Yes it has, years ago, and I don't follow the "it's just a game" line of arguing. The gratuitous gore in a lot of games adds nothing to the game. It's just, yay, power fantasy. "Look at me! I'm MURDERING those guys! Wheee!" You can find that in a ton of youtube playthroughs. People really say stuff like that while they play games.
Gore sells, just like sex sells. It's a cheap, lazy and surefire way to generate more profit. Simplest possible interaction (aim at stuff and press a button), boobs, and gore. Ideally in slow mo. Profit.
ps had a look at the trailer, i found its dreadfully dodgy, it clearly shows some of the targets are police and ethnic/minority people, the killer's outfit is quite questionable as well, feels like a bunch of skinheads want to get high on their own game, anyway, I think any sane player should keep clear steer of this one!
Well now the term "genocide" in the trailer makes more and more sense....that word has a very distinct meaning and can't be used for just random killing sprees.
Come on, come on, let's be objetive and serious, there are films worse than this game, much worse, and games as well. COD MW2 had a "cool mission/map": to kill all people in an airport, the police, SWATs, and all... it seems ironic.
Kane and Lynch, Left 4 Dead, Sleeping Dogs, GTA, Hitman Absolution, Postal Series, AC franchise, Dishonored, CODs, and a large etc are just a feast for killing. We could say in all the games you kill someone/something . I'm sure if they change "innocent people" for zombies, you won't say a shit.
in terms of games: Kane and Lynch yeah ok, Left 4 dead...you are still fighting zombies, Sleeping Dogs as GTA gives you a choice and usually your doings have consequences even if it's just the police on your tail, Postal was garbage as said before and played way more for evil laugh than this is, AC again you can kill but then the guards are on your back. The Mission on CoD was highly criticized, censored in most versions outside of the US and one of the most unpleasent moments of gaming atleast i ever experienced (which might have been what the devs went for).
Really? Attacking the devs? Over a videogame? Also linking to a sjw tumblr as proof of anything, is this PC or shitty twitter activism? It's a fucking game stop acting like children and don't buy it if you don't like it.
Yeah, how dare that blogger point out that the Nazis are Nazis. Clearly we're the ones who are violently upset and lashing out immaturely about all this.
Also this links points to pretty shitty journalism. '...developed by Neo Nazis'. They are not neo nazis. They have two guys with fucked up opinions. Maybe more of them are 'badly educated'. We don't know. Doesn't sound like pleasant guys but shouting 'NOE NAZIS' is a click bait.
Members of the team literally support fascist groups and the trailer has a line about genocide. Before we knew about the first part you could write it off as hyperbole or a translation error but it's safe to say these guys are some bigots.
i grew up playing games like Postal (and the sequal), Duke Nukem, Doom, Mortal Kombat.
And i think i turned out fine.
What we need to remember is that games are just as much a form of expression as movies, paintings, books, or music.
There are musicians who write music that literally tell you to go and murder people, nobody does anything about it.
There are movies with far more horrific and terrible scenes than anything shown in this trailer.
There are already games that promote violence for the sake of violence, and some of them worse than this.
My taste in games has changed quite a bit while growing up, and this doesn't really interest me anymore. It's not something i want to play and it's not something i'd encourage my children to play. HOWEVER, i'm not going to tell someone they shouldn't make this game if it's what they want to make, and i'm not going to pretend to know enough to say that it will have a sweeping effect on any group or groups of people, although i honestly believe it won't.
Postal is a shitty series of games with bad mechanics and awful graphics that barely makes money catering to manbabies. This is a self-serious version of Postal made by bigots. It's going to be terrible. It's not going to sell very well. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be condemned for the shitwizardry it is.
i grew up playing games like Postal (and the sequal), Duke Nukem, Doom, Mortal Kombat.
And i think i turned out fine.
What we need to remember is that games are just as much a form of expression as movies, paintings, books, or music.
There are musicians who write music that literally tell you to go and murder people, nobody does anything about it.
There are movies with far more horrific and terrible scenes than anything shown in this trailer.
There are already games that promote violence for the sake of violence, and some of them worse than this.
My taste in games has changed quite a bit while growing up, and this doesn't really interest me anymore. It's not something i want to play and it's not something i'd encourage my children to play. HOWEVER, i'm not going to tell someone they shouldn't make this game if it's what they want to make, and i'm not going to pretend to know enough to say that it will have a sweeping effect on any group or groups of people, although i honestly believe it won't.
Pretty much this. I also find it rather hypocritical that we're fine with violence in other titles by justifying it to ourselves on the grounds of whatever the reason might be, yet get all morally righteous when we're dealing violence being put in for the sake of violence. Why do we HAVE to have a reason for it? It's a videogame, we're not deciding to authorize (lethal) force with respect to a living, breathing individual here.
Is it a tasteful game? Opinions may differ, but this title does not make the developers some sort of the anti-christ incarnate that will disrupt the fabric of society and bring about the end times. Vote with your wallet, don't buy it if you disagree with the product.
