[QUOTE=RichyZ;46946957]wonder how people would react if you made a game where you play as a terrorist taking hostages and are incentivized to kill as many as you can before being gunned down[/QUOTE]
[t]http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110123193633/callofduty/images/archive/d/d0/20120116155100!MW2_No_Russian_Elevator.png[/t]
Hatred is harmless as it does not actively promote any 'negative agenda' other than provide an outlet to those in need of such
heres a similiar game that rightly deserves to be hated
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_Cleansing_%28video_game%29[/url]
seems everyone has conveniently forgotten about that one
another one comes to mind is Brutal Doom
[QUOTE=Yourself;46946991]Hatred is harmless as it does not actively promote any 'negative agenda' other than provide an outlet to those in need of such
heres a similiar game that rightly deserves to be hated
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_Cleansing_%28video_game%29[/url]
seems everyone has conviently forgotten about that one
another one comes to mind is Brutal Doom[/QUOTE]
because there's a difference between a shitty, try-hard 2002 game that's literally called "Ethnic Cleansing" and a game in UE4 in 2015 that has a LOT of detail put into it
both are made for the appeal to the public eye, but one has more eye candy.
[QUOTE=Ericson666;46946339]Context is incredibly important, you can't just ignore it when considering media. It's the difference between a goofy game like Kitten Cannon (maybe not the best example) where the player is detached from the violence and just shooting a vaguely cat shaped blob out of a cannon with tons of cartoony effects, and some RapeLay-esque cat torture simulator where you dismember and cut apart a cat in incredible detail with realistic shrieking and crying or some shit.
The trailers work pretty hard to drive home the fact that people are fucking terrified of you and react... pretty much how you'd expect them to react when someone's going on a mass shooting. In a game like Postal 2, a lot of the enjoyment comes from being able to take a step back and laughing at just how ridiculous the situations and Postal Dude's life is, while with a game like this where the mass murdering is played straight and has no levity... Well, then your main enjoyment is just coming out of slaughtering people wholesale, and that's pretty fucked up.
Media doesn't get a free pass to not be criticized for being incredibly fucked up just because "it's just a game/movie/whatever". The developers actively chose to set up their game as a mass murder simulator, and from there they actively chose to give it an incredibly morbid and creepy (in a bad, fetishizing mass murder kind of way) setting, and from THERE they put a ton of work into the smaller details like how the people beg you to let them live and making incredibly violent execution animations to really enhance that feeling.
I'm not necessarily saying that I agree with the rating the game got, but you have to admit that the game is incredibly fucked up and can't really be compared to something like Postal 2 or GTA besides on the surface.[/QUOTE]
Not sure what you mean by fucked up, nor do I see why that's supposed to be an inherently bad thing. Does A Clockwork Orange not get praised, despite depicting gratuitous violence that could easily make people feel nauseous? What if I think getting into the shoes of a mass murderer would be an interesting experience? Heck, I know I bring up Total War in a lot of threads like this, but what if I enjoy exterminating entire races in those games, even though there's no moral justification for it? Does that make me a fucked up person, or make it a fucked up game in any way? Should we look down on couples who roleplay rape because they get a kick out of it, or should we consider these persons morally sane since they stay in the realm of consent?
Despite what you seem to claim, video games seldom hold the moral high ground since that's not their point, and I don't see why we should consider this game in particular goes too far by some kind of arbitrary measure.
Why should we care that this game displays morally bad behavior if we consider that it doesn't make people replicate this behavior in real life? Or perhaps you consider it does? In which case I'm surprised to see we haven't stopped arguing about that after Thompson got disbarred.
[QUOTE=Yourself;46946991]Hatred is harmless as it does not actively promote any 'negative agenda' other than provide an outlet to those in need of such
heres a similiar game that rightly deserves to be hated
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_Cleansing_%28video_game%29[/url]
seems everyone has conveniently forgotten about that one
another one comes to mind is Brutal Doom[/QUOTE]
Wasn't Brutal Doom created to make Doom more like the Doom Comic though?
[QUOTE=RichyZ;46946957]wonder how people would react if you made a game where you play as a terrorist taking hostages and are incentivized to kill as many as you can before being gunned down[/QUOTE]
While you're not incentivized to kill all of them them(As the guards will rush you and you'll fail your mission), Gods Will Be Watching has you do this in the first chapter. You can shout at them, kick them, shoot them(leg or head) or trade them to the cops. You only get 4. Killing all 4(or having them escape) results in the cops storming and killing you. Go too easy on them and they'll try to make a break for it. Go too hard on them and they'll do the same(Figuring you're going to kill them anyways). Shooting them in the leg will stop them from running but they'll eventually bleed out.
