Russia Gives MW2 Cold Shoulder

The Russian government is apparently not a fan of how the country is represented in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, as all copies of the console version of the game have been recalled from stores.

Infinity Ward has also released a patch for the Russian PC version of the game which will remove the “airport” mission from the game entirely reports HellForge, citing a Russian gaming website. The mission in question features a civilian slaughter carried out at the behest of a Russian terrorist named Makarov.

Re-edited console versions of the game, once given the go ahead by Russian censors, could be introduced to stores within a month.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone

60 comments

  1. 0
    Morkoa says:

    Im currently in the US Army and in Iraq (yes we are still here). But i do think that while the game is being withheld from the gamers there it is not that retarded of a reasion\

    Once you stop quabling about past wars and conflicts that dont relate as much to the topic at hand(and are alredy over and done with get over it!),  think of this.

    This is not some gamer ban, from my prespective, its the russian govermnet trying to look good considering the way our politicans and goverment officials see the game as a russia is bad thing. And as we ALL know most goverments are kinda retarded. So in short (as not to rabble) russia is trying to see more like they care(as they alredy do) as other goverments get kinda warry (parinod retards in my oppinion as a soldier)  but while we are not as fond of our goverment and politics it is a harsh field to be in.

    We may be gone but never forgoten.

  2. 0
    iceman654 says:

    ****The govenment censorship in Russia is worse than Australia, although with the way Australia is at the moment I could guess that Australia would one day be worse than Russia in terms of censorship****

    The fact you’re even mentioning the two countries in the same sentence when discussing censorship, clearly displays your laughable degree of ignorance. Despite a few video game bans, Australia is still one of the most free nations in the world. You just never hear about any of the good stuff that happens, because the media only loves to publish the negative side of things.

    Russia is one of the least free nations in the world, it’s up there with China, North Korea, Iran etc. To compare Australia or any other Western nation to any of those countries is just straight out laughable. You must seriously know NOTHING about the world.

     

  3. 0
    Im_Blue says:

    Ummmmmmmmm where did you get that information from. Back in 2000 when the NRA released a dud report using faulty statistics?

    Gun related deaths steadly decreased throughout the 90’s before and after the new gun laws.

    Also I am curious as to where you get your facts that owning firearms reduces crime? I mean if we followed that logic you might Expect the U.S.A to have low crime rates considering it has such a high level of gun ownership. But you guys instead have an extreamly high rate of crime.

    Further I remember reading somewhere that something like 90% of the time guns are used in self defence in a home invasion they end up hurting loved ones or the gun operator themselves.

    Also on a lighter note havent you seen Reservoir Dogs when Tim Roth robs the car and the girl shoots him in defence. The first thing Tim Roth does is glock her back.

    While you are talking hypotheticals do you really think the ‘punk criminals’ wouldn’t shoot back if they started getting shot at. And supposing they don’t back down when you wave a gun in their face, and instead pull there own, is that a situation you really wanna be in? A gun fight with a crack head over a T.V.?

  4. 0
    Erik says:

    "You’re basing your argument on your belief that a criminal, when faced with the option of attempting to commit their crime facing armed resistance or fleeing, will often decide to commit the crime."

    And you are basing your argument on your belief that the criminal knows that you are armed when they approach you.  So unless you are wearing some kind of ridiculous wild west holster out in open the criminal will pretty much commit himself to the crime then act accordingly when the victim escalates things.

    "It doesn’t matter if you’re Master chief or not; a criminal breaking into a house, upon hearing the chambering of a round in a shotgun, assault rifle, rifle, or pistol, will leave the premises far more often than not."

    Unless they feel that they must defend themselves, when they weren’t planning on such a drastic approach in the first place.  I myself would try to escape my home rather than have a shoot out in it.  I really don’t think I would want to get shot over someone who only planned on sneaking in, grabbing a vcr, and slipping out.

    "Criminals aren’t hardened professionals; they’re lazy thugs, acting like they’re fearless, an act quickly abandoned when a pistol is turned on them."

    I think that I would rather face off against the hardened professional.  The lazy thugs are more likely to freak out when a gun is pulled on them.

