Where Modern Warfare's Campaign Goes Wrong

Channel:

The Gaming Discourse

Subscribers:

11,000

Published on December 20, 2019 12:09:23 AM ● Video Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJIQQi-7wZM

Game:

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare (2019)

Duration: 31:21

1,104 views

90

SPOILERS - THE ENTIRE CAMPAIGN.
Modern Warfare fulfills its commitment to being dark, gritty, and uncompromising, but does so within a confused narrative, making the entire experience feel uncomfortable and forced.

MPORTANT NOTES:
I nearly scrapped this video because I had a tough time balancing the things I wanted to say with some things that were better left out or that I felt like I already said. I decided rather than scrapping it, I’ll put some of the stuff I took out/ended up not writing here.
1-On Farah’s Stance Against the Use of Chemical Weapons and Hadir’s Use of them
The first person to watch this video (before I uploaded it) asked me if it was really necessary that Farah should spend a scene talking about why she’s against using chemical weapons (especially when she says ‘they kill all things’). I’d like to more thoroughly explain my opinion. Between Farah, Hadir and Al-Qatala, we have three entities with different opinions on ethical warfare, and we know where each stands. To put it simply: Farah is just, Hadir is more gray, and Al-Qatala is evil. Regardless, Hadir/Al-Qatala think their actions are justified (like Barkov). But Farah’s never given a chance to say why she thinks Al-Qatala/Hadir are wrong. She’s willing to fight/die for her country, but she also has lines she won’t cross, even if her moral code risks her losing the fight for her country. Now, in the context of an action or adventure game, I don’t think this omission would be all that big of a deal. But Modern Warfare is in a different context; It wants to be taken seriously. With that context in mind, I think Farah’s character (and the story in general) would’ve been better had it spent time explaining the deeper philosophy behind why it’s important that the good guy (Farah) has principles, even if those principles risk defeat.
2-Barkov is labeled as a ‘rogue’ General at the beginning of the game.
It’s brief, but Barkov is labeled as a rogue general in the first cutscene right above his picture. This isn’t mentioned anywhere else in the campaign, and is a little confusing considering Russia disowns him at the very end.
3-In the cutscene after Captive (young Price) there are American troops.
You can see them behind Price as he boards the helicopter at the end. It’s brief, but they are there. Still, this doesn’t indicate how the west has intervened in Urzikstan over the last decade (or longer), and doesn’t provide answers for why Al-Qatala attacked Piccadilly.
4-On Hadir killing Barkov being a problem but Farah killing Barkov not.
Late in the campaign, Farah’s forces are deemed a terrorist organization. It’s never explicitly stated why, but I would assume it’s because of Hadir stealing/unleashing the gas. Hadir killing Barkov would be a catalyst to a US-Russia war because Hadir is an American asset. The idea behind declaring Farah’s forces as terrorists is (I assume): If the US distances itself from Farah, it will calm relations between US and Russia, lessening the consequences of whatever Hadir does. This also means that Farah killing Barkov is fine for US-Russia relations because the US now deems her a terrorist. Problem is, Alex, Price, and Garrick (CIA and SAS) join Farah’s attack. So while Farah isn’t an American/UK asset, Alex, Price, and Garrick still are. Not to mention Laswell (Alex’s CIA handler) starts the attack with a drone strike and they bring along a tank, which is American. So if they wanted to keep it a secret that the US/CIA was supporting the Urik militia in their attack on Barkov’s lab, then they did a bad job.
5-About this line:
“Price operates according to what seems like his own code. He felt like shooting this woman was the right call and that’s all there is to it. But Garrick’s character is less defined, and so are we as players.”
I’m not saying Price made the wrong decision when he shot the woman. What I am saying is that we, as players (and Garrick as a character) might feel bad about shooting her/the situation in general, even if it was the right call. As I said, you don’t feel like a hero at the end of Clean House. But Modern Warfare never addresses this. It never saves time for introspection.

Find Our Podcasts Here:
-Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1mZSVw2R9Io1nu-dkXgZ_w
-iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/the-gaming-discourse/id1188835165?mt=2
-Soundcloud: @thegamingdiscourse
Connect with us:
Gaming Discourse Twitter: @GamingDiscourse
GD Facebook: www.facebook.com/GamingDiscourse

Other Statistics