IW wanted you "close to atrocity" in MW2

By Tom Bramwell Published 20 November, 2009

Every tester "opened fire on the crowd".

Modern Warfare 2 scriptwriter Jesse Stern has said that the goal of the game's controversial airport level was "to put you as close as possible to atrocity". (Beware, spoilers ahead.)

"We've been catching a lot of criticism for that and a lot of praise as well," Stern told GamePro (thanks Kotaku). "People have really strong reactions to the airport scene and it's been fascinating because we all wanted to make it something that would be upsetting, disturbing, but also something people relate to.

"There's something instantly identifiable about it when it happens, when you're in that situation and the level begins."

Stern went on to say that there were periods during Modern Warfare 2's development when the team had to take a step back because the events they were trying to incorporate into the game were coming to life in the real world: terrorists running amok with machineguns in urban areas, Russian tanks rumbling into Georgia...

But they stuck with the airport level, called "No Russian", regardless. "People want to know," Stern explained. "As terrifying as it is, you want to know. And there's a part of you that wants to know what it's like to be there because this is a human experience.

"These are human beings who perpetrate these acts, so you don't really want to turn a blind eye to it. You want to take it apart and figure out how that happened and what, if anything, can be done to prevent it. Ultimately, our intention was to put you as close as possible to atrocity.

Also interesting is Stern's recollections of people testing the game. While reactions were obviously polarised, one thing does stick out: "Every single person in testing opened fire on the crowd, which is human nature."

Picture of Tom.

About Tom Bramwell

Tom is Operations director of Eurogamer Network and Editor-at-Large of Eurogamer.net. He joined the company in February 2000.

Read more articles from Tom by visiting the Tom Bramwell archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (68) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • keyboardmonkey #1 2 years ago

    Another day another MW2 story...

    I enjoyed the Airport level... does this make me sick?

  • Killdare #2 2 years ago

    Ah - I'm not human then. I left the crowd distinctly unshot. No wonder I always end up as a goodie-goodie in Fable/KOTOR/Mass Effect/Black and White ...

  • Deepo #3 2 years ago

    "Every single person in testing opened fire on the crowd, which is human nature."

    Human nature? Really?

  • Lee_Morris #4 2 years ago

    Everyone I've heard talk about that level say they fired on the crowd and it boggles my mind. Why would you want to do that? Honestly please answer cause I cannot fatham it. I still think it is important to the story (if you can call them hodgepoge set of events a story) becuase of what happens at the end of the level. To me it communicates strongly why the russians invade america nd with such force
    Edited by 2 at 20/11/09 @ 08:33

  • 4thVariety #5 2 years ago

    Maybe that says more about the selection process for testers than it says about human nature. Activision even seems aware of that. Why else would they remove the option to shoot civilians for the German version?

    But thanks for wringing one more news item/free advertisement out of that scene. Activision's promotion seems to take every chance to ejaculate this shootout in the face of the public, reminding us that it is not about the message, but cheap shots for attention. Oh Activision, if you only had known in advance what an outrage Tony Hawk would cause by skating in the White House. You would have made it the cornerstone feature in your new Tony Hawk game.

    Well, there is always next year. May I ask to be able to choke babies in the next CoD? I promise to tell my local news team your game made me do it when I choke real babies due to my human nature afterwards.

  • captainrentboy #6 2 years ago

    I opened fire on the crowd without thinking twice, y'know why? Because it's just a computer game, once the people you've shot begin dissapearing/clipping through other bodies and you realise that everyone in the crowd is dressed up in one of six different outfits it kind of loses it's impact/immersion anyway.

  • Darren #7 2 years ago

    "Every single person in testing opened fire on the crowd, which is human nature."

    Huh?!? What a strange thing to say.

    If it was a test only to see how people react in that situation then I'd say that says more about the testers' nature than everyone else's. I mean I didn't shoot them... I found the whole scene tasteless and pointless. It made little sense storywise either, at best it was far-fatched and at worst it was downright stupid IMO. Yeah... sure... it's perfectly believeable to expect a nation to go to war and invade another because one American was framed despite there being bodies of Russian terrorists there too?