Postal is a shitty series of games with bad mechanics and awful graphics that barely makes money catering to manbabies. This is a self-serious version of Postal made by bigots. It's going to be terrible. It's not going to sell very well. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be condemned for the shitwizardry it is.
Is that some Hotline Miami fan art i see that you've made?
in terms of games: Kane and Lynch yeah ok, Left 4 dead...you are still fighting zombies, Sleeping Dogs as GTA gives you a choice and usually your doings have consequences even if it's just the police on your tail, Postal was garbage as said before and played way more for evil laugh than this is, AC again you can kill but then the guards are on your back. The Mission on CoD was highly criticized, censored in most versions outside of the US and one of the most unpleasent moments of gaming atleast i ever experienced (which might have been what the devs went for).
If with think with pure logic (not like an emo), with objetivity, Zombie games just use a make up on people... so ok, they are "dead people", but they are people. And when you use your shotgun, you see a head exploding, a leg there, or a hand there. And when we use melee weapons, better not talk. The Dead Island Franchise has more gore, and if we play shadow warrior... omg, katana 100% GORE FEAST.
With Sleeping Dogs, GTAs, Saints Rows, etc. there aren't consequences at all. In those sandbox you do as you please. You can play the carmageddon way, killing all the innocent people in all the streets with your car, monster truck or whatever vehicle.
In Deus Ex Human Revolution, i killed all the policemen/people in the police station. And how curious, later... in the news we find in the game appeared: "someone killed all the people in the police station of..". The devs gave us that freedom!
Postal may be garbage for your kind, BUT for too many people it's a classic game we all should play. The same happens with Load Out. It's a matter of tastes, and you can not decide for others, and less... to say them what is good and what is bad, because you can't see how unbiased is your point of view. Follow the motto: "live and let live other their lifes", or: "this is not your war, don't enter or it will be".
The COD mission i talked about, if i recall well, it was censored in Germany and Australia, due to their censorship. In those two countries they censor almost every game with violence.
And in AC series, guards are not a problem. In my steam profile i have screenshots of the 1st AC, and all the whole ground covered with guard corpses. I have played hours and hours just killing bazillions of guards non stop (ignoring quests and all), for the sake of combat. The same with shadows of mordor, when i enter any orc fortress, i kill every innocent orc i see, no matter their quantity. I remember you when we kill more than 5 civilians in AC, we have the penalty of desynchronization, so back to the last check point.
Japanese society are more clever, and they don't have issues with games, because for them, a game is just a game. Illusion is the company that createad the game for raping girls, and how curious, japan is the safest place in the world. Or a manga/anime hentai, for them is just a hentai, just drawings, and not "child pornography" as some unbiased/brainless guys think in occident.
The human being will always hate/fear what they don't like/understand. Haters gonna hate hehe.
Really? Attacking the devs? Over a videogame? Also linking to a sjw tumblr as proof of anything, is this PC or shitty twitter activism? It's a fucking game stop acting like children and don't buy it if you don't like it.
this a million times this, seriously i dont understand how you people can be upset about this. its fictional
If anything, a game like this might have the benefit of making some people finally understand that not all viddyagames are meant to be played by 12 year old kids, that games are a medium to be treated, carefully observed, criticized and regulated (as in rated - not banned or hastily censored) just like any other. Seen from that angle the good or bad intentions of the creators hardly matter - the end product itself becomes an interesting discussion tool, even if the game sucks and is made by people with shitty intentions.
I actually tend to have just as much of a problem with games like Uncharted, where the cool, tongue in cheek hero turns out to be a psycho killing hundreds of cannon fodder bad guys during gameplay sequences without giving me the option of taking a stealth approach instead. This kind of stuff is actually enough to make me give up on a game, regardless of how cool the set pieces or the facial mocap are. No hard feelings tho - at that point I personally just give up on playing the game and sell/give it away. Maybe a game like Hatred could make devs think about that kind of stuff a little more, who knows.
Blaizer, regarding the airport scene in MW2 : I actually disagree with you here, as I personally found that level to be very poignant and thought-provoking. I am not sure if you played it yourself, but in case you didn't : in this mission the player controls an undercover agent forced to go on a terrorist raid with the group he is infiltrating. If I remember correctly you are not actually forced to kill anyone (don't quote me on this, it's been a while), but regardless, you end up being the front row witness of the actions of a terrorist group shooting innocent people. And all that for nothing : at the end of the mission (spoiler alert !) you actually learn that your cover was blown from the start and you end up being shot anyways. Not only did innocent people die, but you were even more powerless than you thought you were.
This was truly excellent game storytelling and a very striking and memorable moment. I am kinda sad to see that it can be distorted and spun out of context that easily, and it's a shame that some people might dig this sequence for all the wrong reasons. But I don't think this makes it "bad" or tasteless. I don't think it was ever intended to be a "cool" mission in the first place, but I am with you on your other points. Maybe I just misunderstood what you were trying to say about MW2.