[QUOTE=_Axel;46945420]This is fucking hilarious, "OK, you're free to depict the killing of innocent people, but please, keep puppies out of this!". I feel like the only reason they put that restriction is so that batshit-insane organisations like PETA don't throw a fit.[/QUOTE]
but what about muh kitties :((
[QUOTE=AlphaAGENT;46947096]Wasn't Brutal Doom created to make Doom more like the Doom Comic though?[/QUOTE]
that also counts as a crime
[QUOTE=AlphaAGENT;46947096]Wasn't Brutal Doom created to make Doom more like the Doom Comic though?[/QUOTE]
I think the problem with Brutal Doom is that the author is a douche
[QUOTE=tunatsub;46944765]Jesus Christmas. I thought an M rating was already for adults only. What's the point of an M and an AO rating? Fuck the ESRB.[/QUOTE]
One is an actual rating. The other is a financial death sentence for your game
[QUOTE=YouWithTheFace.;46944856]How did manhunt 2 deal with this.[/QUOTE]
They didn't, that's why it's not on steam.
[QUOTE=Ericson666;46945671]Well, that's the thing though, they're taking it completely seriously. If it was jokey or campy like Postal 2 it'd be less disturbing, but it's not, sooo...[/QUOTE]
What are you people basing this off of? There's only one gameplay trailer for Hatred. How are you comparing the story and theme of Postal 2, which you probably have actually played through, to Hatred, a game you've only seen a 2 minute trailer of? Go look at any Postal 2 trailer and all you see is The Dude killing random people without provocation. Go find me one that doesn't.
[QUOTE=Korova;46944747]You can always buy RapeLay
[url]http://www.somethingawful.com/hentai-game-reviews/rapelay/[/url][/QUOTE]
Oh god.
The horror. That's a game I haven't heard from in a long, long time.
[QUOTE=_Axel;46947089]Not sure what you mean by fucked up, nor do I see why that's supposed to be an inherently bad thing. Does A Clockwork Orange not get praised, despite depicting gratuitous violence that could easily make people feel nauseous? What if I think getting into the shoes of a mass murderer would be an interesting experience? Heck, I know I bring up Total War in a lot of threads like this, but what if I enjoy exterminating entire races in those games, even though there's no moral justification for it? Does that make me a fucked up person, or make it a fucked up game in any way? Should we look down on couples who roleplay rape because they get a kick out of it, or should we consider these persons morally sane since they stay in the realm of consent?
Despite what you seem to claim, video games seldom hold the moral high ground since that's not their point, and I don't see why we should consider this game in particular goes too far by some kind of arbitrary measure.
Why should we care that this game displays morally bad behavior if we consider that it doesn't make people replicate this behavior in real life? Or perhaps you consider it does? In which case I'm surprised to see we haven't stopped arguing about that after Thompson got disbarred.[/QUOTE]
Having incredibly gruesome things isn't inherently bad, because like you said, there are plenty of great works that have horrible violence in them as part of some overarching theme, like Hotline Miami or Spec Ops: The Line. The difference here is that Hatred just has violence for the sake of violence, and to ridiculous measures.
Total War isn't really as comparable because, for one, it's a historical game, and history is pretty violent, so can be justified in that there's a purpose to it all (it's showing the past and educating people about history). Plus the fact that as the commander you're dealing with larger strategies and you have to do a thousand different things, so not only are you removed from seeing all the awful things that you caused in person, but the genocide is also a much smaller part of the game in total. Compare that to Hatred, where the entire point of the game is to slaughter people in horrific ways, and nothing else. Unless you made a mod for Total War where you can command your troops to personally fuck the eye sockets out of captured babies in polished 1080p cutscenes, and that was all you did, it's not that bad.
And again, I'm not saying I'm necessarily agreeing with it getting an AO rating, because the guidelines between what's an M game and what's an AO game are really vague and subjective. That being said, I still think it's in incredibly poor taste and creepy, and only a few steps above RapeLay. It doesn't mean I think that these games are gonna cause little Timmy to run out and start raping and murdering everyone, but I still think they're really sleazy and creepy
[QUOTE=Tetsmega;46948372]What are you people basing this off of? There's only one gameplay trailer for Hatred. How are you comparing the story and theme of Postal 2, which you probably have actually played through, to Hatred, a game you've only seen a 2 minute trailer of? Go look at any Postal 2 trailer and all you see is The Dude killing random people without provocation. Go find me one that doesn't.[/QUOTE]
Considering that their first trailer is what everyone's going to get their impressions of the game from, and they definitely know that, I think it's pretty safe to say that the full game is going to be really grim and brutal, unless their marketing department is full of absolute retards/geniuses (I'm leaning towards the former considering they basically just got themselves banned from every retail store in America). As for Postal 2's marketing campaign, I can't say much about their trailers other than they're kinda poorly made to begin with. Both of the ones I just checked out had cat silencers though, so at least there were pretty big indications that it wasn't serious
[QUOTE=Ericson666;46948442]Having incredibly gruesome things isn't inherently bad, because like you said, there are plenty of great works that have horrible violence in them as part of some overarching theme, like Hotline Miami or Spec Ops: The Line. The difference here is that Hatred just has violence for the sake of violence, and to ridiculous measures.