    It's been said that the game's set-pieces were done before the story was finalised and, boy, does it show. That says to me that this particular scene was created not for story reasons but purely for the controversy it would cause.

  • TriggerHippie #8 2 years ago

    Every single person in testing opened fire on the crowd

    Isn't that their job? They're testing sweet F.A. if they don't.

  • kentmonkey #9 2 years ago

    Seriously tired of all this constant MW2 coverage. Everywhere you go there's something else being said about the game.

    It wouldn't be so bad if they'd kept up the quality of COD 4,and it deserved all this hype, but they didn't. And if that airport level was meant to make you feel 'as though you were there', then it failed miserably. Watching people stand and wait for you, even though they can hear gunshots ten feet away, and only run away when you get close to them, just so they can be shot down, was totally unrealistic. And I didn't partake in the shooting of civilians, because that's not what I would have done in real life. I'd have taken the opportunity to shoot the others from behind, before the atrocity even started.

    Last COD I buy unless it's with chips or until they buck their ideas up and stop trying to ruin the industry with their self-indulgent and aggressive sales techniques.

  • the_dudefather #10 2 years ago

    if they were actual people sure, but it's more akin to opening fire on a puppet show (of the marionette variety, otherwise you would get a lot of puppeteers with missing fingers and hands)

  • keyboardmonkey #11 2 years ago

    @ Lee_Morris
    "Everyone I've heard talk about that level say they fired on the crowd and it boggles my mind. Why would you want to do that? Honestly please answer cause I cannot fatham it."

    Because it was mindless violence and fun.. It's something you would never do in real life so it's fun to do in a game.... Just like in GTA carrying out drive by shootings, trying to run people over, stealing a cop car...

  • Santino #12 2 years ago

    i usually always go good when given the chance. first thing i did was shoot at the bad guys standing beside me, which of course the game doesnt allow. After that i just made my way through the level stopping to put the odd npc out of their virtual misery, and eventually just started to shoot everything for a bit of fun. Even if you choose to 'be the good guy'' and not shoot any civilians you are then forced to shoot the swat teams that show up to get out of there and finish the level! what a mess the game is storywise it must be said.
    Edited by 1 at 20/11/09 @ 08:47

  • tossetaz #13 2 years ago

    I wish EG would write proper comments like this: [link url=http://www.rockpapershotgun.c om/2009/11/19/wot-i-think-about-that-level/#more-21358 ]http://ww w.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/11/...[/link]

    instead of the constant activision promotion!

  • crwoody #14 2 years ago

    I ran out of bullets on that level.

  • hjarg #15 2 years ago

    This airport level... well, that was just stupid imho.
    You get to be a nice CIA agent that is somehow planted into close proximity of evil evil terrorist Makarov (speaking of that, how long does it take to teach average GI Joe, who is recruited from the standard platoon in Afghanistan, Russian? Not only the language, but the Russian customs and ability to drink vodka by the glass and all that? No wonder it failed. But that's beside the point).
    So, you're a badass CIA agent. You are given gun to mow down innocent civilians. Your comrades march happily ahead turn their backs on you. Including the evil Makarov himself. Now, is there any particular reason I shouldn't be able to just aim the bloody nice gun i've been given towards the back of really evil terrorist Makaroni and pull the bloody trigger?
    Controversial for it's stupidity imho.

  • JahB #16 2 years ago

    "Every single person in testing opened fire on the crowd, which is human nature."

    Human nature? Really?

    yes, it is. it's the forbidden thing to do (like that apple, way back in the days), and if you put something like that in an environment without consequences, people will do it. guaranteed.

  • muscleblade #17 2 years ago

    I didnt bother to shoot at the crowd. It didnt feel right to me. Im not the kind of gamer that goes around killing innocents on the street in GTAIV either. Collateral damage is another thing though.

  • TipTop #18 2 years ago

    "There's something instantly identifiable about it when it happens."