Now of course I am not saying that Hatred has any of such qualities (it actually does look pretty shitty) but if it can make people stop and think for a second about that kind of stuff, then maybe that *could* be beneficial. I kinda doubt it tho
Blaizer, regarding the airport scene in MW2 : I actually disagree with you here, as I personally found that level to be very poignant and thought provoking. I am not sure if you played it, but in case you didnt : in that mission the player controls an undercover agent forced to go on a terrorist raid with the group he is infiltrating. If I remember correctly you are not actually forced to kill anyone (don't quote me on this, it's been a while), but regardless you end up witnessing the horror of a terrorist group shooting innocent people from an insider perspective. And all that for nothing : at the end of the mission you actually learn that your cover was blown from the start and you end up being shot anyways, which stresses the absurdity of the whole thing.
Don't agree, with what?, i just pointed a mission of a famous game that was harmful for some sensitive people.
Yep, i have played it, I played several times the campaign. I have all the CODs and i might be buying the advanced warfare one. And well, you are not forced to kill the "innocent people", but you are forced to kill all the "innocent swats". Later, the character we use is killed as you know... and used as the tool for a war. I found that part of the game ridiculous.
More games: Prototype I & II. Alex Mercer and James Heller are just killing machines, murderers, serial killers. You are forced to "absorb/kill" millions of innocent people. And like with ACs, if you are a good player, you can be killing countless hordes of elite soldiers/armies. Something insane but fuck, pretty spectacular with those viral powers.
At this rate, i'm gonna cry because i killed too many innocent mushrooms and turtles in super mario bros. OMG, they deserved just love and kisses. Oh my bad, sex games are also seen with very bad eyes by some people. Glad Japan is still there, haters could want to nuke the whole country.
Yeah totally - that's why I wasn't sure to understand your point about this mission. I suppose that some people might think it's "edgy", some might get a kick out of blasting everyone in sight (and indeed that can be fun ! It's a freaking game ) but I personally found it to be very clever, even though the rest of the campaign was quite forgettable. Awesome MP tho
I am personally not to sure what to think about games like Prototype/Infamous, and so-called action-adventure games in general. I dig the scale and the visuals, but my interest kindof stops there really. Sometimes I feel like I am missing out on some fun stuff, but more often than not I find a short downloadable demo to be good enough for me as these things gets repetitive quite fast.
Anyways, Hatred just looks uninteresting on top of being pointless really. The diverse reactions to it sure are interesting though.
There's a difference between killing people in games and murdering them. Killing and murder are not the same.
The difference between killing and murder is zero in games. To murder is to kill with premeditation. We just kill "processes" with premeditation, always. Just play games such as dishonored or hitman absolution.
Context changes meaning. Two games with identical mechanics can be grossly different depending on that context. If you don't see that, compare:
Game 1: press button to impregnate your wife
Game 2: press button to climax in girl you forced yourself on, who is begging and crying
You forget you CAN'T have a real wife in a game... Most games are focused in doing things we can not do in real life. And ok, Japan produces a lot of sex games, mostly harem games. And now question yourself if: it's ok to have a harem in real life?. In too many countries is still ok.
Games are just an illusion, games... pixels or polygons, nothing real, just for entertainment like films. Your Game 1 and Game 2 are present in a high amount of films but with worse scenes, more crude.
So is the standard practice now? Someone makes something controversial / offensive and you're so incensed you go drag up their photo's and personal history to give em a good old bash.
Personally, i had a bit of a laugh when i watched it earlier. Thought to myself, the parents are gonna love this one. I know i do, hotline miami was a great game and this seems more or less, like a less tactful version.
There's this reoccurring (dare i say) american idea of sanitising violence, turning it to something heroic as you X murders their way through countless whatever. People are shot and just fall off screen, disappearing out of sight. The game seems to play it straight however, in full view and horror. You may be killing a whole bunch of people but it doesn't seem to be portrayed as heroic or just. It reminds me of A Bittersweet Life in alot of respects.
i grew up playing games like Postal (and the sequal), Duke Nukem, Doom, Mortal Kombat.
And i think i turned out fine.
What we need to remember is that games are just as much a form of expression as movies, paintings, books, or music.
There are musicians who write music that literally tell you to go and murder people, nobody does anything about it.
There are movies with far more horrific and terrible scenes than anything shown in this trailer.
There are already games that promote violence for the sake of violence, and some of them worse than this.
My taste in games has changed quite a bit while growing up, and this doesn't really interest me anymore. It's not something i want to play and it's not something i'd encourage my children to play. HOWEVER, i'm not going to tell someone they shouldn't make this game if it's what they want to make, and i'm not going to pretend to know enough to say that it will have a sweeping effect on any group or groups of people, although i honestly believe it won't.
TL : DR
yep. agree with tis.
If you want to boycott a game, just don't buy it. simple as that. use your dollars to state your opinion.
