• bugieman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    IIRC you never actually have to shoot any of the civilians in that level, but as players we all assumed that you did. IMO that level was the most interesting commentary that has been made in the COD series because it (somewhat sneakily) put the onus onto the player. Most of us just assumed that we needed to gun down the civilians without choice. In my opinion its one of the more poignant moments in the entire series for how it handled such a grim story beat.

      • BigPotato@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        I disagree. Point one, the point of COD games was always to be the “Good Guys™” defeating the “Bad Guys®” but this level has you doing Bad© Guy™ stuff… So do YOU do bad guy stuff because you’ve got to so you can do Good° Guy© stuff or do you abstain? This point is somewhat ruined by “The cops showed up, we gotta shoot them.” Which then directly shows you the gameplay loop of the entire game and begs you not to engage with it.

        Point two, Spec Ops: The Line, don’t worry not the white phosphorus scene. In the refugee camp you need to disperse a crowd of unarmed refugees who are going to kill you. They’ve killed your squad mate and your other squad mate awaits your order. You open fire on the crowd and your squad mate says “What the FUCK? You didn’t need to gun them down!” Jokes on you, the whole time you could’ve shot in the air and they would’ve run. You made the choice to gun them down despite not having weapons. The gameplay loop is “Shoot bad guys because they shoot at you” not “shoot anything you feel threatened by.”

        The point of the game can be anything. The gameplay loop is to shoot enemies to win levels. The point was that unarmed civilians aren’t enemies. Are cops though?