    "Your story could easily have gone a far more violent way, with your father being shot upon turning over the cash. Then we’d be talking about ‘if he’d had a gun, he could’ve fought back’."

    No I don’t think I would be talking about that.  You would I’m pretty sure.  But I know that I wouldn’t be.  Fighting back is one of those Hollywood things.  The real world is far less forgiving.  If I had a gun with me in such a situation I would not use it.  I’m not a video game hero, and I’m not going to be able to valiantly fight off my attacker.  I’m sure there are a number of things I would do, like shit my pants.  As that is the way of the real world.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  5. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    Actually, the department of justice says there are between 1 million and 1.5 million instances where a firearm prevents the commission of a crime. 

    You’re basing your argument on your belief that a criminal, when faced with the option of attempting to commit their crime facing armed resistance or fleeing, will often decide to commit the crime.  This is bullshit.  Criminals would rather flee than fight.  It doesn’t matter if you’re Master chief or not; a criminal breaking into a house, upon hearing the chambering of a round in a shotgun, assault rifle, rifle, or pistol, will leave the premises far more often than not.  Criminals aren’t hardened professionals; they’re lazy thugs, acting like they’re fearless, an act quickly abandoned when a pistol is turned on them.

    You may not believe that legal firearm ownership has any affect on crime rates, but the facts point out otherwise.  The same is true of Concealed Carry.  They’re both great deterrents.

    Your story could easily have gone a far more violent way, with your father being shot upon turning over the cash. Then we’d be talking about ‘if he’d had a gun, he could’ve fought back’.  Concealed Carry is a fantastic thing, preventing crimes with firing the pistol at the crimnal rarely being necessary.

    Also, I see no problem with more dead criminals.  Maybe that’s just me.

  6. 0
    Erik says:

    Although I think that gun ownership should be a protected right, to insinuate that gun ownership would make crime go down is a really ridiculous statement.  No you are NOT Master Chief nor do the criminals think you are Master Chief.  Pulling a gun in a crime situation means that the likelyhood of there being bloodshed in a crime is much higher.  Yes for the criminal sometimes, but for the victim also other times.

    The summer before last when driving an Ice Cream truck my father was robbed at gunpoint.  When the criminal got the register (with all of $15) he took off.  Had my father had a gun and pulled it, well there would have been a dead person in that situation.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  7. 0
    sharpshooterbabe says:

    Maybe if Russia keeps more control of their people & government they wouldn’t of had to of banned this game. Sorry. But that’s how I see it. & especially the USSR……which there is still a small group of them left in hiding today……yeah they wouldn’t like that scene either. Or would they?

     

     

    "It’s better to be hated for who you are, then be loved for who you are not." – Montgomery Gentry

  8. 0
    State says:

    Perhaps you should ask people who live in countries like the US and UK for their experiences as you appear to have no knowledge yourself.

    To state that Bush presidency was as oppressive as the regime in Russia is ridiculous. To state wild ideas about how the Conservative party in the UK aims to bring in an oppressive regime is ridiculous too.

    It’s one thing for politicians and lawyers to make a name for themselves calling for the banning of such item (usually due to the belief of potential damage it could do), it’s another to actually ban something because it criticises the government and the country. The US and UK are more worried about its populations, Russia is more worried about its government.

    For the people that claim games should be banned because of the "damage" it does to people’s minds, you are obviously evidence that they may have a point.

  9. 0
    F__ked up says:

    hmm this controversy reminds me of the controversy surrounding Kurtlar Vadisi Irak AKA Valley of the Wolves: Iraq after all it was banned a few theaters.

    but its only fiction why should we care?

     


    I am a critical thinker not a dumb ass inbred conservative or a jackass liberal

    Pedophiles are the new Nazi / Communist. Labeling someone a Pedophile will get them blacklisted even though there is no evidence.

    Murder is not a crime when done in self defense, a time of war, or when done by court order (death penalty). People cry murder when fetus are aborted. How about when the mother could die? The mother is 13 years old? The mother was raped? The child is a product of incest? Is foster care really the best answer for children who’s parents cant take of them? How many children actually end up in foster care when their parents are dead beats?