Reminds me of the whole, big size cola thing in new york, where they wanted to ban big size drinks. I mean, jeez, let them make their own choices.
There's much violence in games anyway. No big deal with this. This game looks like one for ppl with strong nerves eventually, that's all. What I'm interested in is what developers plan to make gameplay interesting. Violence will give them attention but won't make game interesting. For now violence is all what trailer shows.
Really? Attacking the devs? Over a videogame? Also linking to a sjw tumblr as proof of anything, is this PC or shitty twitter activism? It's a fucking game stop acting like children and don't buy it if you don't like it.
Meat games at their finest, I told you the meat would go to far but no one believed me.
No doubt the salami slices will flock to this making another new generation of meat.
There's an inherent flaw in the, "Don't like it, don't buy it" strategy. If the developer doesn't know WHY you didn't buy it, then it doesn't really serve any purpose. Maybe you disliked the art direction. Maybe you wanted multiplayer massacres. Maybe it was too high spec for your machine. Maybe you wanted it to be on Steam but it never appeared.
"You were offended at the content" isn't the automatic message received when a game doesn't sell.
also, i have to ask all the people defending this; is there a line anywhere on what should and shouldnt be in a videogame? can i make a racist game, where you play a nazi killing only black people, and they are shown as less worth than whites? is it ok to make a game where raping girls is the goal? (blazier already wrote about this, but i couldnt figure out if he was defending it or not)
my question is not retorical at all, just simple; is there any line of what can be in a game or not?
and if yes, where does the it go?
edit: i wanted to add, this is a question about ethics, not legal matters, im just curios if people would defend the makers of the japanese rape game in the same way.
also, i have to ask all the people defending this; is there a line anywhere on what should and shouldnt be in a videogame? can i make a racist game, where you play a nazi killing only black people, and they are shown as less worth than whites? is it ok to make a game where raping girls is the goal? (blazier already wrote about this, but i couldnt figure out if he was defending it or not)
my question is not retorical at all, just simple; is there any line of what can be in a game or not?
and if yes, where does the it go?
There is no line and if you think there should be you have no business in art imo.
I belive you do and I don't think anyone here is trying to take this right away. You can criticize this game all you want. I personally think this game is waste of everyones time. It looks bad and is tasteless. They have a right to create it though. As long as no one gets hurt they can do whatever they like. It doesn't mean you can't say it's shit.
I'm all for freedom in games, but i do think there are lines that should be drawn. Some people seems to think as if this is simply about just person liking or disliking a theme that game covers.
For example, racism in games can be one of the best things ever done for gaming. Now, before you kill me, think of Star trek, just how much it did on this topic. It uses racism and other stuff, but only in way to tell how wrong it is, and make people aware of it. IIRC, the "uhura" once said, when she talked to Martin luther king, that he basically told her, that she did more to fight racism than he himself did.
So the theme itself, like murder, could not only be not bad, it can serve a really great purpose.
But, the problem here is, from what i understand at least, you basically play as cold blooded murderer, going on a killing spree.
I dunno, i think that's still a step too far, because unlike all those games, it kinda feels as if it's giving message that killing is good, in that way.
Sure we had killing people in other games and movies, but it was usually either some cause why you do it, or there was some penalty or something. But it's rare that it was quiet this brutal and straight to the point. It almost gives you feeling as if killing is ok.
Not saying that people are going to massively on a killing spree, but when you think that 15,16 years old kid are going to play this, i dunno, it does feel a little wrong.
And to relate to the question earlier...i dunno if i really wanna see a game where it's openly supporting racism or nazism or stuff like that, and pass it as ok just because it's a game. Racism isn't ok, be it game or RL. And while people should enyoj games as they want, there are some lines i don't think we should cross.
alright let me refrase that; why isnt it a worthy criticism of game that it sends the "wrong" message? wrong in this sense would be morally wrong.
obviuosly the creaters have the right to create whatever they want, but doesnt i also have the right to criticise whatever i want?
There's nothing wrong with criticizing a persons art, or game, or whatever. The argument here isn't "you shouldn't be criticizing it", the argument is "you shouldn't be demonizing it".
Just reminds me of the original Postal game. Kill everyone for no reason, same top down/isometric view as well by the looks of it. I played it a bit. Didn't end up killing people in real life strangely enough... or did I?... ;P
also, i have to ask all the people defending this; is there a line anywhere on what should and shouldnt be in a videogame? can i make a racist game, where you play a nazi killing only black people, and they are shown as less worth than whites? is it ok to make a game where raping girls is the goal? (blazier already wrote about this, but i couldnt figure out if he was defending it or not)
my question is not retorical at all, just simple; is there any line of what can be in a game or not?
and if yes, where does the it go?
edit: i wanted to add, this is a question about ethics, not legal matters, im just curios if people would defend the makers of the japanese rape game in the same way.
Sure, I would say go ahead. As long as the game requires that audience participates willingly, I see no problem with any type of legal content.