[/QUOTE]
Lots of movies have violence for the sake of violence and nobody bats an eye. Games should be allowed that freedom too. Responsible, adult people who have the mental capacity to play violent video games aren't affected by what the game tells them and don't need satire or moral lessons or other rubbish to tell them murder is bad and they shouldn't do it.
And if you think it's "creepy" or not is your own personal opinion and ultimately means absolutely nothing so I'm not sure why even go there
Ah dang so Hatred only needed cat silencers.
I personally thought that the No Russian level from Modern Warfare 2 was pretty edgy at the time. I mean, you literally mow down an entire airport full of civilians with LMGs. The level definitely garnered some media attention, but the game still didn't get an AO rating. I really want to see things that are considered, "AO".
[QUOTE=Ericson666;46948442]Having incredibly gruesome things isn't inherently bad, because like you said, there are plenty of great works that have horrible violence in them as part of some overarching theme, like Hotline Miami or Spec Ops: The Line. The difference here is that Hatred just has violence for the sake of violence, and to ridiculous measures.[/QUOTE]
My point is; why even try to justify the violence depicted in video games if it doesn't cause any inherent harm? Do you believe video game violence can lead to real violence? If not, why is it a problem if the violence in Hatred serves no purpose?
[QUOTE]Total War isn't really as comparable because, for one, it's a historical game, and history is pretty violent, so can be justified in that there's a purpose to it all (it's showing the past and educating people about history). Plus the fact that as the commander you're dealing with larger strategies and you have to do a thousand different things, so not only are you removed from seeing all the awful things that you caused in person, but the genocide is also a much smaller part of the game in total. Compare that to Hatred, where the entire point of the game is to slaughter people in horrific ways, and nothing else. Unless you made a mod for Total War where you can command your troops to personally fuck the eye sockets out of captured babies in polished 1080p cutscenes, and that was all you did, it's not that bad.[/QUOTE]
So, going with your point of view that violence in media should be justified in some way and that trivialization of virtual violence is a bad thing, then Total War is actually worse in that regard, isn't it?
Some people would argue that giving players the option to commit genocide through a sleek and user-friendly menu with minimal eye candy trivializes extermination much more than if it depicted the horrible massacre of innocents and children it actually consists in, driving the player on the verge of puking in the process.
Assuming your assumption is true, sanitizing extreme violence by making it as trivial and seemly as clicking on a button and watching the population bar go down would go a long way to make people accept such events in real life, whereas depicting these horrors as what they are would sensitize people on how inhumane genocide actually is.
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;46945542]honestly you can blame america, if it weren't for the fucking puritans way back when then i am certain that sex and nudity wouldn't be as taboo as it is[/QUOTE]
I say we buy a time machine and sink their pilgrim shit :v:
This is nothing more than a marketing stint honestly
I'd argue 90-95% of indie games don't get ESRB ratings anyways, since they aren't going to sell on a retail outlet where that is required so there is no need to (plus it costs money). Why would hatred get one then? So they could flaunt their AO rating as a mark of how hardcore the game is. That's pretty much the only reason.
I'm willing to bet to they submitted footage/game/descriptors/etc that made the game out to be way more edgy than it might actually be to really try and get that AO rating.
This entire game is banking on being controversial and being some kind of super hardcore edge-fest to succeed. Honestly, it really isn't the worst idea to make a buck and market yourself, even if it lacks a LOT of tact. And if the game is actually good, more power to them.
[QUOTE=Ericson666;46948442]And again, I'm not saying I'm necessarily agreeing with it getting an AO rating, because the guidelines between what's an M game and what's an AO game are really vague and subjective. That being said, I still think it's in incredibly poor taste and creepy, and only a few steps above RapeLay. It doesn't mean I think that these games are gonna cause little Timmy to run out and start raping and murdering everyone, but I still think they're really sleazy and creepy.[/QUOTE]
That's another thing I don't quite get, depiction of rape always seems to be considered as morally poorer than the most gruesome and unwarranted of rampages. Correct me if I'm wrong but I consider murder to be more morally reprehensible than rape. If you believe the same thing, and still assuming it is relevant at all to judge games based on their moral righteousness, why hold Hatred, a game where you're able to commit massive massacres, on a higher moral ground than Rapelay, where the player rapes three women?