    A 14 year old is child when they have sex but is an adult when they commit murder?

  10. 0
    ZAR says:

    There are moments when I really wish I could link this forum together with some of my Russian friends.

    Just to give some people here a hint of an idea how living in Russia (which is only one state of the Russian federation) ACTUALLY is.

    Yeah, there is censorship, yeah there are nutter politicians claiming that porn and video games are bad and what not.

    But what’s the difference?

    Politicians behaving like dictators? Nutters in charge of censorship debates? Media censorship, propaganda and “embedded journalism”?

    Sounds a lot more like our “Western Civilised Countries” these days than Russia to me.

    ZAR.

  11. 0
    Im_Blue says:

    Dude I live in Australia and its really not THAT bad. The R-18 thing sucks ass, but thats what happens when conservatives and hardline christians are in power.

    We do have some issues with freedom of speach, because we don’t have an eshrined Bill of Rights.

    But from my knowledge we rarely have an troubles with the government telling us what to think.

    In fact most of the controversial issues we experience involve big business suing for defermation since the individual has limited BONAFIED rights.

    That being said nothing extreme ever really happens. This R-18 thing is a rather unique example, but again its to be expected when you have both a government system that allows ONE person to make such a decision, and when said person has a strong conservative/christian background.

    Also, because you reminded me of it a few threads back, Austin Lewis asked how crime was down here since we limited gun laws. As far as im aware its comprartivly lower than the U.S.

  12. 0
    TBoneTony says:

    But still, Russia has great music, great games like Tetris for example…

    Yet the Government only see the bad things in Videogames and nothing else.

    The thing I hate about Censorship is that it is mostly being enforced on works of FICTION…

    Well you could have the opposite, FOX NEWS smearing everyone and even though they are the worst in news journalism, not even they would allow this sort of censorship in their own country.

    Yes, journalists do get shot if they talk against the government in Russia, that is why it sucks so much.

    I would rather have Fox News smearing everyone in the planet than having a government telling everyone what they should or should not do.

     

  13. 0
    TBoneTony says:

    The govenment censorship in Russia is worse than Australia, although with the way Australia is at the moment I could guess that Australia would one day be worse than Russia in terms of censorship.

     

  14. 0
    chadachada321 says:

    I wonder if Red Dawn is censored over there…

    On a somewhat-related note, they are filming the remake of Red Dawn in my town and surrounding towns/cities. All of the forest/wooded scenes are being shot in my township or the one next to mine, it is so freaking awesome.

    Anyways, Russia = censorship. Boo on them.

    -Optimum est pati quod emendare non possis-It is best to endure what you cannot change-

  15. 0
    Father Time says:

    Just say the villain’s from Georgia or some other former Soviet state for the russian version or would they still be angry over that?

    —————————————————-

    Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it’s over they have the same positions they started in.

  16. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    I feel we need a new tag for censorship.  Also, maybe a tag for ‘Russia Sucks’.

    I sincerely hope that Russian citizens didn’t turn their games in or update their PC games with the new patch; the whole thing is moronic.

  17. 0
    ZAR says:

    Uncle Tom’s Cabin is also “only” fiction. So why bother with its content, right?

    And, yeah, you missed something. I wonder what you and your kind would say if any Russian game depicted your very own country arming and training those very same terrorists in Afghanistan they are now fighting.

    ZAR.

  18. 0
    axiomatic says:

    Did I miss something somewhere?  Have worldwide IQ’s dropped rapidly? This is a game of FICTION! So Russia is going to enforce this stupidity on BOOKS and MOVIES as well right? RIGHT?!?!

  19. 0
    ZAR says:

    Wounded Knee, My Lai etc. etc. etc.? Not part of your history book, eh?

    Being lectured by you is really an honour! You’re not only a complete ignoramus, you’re also proud of it.

    And isn’t it strange, how you try to push the Fox-News version of things as often as possible? But maybe that’s why you came here in the first place.

    And you certainly wouldn’t find Russia on the map, not even if your own LIFE depended on it.

    ZAR.

