• Valve pulls Hatred from Greenlight due to disagreeing with the subject matter of the game.
    576 replies, posted
Jesus Christ all the people comparing Hatred to GTA. Hatred: - Kill civilians for the purpose of killing civilians - Kill cops for the purpose of killing cops GTA: - Kill civilians because you can - Kill cops because because you can - Rob a bank for money - Play tennis - Do yoga - Drive around, enjoying the sights - Explore the city and mountain ranges - Do silly shit like that which the Achievement Hunter crew do It's not about the fact that you [I]can[/I] kill civilians in GTA, it's that that's the [I]only[/I] thing you do in Hatred. They're not comparable. Same with a lot of the games mentioned in this thread (Dota and Manhunt (which isn't about killing people, it's about being forced to do so)). Also, half-finished games and DeviantArt Hentai games aren't comparable either. Half-finished games are a whole other subject than that of Hatred (complete game vs. game purpose). The DA games are sexually suggestive and, in the eyes of many of us here, gross. But that doesn't make them comparable to Hatred. Shit game != game with bad intentions.
[QUOTE=wulfe8857;46720589]Jesus Christ all the people comparing Hatred to GTA. Hatred: - Kill civilians for the purpose of killing civilians - Kill cops for the purpose of killing cops GTA: - Kill civilians because you can - Kill cops because because you can - Rob a bank for money - Play tennis - Do yoga - Drive around, enjoying the sights - Explore the city and mountain ranges - Do silly shit like that which the Achievement Hunter crew do It's not about the fact that you [I]can[/I] kill civilians in GTA, it's that that's the [I]only[/I] thing you do in Hatred. They're not comparable. Same with a lot of the games mentioned in this thread (Dota and Manhunt (which isn't about killing people, it's about being forced to do so)). Also, half-finished games and DeviantArt Hentai games aren't comparable either. Half-finished games are a whole other subject than that of Hatred (complete game vs. game purpose). The DA games are sexually suggestive and, in the eyes of many of us here, gross. But that doesn't make them comparable to Hatred. Shit game != game with bad intentions.[/QUOTE] Your logic is so flawed. In Hatred, whats stopping you from: - Walking, enjoying the sights - Explore the city + shops - Do silly shit A game is how you play it. I'm sure you can just dander around in Hatred just fine, no ones forcing you to aim at that civilian and pull the trigger.
[QUOTE=wulfe8857;46720589]Jesus Christ all the people comparing Hatred to GTA. Hatred: - Kill civilians for the purpose of killing civilians - Kill cops for the purpose of killing cops GTA: - Kill civilians because you can - Kill cops because because you can - Rob a bank for money - Play tennis - Do yoga - Drive around, enjoying the sights - Explore the city and mountain ranges - Do silly shit like that which the Achievement Hunter crew do It's not about the fact that you [I]can[/I] kill civilians in GTA, it's that that's the [I]only[/I] thing you do in Hatred. They're not comparable. Same with a lot of the games mentioned in this thread (Dota and Manhunt (which isn't about killing people, it's about being forced to do so)). Also, half-finished games and DeviantArt Hentai games aren't comparable either. Half-finished games are a whole other subject than that of Hatred (complete game vs. game purpose). The DA games are sexually suggestive and, in the eyes of many of us here, gross. But that doesn't make them comparable to Hatred. Shit game != game with bad intentions.[/QUOTE] A couple of months ago, most FP users were making fun of the game for being edgy and criticizing for being so violent for no good story worthy reason other than "I hate everything!" Now, its apparently "a parody".
[QUOTE=Bread_Baron;46720580]For those wondering what makes Hatred different to Postal 1, there's one very clear yet simple difference. Hatred glorifies mass murder, whereas Postal condemns it. Postal constantly makes you feel uncomfortable and shows you that your actions are fucked up, whereas Hatred encourages that behaviour. They're opposite ideals about the same subject matter.[/QUOTE] [t]http://i.imgur.com/mpYXuEd.jpg[/t][t]http://i.imgur.com/2OLaZ32.jpg[/t] You shoot people, and then they writhe on the ground bleeding out and sometimes trying desperately to crawl away. You can then walk over them, press X, and unload into them in an execution.
Seems like their decisions on what gets to be on Steam and what doesn't has jack shit to do with the subject matter or quality of the product, because we've seen they don't give a flying fuck how bad a game is anymore as long as it has been greenlighted. It's very clearly a PR thing to stop the moronic masses from claiming that somehow the games put on Steam represent the opinions of Valve, which is completely absurd. Can't say I blame Valve at all, better to completely avoid the shitstorm. It's not like anything of value was lost.
It's a video game. I don't care how "violent and evil" it may be, it's pixels. Moralist crap is stupid. Is it a[I] good[/I] video game? Well that's up to you to decide.
I guess you can't complete GTA by only killing civilians and cops. But in Hatred that's the only way to complete the game. But does that matter? That's the core of this argument, I think.