I really dislike this trend of claiming that art has some social responsibility that it must adhere to. The problem with censoring offensive speech is that it's very difficult to set the boundaries. Where one might see a useless piece of trash, another could see something subversive and meaningful. One could argue that GTA is a satire of real-life violence, another person could claim that it glorifies it. Who is to decide which one of them is right?
Although I hate to say platitudes, I think that in the end it is all about free speech. I'm very moderate in the realm of politics and can get along with people from both right and left sides of the political spectrum. However, free speech is one aspect I will never compromise on, even if it means the right for offensive material to exist. To me, any instance of censorship is a blow to the idea of a free society.
It is easy to argue for free speech when you agree with what is being said and very difficult to do so when you don't.
you can think its boring if you like, but as i see it, its the next step for games to take, before it can become a "real" medium. so far we only critisize technical aspects, the art's ability to look nice despite constraints, the gameplays responsivness and such things. in all other meduims, books, films, art, the intent and the message behind the creation is also up for scrutiny. yet we dont do it in games, yet. why?
if you dont belive that media such as books, films and games has a effect on changes in society, i say its YOU who dont have buisness in art.
when we accept that the media we work with has the ability to change society, why wouldnt we also accept that responsibility it entitles?
and why wouldnt someone be critisized for their disregard of that repsonsibility?
edit: this thread is moving fast. my response was for amsterdam hilton hotel, but i guess it fit for the rest aswell.
But I do find it hilarious the double-standard it puts to light on so many popular games, like Payday, where your job is to kill dozens and dozens of cops in order to rob a bank, or Bioshock Infinite where you're killing citizens of a city who are just trying to defend it, in ways even nastier than this trailer depicts. It's all context I know, but that's just it, is brutal violence justified by its context?
the intent and the message behind the creation is also up for scrutiny.
Which is bad - since quite often you can't really tell for sure what the message is or if there IS any message at all.
This leads to retarded assumptions.
In many cases authors write their works with a minset of "this is how I see world".
But people interpret it as "this is how I want -everyone- to see the world"
Do you get the difference?
(note: i'm writing that in context of works of fiction in general and not in context of this particular game)
if you dont belive that media such as books, films and games has a effect on changes in society, i say its YOU who dont have buisness in art.
You can criticize the game all you want and you have the right to, but time and time again it's been proven that no form of any fictional medium will change the viewer. No book, Film, Video Game, etc. will make anyone racist/sexist/etc. unless said person already had those strong views to begin with.
For example, a Danish study wanted to know whether pornography will make you sexist or not, cause you know, Porn is the epitome of sexual objectification and what they found was a no brainer; everyone was normal except for the participants who were already sexist.
I only read to page 2 of the thread so far, so sorry if I'm missing anything. Just want to point out that the fucknovideogames tumblr has a rather slanted view.
"the white protagonist brutally murdering and mutilating people of color."
Yes, but also mutilating white people. There are considerably more murdered white people in the video. The top-down bits are hard to tell, but the close up murders are:
white, white, black, white, white, black, mixed, white, white, white.
I think this makes the industry I work in look terrible. We all end up getting tarred with the same brush by the media. They have the right to make this game sure, but it makes me sad that they want to. There is a level of brutality and violence that makes me sick.
I think media doesn't change the participant but it reflects the world we live in and the fact that people want to mow down screaming civilians is pathetic. In the COD airport scene you could kill innocents but you weren't meant to feel good about it. I'm not into violent games but all this talk that the violence here is the same as Far Cry, GTA and Assassins Creed is missing a large amount of context. The people proposing that argument are being purposefully obtuse IMO.
This game seems to glorify spree killing in a world where spree killing seems to be happening more and more often. How can anyone defend that?
Oh yeah, Less violence in games would be lovely all round really. You can call me a hippy all you want, I don't give a shit.
I'm not into violent games but all this talk that the violence here is the same as Far Cry, GTA and Assassins Creed is missing a large amount of context. The people proposing that argument are being purposefully obtuse IMO.
Obtuse, i don't think so, but the opposite.
What makes this industry great is that you can make games for all audiences, not only for small childs.
As another example, i put you the morality of the games of PAY DAY.
The main problem with the people against this game or games with violence in general is easy. They don't want to think we are talking about games, just games.
Games are not the reality, and if you think so, go to a psychiatrist, seriously. If someone can't differenciate between game vs reality has a serious problem. And another thing would be the hatred towards others with different point of views/form of expressions/ideas/tastes/etc.
Too bad occidentals are not so clever/tolerant as the japanese.
Replies
Gore sells, just like sex sells. It's a cheap, lazy and surefire way to generate more profit. Simplest possible interaction (aim at stuff and press a button), boobs, and gore. Ideally in slow mo. Profit.