  20. 0
    Erik says:

    Also, Uncle Tom’s Cabin is avaliable in many US bookstores.  So your statement further falls flat.  I don’t know how you do things, but I prefer the "I don’t agree with what you say but I’ll defend your right to say it" over your way.

    I mean Austin is still allowed to speak afterall.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  21. 0
    Erik says:

    "I wonder what you and your kind would say if any Russian game depicted your very own country arming and training those very same terrorists in Afghanistan they are now fighting."

    There is a game like that.  Do you want to know what it’s called?  It’s called Modern Warfare 2.  The person who is behind all of the terroristic acts in Modern Warfare 2?  An American.  So perhaps before you open your gob you should get some perspective first.

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  22. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    I wonder what the Russians would say if someone made a movie about the way the Russians REALLY fought the war in Afghanistan.  You know, killing livestock and children and women from their helicopters, setting boobytraps aimed specifically at children, raping the locals.

    Oh, but don’t let that get in the way of your ‘America is evil’ tangent.  We gave them the tools to fight back, put a stop to the butchers, and to kick them out of their land.  And then, due to the fact that no one in our government really seemed to give much of a fuck about the country anymore, we abandoned them while they rebuilt, providing a great place to foster hatred for America. 

    By the way, that training?  Helped a bunch of illiterate people demolish one of the two superpowers, and helped them reclaim their country.  Oh, and it also helped lead to the fall of the USSR, which you benefitted from whether you know it or not.

  23. 0
    State says:

    You’ve completely missed the point. The reason the Russian government wants to ban media that portrays Russia in a bad light because it is damaging to their image.

  24. 0
    axiomatic says:

    You know… I heard that the Gungans from Star Wars are upset that George Lucas portrait them as clumsy Rastafarian stoners? Should we fear that the gungans would start to round us all up and (clumsily) kill us? No because they don’t exist, and neither do the Russians in Modern Combat 2.

  25. 0
    State says:

    Apart from the fact that Russia assassinates journalists who criticise the government, works of fiction that Russia has banned include the film Borat, whilst Indiana Jones 4, South Park, The Simpsons and Family Guy received calls to be banned in Russia due to its portrayals of the Communists or containing criticisms of the current government.

  26. 0
    Im_Blue says:

    Did I say that supporting the Taliban had anything to do with wanting them to live a western liberal lifestyle? No, you are puting words in my mouth. I said you used them to fufil a higher purpose (again the collapse of communism) and in doing so you supported a group that is less than friendly to western larglery seculrist democracy.

    Also despite the fact that I do not have an extensive knowledge of the Soviet actions in Afghanistan I naturally assumed they were fucked up. All war is fucked up and civilians get hurt. That has minimal bearing on the argument at hand. When i said your government used a group of people i meant exactly that. You USED a group of people to acheive a certain goal. If your government really cared about those people they would have continued with support after the war.

    I mean the two wars you are fighting now are / were against regimes that your government funded and trained. Do you not see any problem with this?

    Finally if you really intended to insult me and me alone why did my country even come into the equation at all?

  27. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    I don’t know if you know this, but the Afghani people wanted the Soviets gone.  The Pakistanis wanted the Soviets gone.  Nobody wanted the Soviets there.  Sure sounds like we were more attuned to their ‘wants and desires’ then you like to think.

    You seem to not care to do any real research into the history of the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan.  Their invasion was one of the most brutal in modern history.  Killing people and livestock en masse from helicopters.  Killing people around refugee camps.  Designing boopytraps targeted specifically at children.  Nobody in the muslim world was really happy to have them there.  They were ecstatic to recieve equipment and aid, even though much of the equipment came from their hated enemies in Israel or was at least funnelled through them.  They were ecstatic to recieve weapons capable of destroying the Hind Gunships that ravaged their country.  As I said elsewhere, the problem was that we never helped them rebuild, and the blame for that goes to the government as whole at the time. No one really cared after the Soviets left.  The assistance we gave them fighting the Soviets had NOTHING to do with wanting them to live a ‘western liberal life style’.