    O_O

    Erm no....

  • OllyJ #19 2 years ago

    It would have been more poignant if the rest of the story had actually made any sense at all!

  • Negotiator #20 2 years ago

    Yes its only a computer game, but that scene is quite hard hitting and remains with you for some time afterwards. It has a realistic feel and tone to it, that say GTA does not, at one point a guy is crawling along the floor with blood pouring out of his stomach. However scenes of this nature are shown in movies all the time and are far more realistic than a computer game, so forget about it.

  • Wyrm #21 2 years ago

    It is identifiable, we're all more than aware of the shooting atrocities that happen in the world, be it terrorism or a nutcase in an American school. It's also in a location that many people are familiar with in day to day life. He isn't saying that we all identify with commiting mass-murder.

  • thesombrerokid #22 2 years ago

    the reason a lot of people open fire on the crowd is because it's the only action the game lets you make, almost everyone will react the same way i reckon:
    try to kill makarov, because the game doesn't even bother to try explaining why you can't.
    failing that you trundle along
    depending on when boredom sets in and to what extend you may hold down the left mouse button, which has zero emotional weight due to the fact that you've been so thoroughly reminded it's a game by forcing you to interact with it in a specific way.

  • andywilkie35 #23 2 years ago

    Non event gets more coverage, great!

    Can we not just be mature about it and say its a fucking computer game and get over yourselves? Cheersthxbye!

  • kangarootoo #24 2 years ago

    I was going to link that RPS article too.

    Again for those not bothering to read the whole thread -
    [link url=http://www.rockpapershotgun.c om/2009/11/19/wot-i-think-about-that-level/#more-21358 ]http://ww w.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/11/...[/link]

    It is really all you need to know about "that level", and the debate that surrounds it.

    If "that level" is our poster boy, our flag bearer, or representative to the rest of the world about how "games can be serious too"... we have been failed.

  • HandOfBeadle #25 2 years ago

    It sounds worryingly as if IW think they actually pulled this off with some level of artistic merit.

  • davisorle #26 2 years ago

    @Killdare

    Dude, i have the same issue. i cant help but always do those things the right way. A problem of being obsessive some times with perfection in things around me in general in my life. Yet in MW2 in the Airport scene I played it once and I killed.. Lots of them since i knew it wouldnt affect the game ( the rest of it.. ) . lol

    Btw as of the statement of the script writer. Im always against ppl and countries banning games and not the way they treat movies etc. BUT.. Dont say it as if you would plainly create a recreation of the Twin towers and the event of 9/11 without wondering what is wreong about it. That said. Great game butthats it.

  • kingcrude #27 2 years ago

    if they wanted the players close to the atrocity, have the player as a civilian trying to escape and then eventually getting shot. if every tester (assuming they were quality assurance) opened fire, then they should have taken it out or got new testers. Everyone I asked did different things.

  • kangarootoo #28 2 years ago

    "if they wanted the players close to the atrocity, have the player as a civilian trying to escape and then eventually getting shot"

    But again, if depicting a true attrocity was the plan, a civilian probably would either escape or be killed immediately. 5 guys simply cannot hold an airport hostage in the way that was depicted.

    Armed security at airports are either military personel or they are from the armed response section of the local police force. And what is more, they are trained specifically to defend airports against attack. 5 guys wandering through an airport in the way shown would get dropped in no time.

    I said when I first saw the movie that I didn't feel it would work, because based on what I was seeing I didn't BELIEVE it. I stand by that. It is as if the director of Bad Boys dropped in a scene from Schindler's List, but only after it got a workover from the Bad Boys script and storyboard team.

  • mcmonkeyplc #29 2 years ago

    I didn't open up on the crowd you sick puppies. Infact I didn't fire a shot until a police man shot me. Then I only shot them not the crowd.

  • Vordred #30 2 years ago

    i found the whole thing pretty pointless.

    i didn't find it shocking in anyway as it's just a game, i did not fire on anyone and found myself getting slightly bored having to walk at a snails pace waiting for all this pointless stuff to end.