Well now the term "genocide" in the trailer makes more and more sense....that word has a very distinct meaning and can't be used for just random killing sprees.
in terms of games: Kane and Lynch yeah ok, Left 4 dead...you are still fighting zombies, Sleeping Dogs as GTA gives you a choice and usually your doings have consequences even if it's just the police on your tail, Postal was garbage as said before and played way more for evil laugh than this is, AC again you can kill but then the guards are on your back. The Mission on CoD was highly criticized, censored in most versions outside of the US and one of the most unpleasent moments of gaming atleast i ever experienced (which might have been what the devs went for).
Yeah, how dare that blogger point out that the Nazis are Nazis. Clearly we're the ones who are violently upset and lashing out immaturely about all this.
Members of the team literally support fascist groups and the trailer has a line about genocide. Before we knew about the first part you could write it off as hyperbole or a translation error but it's safe to say these guys are some bigots.
And i think i turned out fine.
What we need to remember is that games are just as much a form of expression as movies, paintings, books, or music.
There are musicians who write music that literally tell you to go and murder people, nobody does anything about it.
There are movies with far more horrific and terrible scenes than anything shown in this trailer.
There are already games that promote violence for the sake of violence, and some of them worse than this.
My taste in games has changed quite a bit while growing up, and this doesn't really interest me anymore. It's not something i want to play and it's not something i'd encourage my children to play. HOWEVER, i'm not going to tell someone they shouldn't make this game if it's what they want to make, and i'm not going to pretend to know enough to say that it will have a sweeping effect on any group or groups of people, although i honestly believe it won't.
TL : DR
Pretty much this. I also find it rather hypocritical that we're fine with violence in other titles by justifying it to ourselves on the grounds of whatever the reason might be, yet get all morally righteous when we're dealing violence being put in for the sake of violence. Why do we HAVE to have a reason for it? It's a videogame, we're not deciding to authorize (lethal) force with respect to a living, breathing individual here.
Is it a tasteful game? Opinions may differ, but this title does not make the developers some sort of the anti-christ incarnate that will disrupt the fabric of society and bring about the end times. Vote with your wallet, don't buy it if you disagree with the product.
Don't be such a hypocrite.
If with think with pure logic (not like an emo), with objetivity, Zombie games just use a make up on people... so ok, they are "dead people", but they are people. And when you use your shotgun, you see a head exploding, a leg there, or a hand there. And when we use melee weapons, better not talk. The Dead Island Franchise has more gore, and if we play shadow warrior... omg, katana 100% GORE FEAST.
With Sleeping Dogs, GTAs, Saints Rows, etc. there aren't consequences at all. In those sandbox you do as you please. You can play the carmageddon way, killing all the innocent people in all the streets with your car, monster truck or whatever vehicle.
In Deus Ex Human Revolution, i killed all the policemen/people in the police station. And how curious, later... in the news we find in the game appeared: "someone killed all the people in the police station of..". The devs gave us that freedom!
Postal may be garbage for your kind, BUT for too many people it's a classic game we all should play. The same happens with Load Out. It's a matter of tastes, and you can not decide for others, and less... to say them what is good and what is bad, because you can't see how unbiased is your point of view. Follow the motto: "live and let live other their lifes", or: "this is not your war, don't enter or it will be".
The COD mission i talked about, if i recall well, it was censored in Germany and Australia, due to their censorship. In those two countries they censor almost every game with violence.
And in AC series, guards are not a problem. In my steam profile i have screenshots of the 1st AC, and all the whole ground covered with guard corpses. I have played hours and hours just killing bazillions of guards non stop (ignoring quests and all), for the sake of combat. The same with shadows of mordor, when i enter any orc fortress, i kill every innocent orc i see, no matter their quantity. I remember you when we kill more than 5 civilians in AC, we have the penalty of desynchronization, so back to the last check point.
Japanese society are more clever, and they don't have issues with games, because for them, a game is just a game. Illusion is the company that createad the game for raping girls, and how curious, japan is the safest place in the world. Or a manga/anime hentai, for them is just a hentai, just drawings, and not "child pornography" as some unbiased/brainless guys think in occident.
The human being will always hate/fear what they don't like/understand. Haters gonna hate hehe.
Shame on some you for being such hypocrite.
Censorship is never good.
this a million times this, seriously i dont understand how you people can be upset about this. its fictional
I actually tend to have just as much of a problem with games like Uncharted, where the cool, tongue in cheek hero turns out to be a psycho killing hundreds of cannon fodder bad guys during gameplay sequences without giving me the option of taking a stealth approach instead. This kind of stuff is actually enough to make me give up on a game, regardless of how cool the set pieces or the facial mocap are. No hard feelings tho - at that point I personally just give up on playing the game and sell/give it away. Maybe a game like Hatred could make devs think about that kind of stuff a little more, who knows.
