Kobe & Call of Duty

Not the same as Gil Arenas having a gun in the locker room, but how does the league feel about one of its Big Stars starring in the Call of Duty commercial, guns ablazin?

Tim Keown takes a shot...there will be plenty of others, no doubt.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/commentary/news/story?page=keown/101116

Your thoughts? Bad idea? Bad advice? Bad for the league? Good for Kobe? Much ado about nothing?

Personally, I care less about 'the children' and more about the wisdom of a guy who was once charged with a violent crime thinking this was a good move.

 

Much ado about nothing. It's a commercial and let's face it, America loves violence. I'm sure he's making a nice coin off of it.

 

Isn't this the second time he's been in the middle of a controversy about being in an ad with a gun?

 

I'm an elite, anti-gun liberal pacifist, so it's not a personal choice I would make.

But with that said, who cares how "the league" feels about it? The league has nothing to say about players' legal, commercial opportunities when they're off the court and out of uniform.

Stories in which writers play moralist and call on leagues to punish players based on the writer's personal viewpoints are usually pathetic. This one is no exception.

 

The 2nd amendment give Kobe the right.

 

I don't care what the league thinks, or that Kobe Bryant or any other celebrity got paid to be in the commercial. I do have a problem with how the ad is presented, however. I got a bad feeling the first time I watched it.

I think an ad of that nature, for a mature game, needs to be a bit more up front about the fantasy, don't-do-this-in-real-life aspect of it. I'm afraid they thought it would be edgy and did so intentionally, knowing some people would find it crosses the line.

Well, it crosses my line. Congratulations, I won't be buying your game. I'm sure you'll lose sleep over that on your bed of dollar bills tonight.

 

Good Lord, what an absolute crock of shit argument. And that's not a shot at you, 21.

The point of the ad, for anyone with even a base level of intelligence, is that it puts anyone in warfare. A teenage girl, a concierge, Jimmy Kimmel. And you can be facing any of them when you play online. The person's handle is written on the side of his or her gun in the commercial.

What a stupid fucking column.

 

I would hope that people know not to shoot off an RPG in real life.

 

IT'S A DAMN COMMERCIAL FOR A GAME.

 

CoD sold 5.6 million copies in the first 24 hours it was available. What the Stern and the league office should be asking is why the NBA branded games don't sell anywhere close to that.

 

I'm sure assault rifles are not an issue, but the mature tag ought to be more prominent. All I know is the ad felt wrong to me. It obviously doesn't feel wrong to 99 per cent of the rest of you.

 

I figured the commercial would be controversial for a variety of reasons the first time I saw it. Surprisingly, there has been little uproar, and it is a tad relieving that America didn't fly off the handle.

I thought both sides of the spectrum would be up in arms, both the 'Think of the Children' and the 'Don't you dare say that regular people are as important as Soldiers' crowds alike.