    IW is usually good at doing those scripted events, like riding in a jeep well all hell is breaking lose or climbing out of the chopper after the nuke goes off and so on. but that well fell sort, it brought nothing out, like most people just found it pointless

  • gjgjg #31 2 years ago

    I went to pull the trigger and didn't (until the police arrived). I tried to shoot my team but it was disabled. am I a big girl?

  • actionfitz #32 2 years ago

    "Every single person in testing opened fire on the crowd, which is human nature."

    erm. I didn't.
    and tbh, it felt more like a cheap stunt to me than anything like an essential plot device.
    /shrug.
    but then I always max out light side or play good guys in games like fable and KOTOR etc :/
    Mostly thats because the majority of games that say they give you moral choices would have you pegged as either Jesus come down from upon high or some cartoonish Mustash twirling Dick Dasardly cloned Baby eater (yes im talking about you Fable).
    /sigh whatever happened to the grey area, the middle ground... for those of us generally decent sorts that still have he capacity for a rather twisted sense of humour...

  • octavedoctor #33 2 years ago

    OK IW, if you wanted to put people closer, why not turn it into a survival situation and have the player as a civilian in the crowd trying to escape, surely that would have been closer to the attrocity of it all, you could have had a cutscene before hand with you and your family before the gunners arrive.



  • oreillymj #34 2 years ago

    There was a scriptwriter?

  • Whizzo #35 2 years ago

    The biggest atrocity in Modern Warfare 2 was the "plot".

  • Iain815 #36 2 years ago

    I shot everything that moved.

    Because it's just a fucking game.

  • tinners #37 2 years ago

    I stared off with a couple of justice shots to the leg but 5 mins into that level i was hunting people down for sport!

    hopefully that means im still human?? :/
    Edited by 1 at 20/11/09 @ 10:44

  • neems #38 2 years ago

    I didn't fire a shot, until the very end (not counting the time I tried to kill Makarov). The AI bugged out, a policeman had been left behind and Makarov and his pal couldn't kill him, or vice versa. They all just stood there plinking at each other, until I did the deed. It took ages as well, the terrorists don't actually like killing cops, they prefer to let you do it, and it takes some fairly intricate maneuvering to get them to advance the level.

    I don't how many times i saw Makarov get shot, the man must be made of rock.

    PS I thought the level was shit, both in terms of artistic intent, and purely from a gaming perspective.
    Edited by 1 at 20/11/09 @ 10:47

  • kangarootoo #39 2 years ago

    "Every single person in testing opened fire on the crowd, which is human nature"

    It is human nature when your attempt at gritty realism fails. If it had genuinely worked, maybe people would have behaved differently.

  • twoism #40 2 years ago

    Just a thought, but if you were a games tester, OF COURSE you'd open fire during that level, or any other level for that matter. How else would you know it wouldn't glitch like crazy at some point?

  • Shadders #41 2 years ago

    The level was pretty horrible, I never killed the civvies, I did however spend ages to see if there was a way to take out Makarov and his chums, unfortunately there wasn't, which makes no sense, yeah you might be outnumbered, but there are countless places throughout the game where you overcome more threatening odds. It's totally stupid.

    And why weren't there any civilians anywhere else in the game? It's convenient that these battles all take place in ghost towns isn't it?

    The single player of this game is actually a shambles, I enjoyed Army of Two more.

  • linksdad #42 2 years ago

    Also let off plenty of bullets to not arise suspicion but mostly into walls above the crowds head or into gaps where the terrorists had already mowed them down. I wasnt particularly squemish (its only a fucking game after all) about any of it it just didnt sit well with my human nature.

    They chickened out of having a 'proper' airport population, there were no kids.

  • geeza2020 #43 2 years ago

    Shadders -

    No civilians elsewhere in the game? What? other than all the civilians in the generic middle east country the first fucking level is in? Or all the people in the Brazilian levels who run away once you and the enemies start shooting?

    Fail.