    The invasion of Afghanistan was not without reason or merit.  It demolished much of the Taliban’s hold, a group whose most famous accomplishment was destroying a giant statue of Buddha with RPG’s.  It scattered Al Qaeda into the mountains, captured 5 of the people behind the 9/11 attacks, and captured much of their stocks of weapons, cash, equipment, and decimated their ranks.  It also served as a warning that we wouldn’t sit around while our people were attacked.

    I didn’t mean to imply that your whole country was stupid, rather I meant to imply that you are stupid.  Although I have met quite a few stupid Australians (all of my wife’s friends). 

  28. 0
    Im_Blue says:

    Well ok I should have specified that it happened in the Regan era not Bush Snr. I will concede that I was wrong in that aspect. Im not prepared to just assume that my country benefited from the colapse of the Soviet Union however since NONE of us are in a position to assume anything about what the world would look like if it were still influenced by bilateral world powers.

    More to the point do you REALLY assume that I wasn’t aware WHY your government provided arms to a nationalist/fundementalist group? Do you actually assume that I am THAT LAZY. THe motive for your governments support changes little, you used a certain group of people to fight a greater purpose (the collapse of "Communism"), without respect for there own wants and desires, which are pretty obviously NOT sympathetic to a western liberal lifestyle.

    Now as a result your country and MINE are caught up in two wars which we probably wouldn’t be in if you guys hadn’t have tried to dictate the political climate in the Middle East. Hence my original point still stands, If i lived in your country I would want a president which didn’t have an aggresive foreign policy. You have done nothing to even challenge that argument, rather you have just given us all a broader history lesson that i didn’t deem entierly relevant for an internet post.

    Furthermore to the point do you really take one Australian’s post on a fucking gaming website to be representative of Australian’s historical knowledge? You honestly think that our entire country is to lazy to pick up a history book? You really are cementing your image as an irrational xenophoic biggot.

    Not meaning to compliment myself but I at least have the common sense to not to assume all Americans are as hateful and irrational as you are. Many are well informed and well……….. nice.

  29. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    Maybe in your country you should learn to open a fucking history book.  Bin Laden received money from the CIA to help fight the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, along with some weapons. That was during Reagan, not Bush Sr.  The assistance and money was, of course, being given to help them fight off the Soviet invaders, which they did beautifully.  Sadly, after watching a bunch of illiterate people demolish the Soviet army, the government as a whole lost the taste for aiding Afghanistan, and didn’t send a few million more dollars to help them rebuild, thus creating an environment where hatred for America would fester.

    By the way, the defeat in Afghanistan was one of the big stepping stones to the demolition of the USSR.  Something which your country of people too lazy to learn history benefitted from.

     

  30. 0
    Cerabret100 says:

    yeah but since when has most fps or CoD’s really needed anything more than that? (no i’m not that big an fps fan unless it’s Half-Life 2 or Fear 1/2)

  31. 0
    Im_Blue says:

    It was also the country of the planner and most of the group that recieved C.I.A. funding and assistance under the leadership of the last Republican Regime. If I lived in your country (which im glad i don’t) id like my Presidents to have a far less agressive foreign policy.

  32. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    Yeah, the country where the planner and most of the group that were responsible for the attack were hiding out was obviously a country that had nothing to do with it at all. 

    I’d prefer a president with at least one or the other, rather than a man who preaches hope and change and then can’t even make a decision.

  33. 0
    Bennett Beeny says:

    Well, when we had a president who many thought had a spine, a handful of Saudis blew up the Twin Towers and we responded by attacking the only Middle-eastern country that pretty certainly had nothing at all to do with it.  I prefer a president with a brain.  Spines are overrated.

  34. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    Think about this: 4 American Citizens and 1 Iranian citizen shoot up an airport.  What would the response be?

    Kick the crap out of Iran?  That’s where my money is.  Well, under leadership with a spine, anyway.

  35. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    Despite him clearly being shown on CCTV footage stills in a few briefings holding a machine gun in the airport and shooting. That’s just bad plot writing.

    ————————————————–

    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  36. 0
    Austin_Lewis says:

    SPOILER*************************************************

     

     

     

     

     

     

    It would seem that Makarov was shooting up the airport with two purposes in mind.

    1) To avenge the death of Imram Zakhaev and the role that the Russian government played in it.

