Call of Duty Modern Warfare - what impact has this had on the military history community?

February 4, 2010 12:00 AM

Share |

Unless you have been hiding under a rock for the last three months or so, you were probably somehow touched by the pre-Christmas launch of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2. The numbers speak for themselves really - since it's launch it is estimated that Modern Warfare 2 has raked in close to $1 billion in sales. To put that in some sort of perspective, James Cameron's massive sci-fi epic Avatar has just become the highest grossing film of all time, topping the $1.86 billion barrier. For a videogame to even be in the same ball park as a record breaking film is quite an achievement. And that doesn't even take into account the strong sales of the first version of Modern Warfare - which shifted 14.4 million units in 2007.

As the Modern Warfare PR juggernaut rolled into town a few months ago it suddenly seemed impossible to escape. Newspaper articles, new channels, blogs and websites all added to the media storm, and the pre-release coverage of the now infamous 'No Russian' level - where the player takes on the guise of a terrorist attacking a civilian airport - launched coverage of the game into the stratosphere.

But what impact has this had on our understanding of the military today - and on military history enthusiasts in general? Has the Modern Warfare series opened up the realms of military history to a wider audience? Or has it been detrimental, reinforcing the kind of stereotypes that Hollywood thrusts upon mainstream audiences? Or is all the buzz surrounding it disguising the fact that the game is no more than that, a slice of mindless entertainment?

The Call of Duty series, like it's traditional rival Medal of Honour, were rooted quite firmly in World War 2 for many, many years. I played a couple of the Medal of Honour games through from start to finish - and although I preferred that series to Call of Duty, I couldn't help but feel slightly uncomfortable with the subject matter. Don't get me wrong, I don't want to seem like a prude, or like one of these people who continously lambasts videogames for their violence. Grand Theft Auto, God of War, various incarnations of Zombie slayer Resident Evil...I have played them and enjoyed them. It is not the violence that I struggled with in Call of Duty and Medal of Honour - but having worked at Osprey for 4 years I have been lucky enough to meet a number of amazing men and women who were actually on the beaches of Normandy, or taking cover in a foxhole in the advance towards Germany - and I get a sinking sense that I should not be enjoying playing through situations that these people lived through.

Which is one of the reasons that I didn't pick up a copy of the first Modern Warfare game until this Christmas. Letting you play as a new SAS recruit and a US Ranger operating in an unnamed Middle Eastern country again made me uneasy - the former SAS troopers that I have met in the past have shrugged off their incredible achievements - and bravery with a sense of efficiency and quiet pride. They don't crow about their achievements. This game does, and does so in bucketloads. Your character seems elevated to an almost superhuman status. But what a ride it provides. Within days I had completed the single player campaign, and promptly went out to pick up a copy of the sequel. All the hype is well deserved. In terms of a gaming experience they are brilliant!

Both Modern Warfare games are supremely polished and deserve the praise they have received. Cinematic, action-packed, brilliantly scripted they are addictive playing, and the on-line multiplayer modes are adrenaline pumping, mindblowing and immensely fun. Although I kept on being annihilated by nine-year-olds who had racked up 100s of hours practice despite the age restrictions placed on the games...

Ostensibly both games have also exposed a whole new audience to the equipment and weaponry of a modern army. Hearing people chat away about MP5s, Javelins, Predator drones, Strikers and the immense AC-130 Spectre Gunship suggests that these terms, gleaned from the games are entering everyday knowledge. The array of weaponry is astounding, and reassuringly accurate. In particular I did enjoy finding an A-12 Shotgun and clearing a whole building with it's ridiculously high rate of fire. But as much as the weaponry looks accurate, how it is used remains pretty much fantastical. The fire-and-forget Javelin from time to time seems to be loaded up with four or five rounds. Grenades can seemingly be lobbed over buildings at will. AK-47s are alarmingly accurate, even at significant distances. The claymores that you set up around a map are stunningly clever and don't explode when you or a teammate walk into them, but go off as soon as an enemy gets in range. Get in close enough, and knife attacks can take out wave after wave of enemies - and in multiplayer, throwing knives have become the long distance instant kill weapon of choice for supremely talented players. And bizarrely you can wonder around with your finger pulling the trigger almost continuously and you never seem to run out of ammo - there is always plenty lying around for you to pick up.

Oh yes, and I'm pretty sure that if you are carrying a Heavy Machine gun, as well as an AK-47, a bunch of claymores, 5 frag greandes, 5 flash bangs, a knife, enough ammunition to stop a small army, night vision equipment, radio equipment, and presumably some food or water (definitely not enough re-hydration undertaken, particularly in the desert /city scenes) you probably wouldn't be able to run around at top speed like a mad man.

Some aspects of the game are a little cliched. Virtually all of the enemies that you face up against are armed with the ubiquitous AK-47 and RPG. In fact at times there seem to be more RPGs flying over your head than would ever be possible in real life. Even your enemies are dully predictable. Middle-eastern terrorist threat? Check. Crazy Russian leading a coup? Check. Russian invasion of the US in a Red-Dawnesque re-imagined Cold War going hot scenario? Check. Afghanistan Cave complex? Check. Some situations are obviously more believable than others. But the levels do descend into the ridiculous from time to time. Hurtling down a mountain on a snow mobile whilst picking off enemies with a hand gun? Dressing up in a full ghillie suit, and wandering through an abandoned Chernobyl to take a shot at an enemy from a mile away?