    I think people are a little too worked up over this. it doesnt make you a better/worse person if you did or didnt shoot at the civvies during the airport level as some people seem to be insinuating with their rather pompous posts. IW just tried something different. it didnt work. So what? Its a fucking computer game people. And if the story didnt make sense to you in MW2 i feel sorry for you. It was basic as fuck, 2 dimensional and predictable, but it did make sense. Oh and IMO, the airport level was a rare miss, and the rest of the game is fantastic entertainment. Which is all the game should ever have tried to be.
    Edited by 2 at 20/11/09 @ 11:46

  • Eurolamer #44 2 years ago

    American human nature, presumably.

    "I loves ma guuun..."

  • Redeye #45 2 years ago

    Enough, already.

    If I were of a slightly more cynical state of mind, I'd say that EG is becoming either:

    A) Fixated with MW2 to the point of obsession.
    B) Desperate for hits, so keep reeling out this increasingly-tired nonsense to provoke response clicks.
    C) Copping a back-hander from Activision to keep this bollocks front and centre.
    D) Determined to drive readers insane with the incessant drivel coming from Activision and IW.
    E) All of the above.

    Yes, there are one or two of those factors that are more than likely non-starters, but for crying out loud, aren't there more interesting things to be reporting on, rather than the same spiel again and again? Yeesh.

  • sickpuppysoftware #46 2 years ago

    I fired over their heads and at screens in case the terrorists twigged that I was going along with their plan.

  • makeamazing #47 2 years ago

    I opened fire cause i was bored.. though the screams were pretty well done.

    to put you as close as possible to atrocity

    Yes you did IW you gave us a rubbish SP experience... thats as close to atrocity I wanted to go.

  • Shadders #48 2 years ago

    Geeza - In the airport there's about 200 civilians, but across the rest of the game which is almost entirely made up of urban areas there are about 8 civilians. The possibilities of mixing civilians into the combat zones are really amazing, but IW totally bottled it. How cool would it have been if American civilians had come out of their houses with their own weapons during the invasion? As surely that's what would happen in real life. Having that massacre scene just served to highlight how empty all the other areas of the game were. I was really excited when they had civvies in the training bit at the start, I won't go into any more detail here though, I'm halfway through a post for my own blog detailing the game's failings.

  • clockworkzombie #49 2 years ago

    There was an interactive movie made with good bad decision points and the crowd were given good and bad cards.

    The projectionist would count the total and show the piece of film relating to the winning total so the hero would have something good or bad happen to him depending on the vote.

    Some time later he confessed to only shooting the bad parts as human nature being what it was he did not think he needed the bad parts. He was proved right. None of the cinemas in the US asked for the good scenes.

  • Matfink #50 2 years ago

    Hey, I don't see any women or children in the airport scene screenies - are there any (out of curiosity)?

  • butler` #51 2 years ago

    It's funny cus they're trying to make the whole thing sound considered, narratively sound and thought provoking. When in reality it's quite an embarassment.

  • Shadders #52 2 years ago

    Matfink - There are women, but no kids, presumably it's a school day.

  • FirewalkR #53 2 years ago

    Ha! "Human Nature". Perhaps it's human nature to open up on the crowd in the game, coz that's all it is, a game. But very, very, VERY few people would be able to do it in real life, even to maintain cover. Perhaps with massive brainwashing you could get some to do it.

    However, instead of this, I also recommend rockpapershotgun's brilliant article on the mission, that kangarootoo posted previously:
    http://ww w.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/11/...

  • Joco84 #54 2 years ago

    It would have been more fun if that level was an "on-rails"

    House of the Living!

  • Marshall2008 #55 2 years ago

    Its a load of crap. There were no little kids in the airport. Where were the buggys??? Would have been perfect if you could pop a round through mums head, blow dads leg off then walk over and cut the buggy in half with a joyous burst of fire......