    2) To start a war between the USA and Russia. At the end of the shoot out, the player character,  an Ex-Ranger turned CIA agent, is shot and left behind, sparking the match that lights the fuse and makes the whole shooting look like it was an American plot.

  37. 0
    Erik says:

    I’m not a fan of W. and frankly think that he should be help personally responsible for the deaths of American Soldiers and Iraqis due to his mistake of a war, IE the end that Saddam met.  But censorship was NOT one of his sins.  With a massive laundry list of mistakes that he made, why the fuck do you feel it necessary to make something up?

    -Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person’s fear of their own freedom-

  38. 0
    State says:

    Any proofs for that claim? Looks like another "specialist" on Russia…

    Well the fact that this article exists about the Russian government trying to censor this game sort of proves my point doesn’t it?

  39. 0
    ZAR says:

    > Censorship is extreme, but I’m hardly surprised that they
    > don’t like their depictions in the game.

    Any proofs for that claim? Looks like another “specialist” on Russia…

    ZAR.

  40. 0
    axiomatic says:

    And why pray tell does Russia not have the same issue with fictional books and movies which depict the same thing?

    This is a soapbox issue, thats why. It is tres cool to pick on video games right now since Elvis and the Beatles are too old to blame the worlds ills on now.

    Hypocrisy at its Russian finest.

  41. 0
    State says:

    Of course Russia would have a problem with the game because of the way it depicts the country. Censorship is extreme, but I’m hardly surprised that they don’t like their depictions in the game. No doubt a lot of Americans would be unhappy if a game depicted them as the bad guys.

    It seems that it is easier to make the Russians the bad guys instead of a group of extreme Islamists (a more tangible enemy) due to the political correctness in the world today.

  42. 0
    ZAR says:

    > Whatever. I’m just disgusted how governments/leaders
    > who push oppressive censorship on the lives of their
    > people are still revered in certain circles here in the
    > ‘states.

    You mean like former president Bush (jr.)?

    > Too bad Soviet culture has so crushed the independent
    > spirit of so many Russian and Eastern European societies
    > that they know only to look to the “fearless leader”
    > for guidance & handouts.

    The United States are actually located in Eastern Europe and once belonged to the Warshaw Pact? History must be rewritten!

    Nope, dude, you don’t know squat about Russia and I bet you’ve never even been there and would’nt even find it on a map. (Especially since the Soviet Union has been disbanded for decades and IT’S NOT THE BAD, RED COUNTRY ON THE MAP ANYMORE.)

    But I guess for some people it’s just too much Fox News and Rush Limbaugh these days.

    ZAR.

  43. 0
    Zerodash says:

    Whatever.  I’m just disgusted how governments/leaders who push oppressive censorship on the lives of their people are still revered in certain circles here in the ‘states. 

    Too bad Soviet culture has so crushed the independent spirit of so many Russian and Eastern European societies that they know only to look to the "fearless leader" for guidance & handouts. 

  44. 0
    GrimCW says:

    so its bad to do it in FPS, but doing it in an RTS is good maybe? maybe not the terrorist mission so much, but World in Conflict has russians loading civi’s onto buses or trying to destroy those buses once taken back by U.S. troops.

  45. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    It set the bad guy up as shallow two-dimensional stock-baddy. Why’s he shooting up the airport? Because he’s a bad guy. And that’s about as deep as the scene gets.

    ————————————————–

    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  46. 0
    Cerabret100 says:

    From what i’ve seen, it is a horrible scene.

    But isn’t that the point? It sets up the bad guy, there is no moral grey area here.

    It’s like in No Country For Old Men (just watched), the first act of the bad guy is to brutally kill a cop, and looks damn crazy doing it. Because of that (and further actions) we know without a doubt he is truely evil and crazy.

    Same situation here.

  47. 0
    Red_Flag says:

    Ironic. IW wants to "push the envelope" with the airport scene, but buckles and caves when an entire national market could be closed because of it. Talk about artistic integrity.

  48. 0
    iamtienpham says:

    I really feel all this MW2 crap is government and news groups being the bully on the playground. Less this has a point, and more of "hey, look at me I can do this".

Leave a Reply