Blaizer, regarding the airport scene in MW2 : I actually disagree with you here, as I personally found that level to be very poignant and thought-provoking. I am not sure if you played it yourself, but in case you didn't : in this mission the player controls an undercover agent forced to go on a terrorist raid with the group he is infiltrating. If I remember correctly you are not actually forced to kill anyone (don't quote me on this, it's been a while), but regardless, you end up being the front row witness of the actions of a terrorist group shooting innocent people. And all that for nothing : at the end of the mission (spoiler alert !) you actually learn that your cover was blown from the start and you end up being shot anyways. Not only did innocent people die, but you were even more powerless than you thought you were.
This was truly excellent game storytelling and a very striking and memorable moment. I am kinda sad to see that it can be distorted and spun out of context that easily, and it's a shame that some people might dig this sequence for all the wrong reasons. But I don't think this makes it "bad" or tasteless. I don't think it was ever intended to be a "cool" mission in the first place, but I am with you on your other points. Maybe I just misunderstood what you were trying to say about MW2.
Now of course I am not saying that Hatred has any of such qualities (it actually does look pretty shitty) but if it can make people stop and think for a second about that kind of stuff, then maybe that *could* be beneficial. I kinda doubt it tho
Ouch, this is actually disturbing :S
Context changes meaning. Two games with identical mechanics can be grossly different depending on that context. If you don't see that, compare:
Game 1: press button to impregnate your wife
Game 2: press button to climax in girl you forced yourself on, who is begging and crying
Don't agree, with what?, i just pointed a mission of a famous game that was harmful for some sensitive people.
Yep, i have played it, I played several times the campaign. I have all the CODs and i might be buying the advanced warfare one. And well, you are not forced to kill the "innocent people", but you are forced to kill all the "innocent swats". Later, the character we use is killed as you know... and used as the tool for a war. I found that part of the game ridiculous.
More games: Prototype I & II. Alex Mercer and James Heller are just killing machines, murderers, serial killers. You are forced to "absorb/kill" millions of innocent people. And like with ACs, if you are a good player, you can be killing countless hordes of elite soldiers/armies. Something insane but fuck, pretty spectacular with those viral powers.
At this rate, i'm gonna cry because i killed too many innocent mushrooms and turtles in super mario bros. OMG, they deserved just love and kisses. Oh my bad, sex games are also seen with very bad eyes by some people. Glad Japan is still there, haters could want to nuke the whole country.
I am personally not to sure what to think about games like Prototype/Infamous, and so-called action-adventure games in general. I dig the scale and the visuals, but my interest kindof stops there really. Sometimes I feel like I am missing out on some fun stuff, but more often than not I find a short downloadable demo to be good enough for me as these things gets repetitive quite fast.
Anyways, Hatred just looks uninteresting on top of being pointless really. The diverse reactions to it sure are interesting though.
The difference between killing and murder is zero in games. To murder is to kill with premeditation. We just kill "processes" with premeditation, always. Just play games such as dishonored or hitman absolution.
You forget you CAN'T have a real wife in a game... Most games are focused in doing things we can not do in real life. And ok, Japan produces a lot of sex games, mostly harem games. And now question yourself if: it's ok to have a harem in real life?. In too many countries is still ok.
Games are just an illusion, games... pixels or polygons, nothing real, just for entertainment like films. Your Game 1 and Game 2 are present in a high amount of films but with worse scenes, more crude.
Personally, i had a bit of a laugh when i watched it earlier. Thought to myself, the parents are gonna love this one. I know i do, hotline miami was a great game and this seems more or less, like a less tactful version.
There's this reoccurring (dare i say) american idea of sanitising violence, turning it to something heroic as you X murders their way through countless whatever. People are shot and just fall off screen, disappearing out of sight. The game seems to play it straight however, in full view and horror. You may be killing a whole bunch of people but it doesn't seem to be portrayed as heroic or just. It reminds me of A Bittersweet Life in alot of respects.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYu4RmbKfkM
yep. agree with tis.
If you want to boycott a game, just don't buy it. simple as that. use your dollars to state your opinion.
Reminds me of the whole, big size cola thing in new york, where they wanted to ban big size drinks. I mean, jeez, let them make their own choices.
Amen brother, Amen.
please provide evidence.
"You were offended at the content" isn't the automatic message received when a game doesn't sell.
my question is not retorical at all, just simple; is there any line of what can be in a game or not?
and if yes, where does the it go?
edit: i wanted to add, this is a question about ethics, not legal matters, im just curios if people would defend the makers of the japanese rape game in the same way.
[ame]www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYm2Mb0CSaw[/ame]
What I'm more interested in is how they pitched this idea to a publisher
There is no line and if you think there should be you have no business in art imo.
obviuosly the creaters have the right to create whatever they want, but doesnt i also have the right to criticise whatever i want?
It's shit.
For example, racism in games can be one of the best things ever done for gaming. Now, before you kill me, think of Star trek, just how much it did on this topic. It uses racism and other stuff, but only in way to tell how wrong it is, and make people aware of it. IIRC, the "uhura" once said, when she talked to Martin luther king, that he basically told her, that she did more to fight racism than he himself did.