    Missed opportunity

  • BiscuitBase #56 2 years ago

    I didn't open fire on the crowd, I shot Markarov in the face, but Infinity Ward decided that this course of action was a fail
    Edited by 1 at 20/11/09 @ 14:55

  • wez_316 #57 2 years ago

    In all honesty... I didn't read any spoilers and finished the game wondering which part of it was supposed to be controversial. What was so bad about the airport scene apart from the boredom of walking around slowly while others do the killing?

    In all honesty... not once in the entire game did I feel disturbed. There was nothing shocking to me in the whole thing. I've seen worse things in games than watching people kill civilians. I mean come on... much worse things. I just don't know what all the fuss is about :S

  • telboy007 #58 2 years ago

    Even though it was just a game I couldn't do it, I had fire over the crowds heads just to make it look like I was keen. Obviously I gunned down the police with full on gusto. Unlike my colleague who was trying to knife the people crawling along the floor... hmm.

  • metalangel #59 2 years ago

    Still haven't played this, is there an ammo limit in this level? Cos I'll want to shoot each person until they're red mush.

  • YourMessageHere #60 2 years ago

    Every single person in testing opened fire on the crowd, which is human nature.

    Aside of the fact they were obviously testing what happened when you did open fire...you create something that appears to offer a choice, but then renders the choice meaningless, stop the clearly obvious way out of the situation (kill Makarov yourself) for unknown and arbitrary reasons, implement the whole thing in a highly immersion-breaking and technically lacking way, and make the good moral choice not only meaningless but actually boring. Then you claim that it's human nature. Are you involved in opinion polls, mister IW goon?

    @ everyone complaining about MW2 stories: It's not like EG is neglecting other things in order to report on this. This is a controversial game and the controversy is ongoing, and the issues that come from it are interesting and important to me and I think to gaming too; I want to hear about it and I'm glad EG are reporting on it. By all means do not read MW2 news if it does not interest you. Or would you rather email the BBC and ask them to stop reporting on Afghanistan because you already know there's a war on there?

  • man.the.king #61 2 years ago

    ""People have really strong reactions to the airport scene and it's been fascinating because we all wanted to make it something that would be upsetting, disturbing, but also something people relate to. "

    I played the level, and I had no reaction. It is just a game, after all. Does that make me apathetic?

  • Adey #62 2 years ago

    i still laugh at all the people who dont understand why the scene was in the game. it was controversial. it was designed to show WHY the russians did what they did. it was a vehicle to carry the story forward. those who dont follow that part should really just give up.

    at the end of the day. its a game. who cares. it was fun for some not for others but it did what it was supposed to do.

  • MrSixer #63 2 years ago

    I didn't open fire either. To be honest I didn't think the scene was necessary at all. It could have been a cutscene if it had to be included.

  • ironmysox #64 2 years ago

    Jesus, why all the fuss? The level was just total nonsense. I didn't feel dirty or guilty for killing everyone I could aim at? It's just a game. I haven't had recurring dreams about walking through Heathrow, spraying hot lead at familes waiting to go on holiday? Grow some balls people. Like the whole MW2 game, to much hype. A totally totally pants level in a totally pants game. I love you, bye.

  • k4rl #65 2 years ago

    jesus christ its a game, I actually switched to my noob tube and blasted f**k out of em. But guess what theres no way I do it in real life. dick heads

  • Phishfood #66 2 years ago

    Part of the job of a tester is to see that everything works right in the game. It wouldn't be professional of them to not open fire on the crowd.

  • BarneyEX #67 2 years ago

    The only atrocity they brought us close was the lack of dedicated servers
    Edited by 1 at 23/11/09 @ 04:27

  • Bluetooth #68 2 years ago

    I shot them all, so unrealistic it was (except for the screams) for they were basically the same 5 or 6 character models. Where were the crying babies, pregnant women, OAP couples going on their annual holiday? They didn't even include the arrogant fat American in an Hawaiian shirt...I know it's Russia, but for it to portray a massacre of civilians you need a wider demographic of characters.

    As it stands, No Russian was a half arsed attempt at something new. Should have been able to shoot babies whilst being held by their cowering mothers, pleading with you not to. That would have been realistic.