The in-game chatter has also been well researched and is packed with terminology used today. Although by the end of the game I was getting a little tired of being perpetually told to "check my corners" while doing room clearance. And the number of times I was told everyone else was "Oscar Mike" while I was taking cover behind the nearest available barrel/car/wall drove me a little mad. There are a few lovely little touches in the dialogue - little nods to popular culture, like the moment before you breach into a ship in the first game and a character pulls out a shotgun with the words "I like to keep this handy for close encounters" - a line lifted straight out of Aliens!

Ultimately, much of the Modern Warfare games is over the top, mostly unbelievable and somewhat inaccurate. Any yet somehow this has still got people talking about the military. How many video-game playing youngsters knew what a ghillie suit was before these games emerged? I would wager not that many. And that simply cannot be a bad thing. Inevitably that is a far as the interest will go for 90% of the people that pick up and play these games. But every single person whose interest is piqued by this game and goes out and picks up a couple of books because they are interested is a great success for the military-history community. This is taking military history to a new community, which is great.

A few years ago, in the wake of the release of the first Modern Warfare game, Osprey released a pair of Elite books about Special Forces Operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are great books, and so interesting - but the response to them was so great, and so immediate that we were taken aback - and became some of our best ever selling titles, both of which have already had significant reprints. Call of Duty Modern Warfare undoubtedly played a role in this.

Next up for the Call of Duty series is rumoured to be a venture into the previously unexplored realms of the Vietnam War. EA have announced that they are dropping the stale WW2 fare in the next Medal of Honour, taking up a new modern angle and basing the game in Afghanistan. The Creative Assembly and Sega have just announced the imminent arrival of Napoleon: Total War. The epic, much postponed RTS Ruse by Ubisoft is lurking just out of sight.

Call of Duty has raised the bar for videogames dealing with the military - and although it has its flaws, if the current trend for well-researched, well-executed games continues, the whole military history community is set to benefit.

Oh yes, and if you play Call of Duty online and you ever happen to stumble across someone cowering in a corner wailing about how an AK-47 should not be that accurate over this sort of distance - come across and say hi. Its probably me trying to work out how to avoid the hail of gunfire sweeping over my head. But please play nice, I'm having enough problems already!

POST COMMENT

To proceed please login below or register.

Email:
Password:
	Reset Password

COMMENTS

Parker

03-Feb-2010 13:01

I never really liked the Call of Duty games. I was an odd case as a young boy\teenager, because I absolutely hated most games as they weren't realistic enough. I liked to collect and organise books and facts on aircraft and their specifications.

I was much relieved when I found out what a 'flight simulation' was. Trying to figure out how to work the plane avionics was almost as fun as flying the sim.

Report this comment

GrahamDubya

03-Feb-2010 14:07

Much as I hate to admit it, you may be right in thinking that COD affects people's interests. I was a tremendous fan of the earlier World War II-themed games (fun fact: I once showed my grandfather, who was a bombardier on a B-24, the level in United Offensive in which you run around a Lancaster bomber), and at the same time my interests have always been in military history. That's what I'm in grad school for now.

I really hope it's just a coincidence, but a month or two before Modern Warfare 2 came out, I found myself moving away from military history and more towards modern war. COD merely compounded this (shameless self-promotion: http://automaticballpoint.wordpress.com). So maybe MW2 changed my mind; maybe it didn't. But it sure looks that way.

Let me also just point out that with those games, the more absurd the better. The snowmobile chase? Retaking the White House? Those were the moments that made it feel 'gamey' and real enough to enjoy perfectly.

Report this comment

Faganator

03-Feb-2010 16:15

In my opinion, Call of Duty, Empire Total War, etc do play a huge role in attracting interest in military history. As silly as they may seem, at least they are attracting attention.

I suspect we will soon see a rush on Napoleonic related books. Better do some reprints Osprey!

Report this comment

Colonel Q

03-Feb-2010 16:54

Interesting subject. I volunteer at the Royal Gunpowder Mills in Waltham Abbey just outside London. We have what must be the largest collection of deactivated small arms accessible to the general public (www.royalgunpowdermills.com/smallarms.htm.) Increasingly our younger visitors are looking for and recognising the weapons they are familiar with from computer games. It’s heartening to be able to report that, as well as a buzz from seeing the real thing, they experience a definite reality-check as they handle the weapons (we are very much hands-on) giving them a whole new dimension to their understanding of how each functions and what they are capable of.

I would agree with the comments that the games appear somewhat clichéd and over the top. Whilst our young visitors are acquiring a proper understanding of what these weapons look and feel like, we also have the opportunity to paint a more realistic picture of how they were used and the people whose lives depended upon them - or were devastated by them.

As a member of the “Airfix” generation, my interest in things military was no doubt kick-started by long hours with glue and paint - today its simply evolved into long hours with screen and mouse.

Report this comment

GI Gene

03-Feb-2010 18:20

Well now, with Modern Warfare 2 out now, Osprey could profit by commissioning more Elite titles about the US Army, Marines, Special Forces, British Army, Royal Marines, Paras, SAS, SBS, Russian forces, etc...

Technical inaccuracies aside, I found the missions in the MOH games enjoyable, but historically improbable. I guess after writing an Osprey book about the OSS you immediately see what is plausible, and what is pure fantasy. I will give the MOH games high marks for keeping the OSS in the public spotlight. Did you see the trailer for the new MOH game set in Afghanistan? You will never see office furniture the same way again...

Report this comment

maple-leaf

06-Feb-2010 17:10

Good piece Mike - entertaining as well as informative and thoughtful.

Osprey aren't the only one's who've been touched by the hand of COD though. Check this out: http://strikehold.wordpress.com/2010/01/20/touched-by-the-hand-of-cod/

Report this comment

UPCOMING TITLES

SERIES

PERIOD

HOBBY

Call of Duty Modern Warfare - what impact has this had on the military history community?