So Hatred is out? If not, how are they able to rate it before it is released?
[QUOTE=Impact1986;46948974]So Hatred is out? If not, how are they able to rate it before it is released?[/QUOTE]
ESRB pretty much always rates games before they're released.
[URL]http://www.esrb.org/ratings/ratings_process.jsp[/URL]
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;46946269]They got it, but I doubt they were trying to get it, they were probably hoping for an M rating. I mean I wonder if anyone will ever make a game where they are actively trying to get it rated AO instead of M with no sexual content.[/QUOTE]
I doubt the creators of this were like "Hey guys let's make sure we stay within these boundaries:" when they made it.
[editline]16th January 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Impact1986;46948974]So Hatred is out? If not, how are they able to rate it before it is released?[/QUOTE]
You say that like we just release games to the shelves without ratings until the ESRB can rate them lol
[editline]16th January 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Mr. Foster;46948588]I personally thought that the No Russian level from Modern Warfare 2 was pretty edgy at the time. I mean, you literally mow down an entire airport full of civilians with LMGs. The level definitely garnered some media attention, but the game still didn't get an AO rating. I really want to see things that are considered, "AO".[/QUOTE]
Probably context again.
It was only one level, the reason for it was something like "YOU NEED TO GAIN THEIR TRUST," and even then, [sp]you die at the end of it.[/sp]
[QUOTE=FetusFondler;46948555]Lots of movies have violence for the sake of violence and nobody bats an eye. Games should be allowed that freedom too. Responsible, adult people who have the mental capacity to play violent video games aren't affected by what the game tells them and don't need satire or moral lessons or other rubbish to tell them murder is bad and they shouldn't do it.
And if you think it's "creepy" or not is your own personal opinion and ultimately means absolutely nothing so I'm not sure why even go there[/QUOTE]
It's not about it having an effect on people, Ericson666 is just criticising the creative direction of the game which is a perfectly valid thing to do and people do it with movies that have violence for the sake of violence (Hostel, Saw, Salo) all of the time.
There's nothing wrong with people criticising a video game
[QUOTE=strayebyrd;46953150]It's not about it having an effect on people, Ericson666 is just criticising the creative direction of the game which is a perfectly valid thing to do and people do it with movies that have violence for the sake of violence (Hostel, Saw, Salo) all of the time.
There's nothing wrong with people criticising a video game[/QUOTE]
Then I'm of the opinion that depicting morally unjustified violence has a place in the media, even in its most despicable form. At the very least its presence doesn't detract from the other qualities of the piece.
In the case of Hatred I think it's an interesting change from the usual tongue-in-cheek violence games like GTA or Saints Row depict.
The ability to get into a much different mindset is one of the main quality of media, getting into the shoes of a psychopath with no regard for human life is merely a form of evasion which can be fascinating in the same way as seeing the world through the eyes of an Alien would be.
[QUOTE=_Axel;46953480]Then I'm of the opinion that depicting morally unjustified violence has a place in the media, even in its most despicable form. At the very least its presence doesn't detract from the other qualities of the piece.
In the case of Hatred I think it's an interesting change from the usual tongue-in-cheek violence games like GTA or Saints Row depict.
The ability to get into a much different mindset is one of the main quality of media, getting into the shoes of a psychopath with no regard for human life is merely a form of evasion which can be fascinating in the same way as seeing the world through the eyes of an Alien would be.[/QUOTE]
and that's a completely valid take on the subject
Criticism of media doesn't just have to be shitflinging, you can acknowledge differing opinions without getting mardy over it
[QUOTE=RichyZ;46946705]no one wants to get it ao because stores will refuse to stock it, its a death sentence to your game
see: gta:sa first edition[/QUOTE]
When brick and mortar stores were the only or primary source of games this was true, but at this point if steam sells it then that should be more than enough for an indie developer I would think.
[QUOTE=Wii60;46944969]i hope steam allows it
free speech is gud[/QUOTE]
Steam shouldn't be obligated to sell a dumb game because muh free speech.
[QUOTE=Wii60;46944969]i hope steam allows it
free speech is gud[/QUOTE]
Isn't arbitrarily dictating what stores can and can't sell with no regard for the company's own intentions a bit of an affront to their own rights?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