So the theme itself, like murder, could not only be not bad, it can serve a really great purpose.
But, the problem here is, from what i understand at least, you basically play as cold blooded murderer, going on a killing spree.
I dunno, i think that's still a step too far, because unlike all those games, it kinda feels as if it's giving message that killing is good, in that way.
Sure we had killing people in other games and movies, but it was usually either some cause why you do it, or there was some penalty or something. But it's rare that it was quiet this brutal and straight to the point. It almost gives you feeling as if killing is ok.
Not saying that people are going to massively on a killing spree, but when you think that 15,16 years old kid are going to play this, i dunno, it does feel a little wrong.
And to relate to the question earlier...i dunno if i really wanna see a game where it's openly supporting racism or nazism or stuff like that, and pass it as ok just because it's a game. Racism isn't ok, be it game or RL. And while people should enyoj games as they want, there are some lines i don't think we should cross.
Just reminds me of the original Postal game. Kill everyone for no reason, same top down/isometric view as well by the looks of it. I played it a bit. Didn't end up killing people in real life strangely enough... or did I?... ;P
http://store.steampowered.com/app/232770/
Sure, I would say go ahead. As long as the game requires that audience participates willingly, I see no problem with any type of legal content.
I really dislike this trend of claiming that art has some social responsibility that it must adhere to. The problem with censoring offensive speech is that it's very difficult to set the boundaries. Where one might see a useless piece of trash, another could see something subversive and meaningful. One could argue that GTA is a satire of real-life violence, another person could claim that it glorifies it. Who is to decide which one of them is right?
Although I hate to say platitudes, I think that in the end it is all about free speech. I'm very moderate in the realm of politics and can get along with people from both right and left sides of the political spectrum. However, free speech is one aspect I will never compromise on, even if it means the right for offensive material to exist. To me, any instance of censorship is a blow to the idea of a free society.
It is easy to argue for free speech when you agree with what is being said and very difficult to do so when you don't.
if you dont belive that media such as books, films and games has a effect on changes in society, i say its YOU who dont have buisness in art.
when we accept that the media we work with has the ability to change society, why wouldnt we also accept that responsibility it entitles?
and why wouldnt someone be critisized for their disregard of that repsonsibility?
edit: this thread is moving fast. my response was for amsterdam hilton hotel, but i guess it fit for the rest aswell.
but calling them neo-nazis based on one guy being anti-imigration/arguably nationalist is so fucking low.
But I do find it hilarious the double-standard it puts to light on so many popular games, like Payday, where your job is to kill dozens and dozens of cops in order to rob a bank, or Bioshock Infinite where you're killing citizens of a city who are just trying to defend it, in ways even nastier than this trailer depicts. It's all context I know, but that's just it, is brutal violence justified by its context?
Which is bad - since quite often you can't really tell for sure what the message is or if there IS any message at all.
This leads to retarded assumptions.
In many cases authors write their works with a minset of "this is how I see world".
But people interpret it as "this is how I want -everyone- to see the world"
Do you get the difference?
(note: i'm writing that in context of works of fiction in general and not in context of this particular game)
You can criticize the game all you want and you have the right to, but time and time again it's been proven that no form of any fictional medium will change the viewer. No book, Film, Video Game, etc. will make anyone racist/sexist/etc. unless said person already had those strong views to begin with.
For example, a Danish study wanted to know whether pornography will make you sexist or not, cause you know, Porn is the epitome of sexual objectification and what they found was a no brainer; everyone was normal except for the participants who were already sexist.
"the white protagonist brutally murdering and mutilating people of color."
Yes, but also mutilating white people. There are considerably more murdered white people in the video. The top-down bits are hard to tell, but the close up murders are:
white, white, black, white, white, black, mixed, white, white, white.
Google is your friend. It has been on news since ages in comparison charts of crime, in which world do you live?
I think media doesn't change the participant but it reflects the world we live in and the fact that people want to mow down screaming civilians is pathetic. In the COD airport scene you could kill innocents but you weren't meant to feel good about it. I'm not into violent games but all this talk that the violence here is the same as Far Cry, GTA and Assassins Creed is missing a large amount of context. The people proposing that argument are being purposefully obtuse IMO.
This game seems to glorify spree killing in a world where spree killing seems to be happening more and more often. How can anyone defend that?
Oh yeah, Less violence in games would be lovely all round really. You can call me a hippy all you want, I don't give a shit.
Obtuse, i don't think so, but the opposite.
What makes this industry great is that you can make games for all audiences, not only for small childs.
As another example, i put you the morality of the games of PAY DAY.
The main problem with the people against this game or games with violence in general is easy. They don't want to think we are talking about games, just games.
Games are not the reality, and if you think so, go to a psychiatrist, seriously. If someone can't differenciate between game vs reality has a serious problem. And another thing would be the hatred towards others with different point of views/form of expressions/ideas/tastes/etc.
Too bad occidentals are not so clever/tolerant as the japanese.