-line personnel, and that's because without all that support, the shooty guys got no bullets, food, or fuel for their shiny tanks. Also take into account how pretty much every airborne assault in history has gone:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Market_Garden
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Crete

I can't believe I'm getting so into this discussion, but then I can't believe someone thinks such a plotline anything short of ridiculous. Fun to play, at least slightly, but I definitely preferred MW1. Actually felt some regard for the characters, and that there was some point to the whole mess, within its own universe. MW2 was like trying to play through the movie Navy Seals.

Dang it, Sebster's said a fair bit of this already, props to him.

I made the mistake of starting a similar post in the video games section but my point was how despite the stirring music in scenes where you are fighting in and around national monuments my gut response wasn't "OMG THEY TOOK THE CAPITOL!!!" it was "This is freakin' slowed!"

Kanluwen wrote:They did tell you the box you recapture was related to a downed satellite. Heck, the hangar you find the ACM in has the downed satellite in it.

But, I'm almost wondering if the ACM's cracking allowed the Russians to disguise their transports with standard airliner codes or maybe even US IFFs.

Yeah, I think that's what they were getting at, but there's no indication in game that the arctic mission to recapture the satellite piece was anything but a success - and there's certainly no effort to tie the satellite piece to the invasion of the US. A coherent story would have these things.

Ignoring the implausibility of the story, more than anything else it's very poorly told.

Cause remember, in the Wolverines! mission you get told that the only things able to actually fire on Russian equipment are direct controlled C/UAVs or standard fighters and equipment.

It's part of why the Russians had so much armor on the ground.

I'm not even worrying about the sheer implausibility of Russia launching an airborne attack on the most powerful country in the world (GDP less than Spain, and in the setting they just went through a bloody civil war). I'm willing to let that slide in order to get into some sweet Red Dawn style action. My problem is how terribly they tell the story.

Seriously, 'The President has been kidnapped by Russians. Are you a bad enough dude to rescue the President?' is a complete, coherent exposition, and enough to justify shooting a pile of Russians. We understand who the bad guys are and why we have to stop them (though I will admit it's arguably a little short on motivation for the villains). Point is, those two lines provide more context for an action game than all the dialogue in MW2, and it's a failing that's even more noticeable given the excellent story in MW1.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Shadowbrand wrote:Yeah, but it's fiction

It really reminded me of the old red alert games.

Both CoD and RA are sweet game's though.

In the Red Alert universe the attack was made possible through mind control. Mind control makes sense in the Red Alert universe, and comes up a lot in play and in the backstory. This makes Red Alert a more coherent and realised universe than CoD.

It is a problem when your universe is less believable than Red Alert.

The bloody civil war was 10 years ago, wasn't it? Shepherd mentions the timeframe during one of his rants.