[QUOTE=Thlis;46720233]Why is GTA fine but this isn't?[/QUOTE] GTA is a plot-oriented game in which you have the option to not kill most people you come across. It does not allow the main character to shove his gun into a woman's mouth while she is begging for mercy and execute her and then give you points for it. When I play GTA, I generally only kill the people I am forced to in self-defense or whom I am required to as declared by the plot. I try to avoid running over pedestrians, and steal empty cars whenever I have the luxury of time to do so. My sense of morality is reflected in the game. I don't go on shooting sprees on the board walk or Main St. because I have no desire to do so. I am free to make judgement calls when planning heists to minimize casualties. I don't [I]HAVE[/I] to be a mass murderer, just a sociopathic criminal who is down on his luck and looking for a way out of the life he has. The fact that you or other people consider killing everyone in sight a game in itself doesn't mean that everyone plays that way. [QUOTE=Thlis;46720233]Why is Manhunt fine but this isn't?[/QUOTE] The violence in Manhunt is primarily committed against mass murderers and others who have committed numerous crimes against humanity. It never struck me as brutal for brutality's sake as much as portraying how horrific and involved of a process it is to kill someone in a manner not involving a gun (which I took to be a statement in itself). As far as I can recall, the main character does not kill many innocent people. [QUOTE=Thlis;46720233]Why is Postal fine but this isn't?[/QUOTE] Postal 1 is pixels and Doom-era sounds interspersed with a text-based narrative. Postal II gives you the option to kill almost nobody if you are willing to try very hard to survive. [QUOTE=Thlis;46720233]If we are going to complain about the execution moves, why is Sleeping Dogs fine but this isn't? Hell, Modern Warfare 2 literally has a level simulating a mass killing.[/QUOTE] Sleeping dogs isn't about mass-murdering innocent civilians, I presume. It contains some plot in which most of the people you commit violence towards want to harm/kill you. The violence is excessive, but also very much centered around the kind of 'finishing moves' you can see in many 70's-90's martial arts films. Modern Warfare II was depicting a false-flag operation. I didn't particularly like the scene, but I also didn't shoot when I realized I had the option not to. You don't have to shoot anyone in that scene, except perhaps the police that come in full force after you get onto the tarmac. I don't know why it is hard for you to understand that there is a fine line between containing violence and being centered around and glorifying gratuitous violence against as many innocent people as you can reach.
[QUOTE=Duskin;46720605]Your logic is so flawed. In Hatred, whats stopping you from: - Walking, enjoying the sights - Explore the city + shops - Do silly shit A game is how you play it. I'm sure you can just dander around in Hatred just fine, no ones forcing you to aim at that civilian and pull the trigger.[/QUOTE] But Hatred doesn't actively encourage you to do anything but kill. GTA gives you a huge world to explore, doesn't really reward you for killing (except for some cash sometimes), and gives you a lot of options to do silly shit. Hatred gives you guns.
[QUOTE=wulfe8857;46720589] It's not about the fact that you [I]can[/I] kill civilians in GTA, it's that that's the [I]only[/I] thing you do in Hatred. [/QUOTE] Did you get an early copy? [QUOTE=wulfe8857;46720645]But Hatred doesn't actively encourage you to do anything but kill. GTA gives you a huge world to explore, doesn't really reward you for killing ([B]except for some cash sometimes[/B]), and gives you a lot of options to do silly shit. Hatred gives you guns.[/QUOTE] That is a really big except further punctuated by the fact you have to kill in order to progress through the game.
-snip-
[QUOTE=Wii60;46720432]censorship is censorship no matter whos doing it steam, which is the biggest pc game market, is a very valuable place to have your game at. sometimes it means life or death of your company. valve saying no to having this game on steam means they are effectively censoring the game from the mainstream[/QUOTE] Valve's monopoly on the PC gaming market is neither here nor there. It's still a store, and stores are more than allowed to sell or not sell whatever they please. Censorship would be if Valve were to somehow prevent the game from showing up on the internet at all. Nothing is stopping the developers from selling the game on their own website. Valve has said "we don't want to sell your product" and that should be the end of the discussion. The only reason people haven't dismissed this news with "good riddance to bad trash" is because censorship in gaming is a hot issue right now. It's fine if the community makes fun of something for being stupid, but god forbid if anyone in a suit does the same thing. Then it goes from happy chuckle times on the internet to some kind of bizarre social issue.
[QUOTE=Grimhound;46720613][t]http://i.imgur.com/mpYXuEd.jpg[/t][t]http://i.imgur.com/2OLaZ32.jpg[/t] You shoot people, and then they writhe on the ground bleeding out and sometimes trying desperately to crawl away. You can then walk over them, press X, and unload into them in an execution.[/QUOTE] Yes, and it's intentionally disturbing.
[QUOTE=Duskin;46720605]Your logic is so flawed. In Hatred, whats stopping you from: - Walking, enjoying the sights - Explore the city + shops - Do silly shit A game is how you play it. I'm sure you can just dander around in Hatred just fine, no ones forcing you to aim at that civilian and pull the trigger.[/QUOTE] That's like saying I can walk around and enjoy the sights in a multiplayer FPS game. Ofc you can, but thats not even near the point of the game, mostly because the game isn't even suited for doing so and obviously isn't being developed with that in mind. GTA games allow you to do all that because they are tailored with that also in mind. You could go on killing sprees, or you could go do the other things the devs set up for you like yoga and tenis, or you could go sight seeing and either look for easter eggs or interesting stuff around the area, or just look at the scenery, which was made to be gorgeous and has effort into being life like in a parodical way.
[QUOTE=Aman;46720636]It's a video game. I don't care how "violent and evil" it may be, it's pixels. Moralist crap is stupid. Is it a[I] good[/I] video game? Well that's up to you to decide.[/QUOTE] We don't show 90 minute movies of literally just killing people without reason in theatres even though that's just colors projected on a screen. Why are pixels different?
[QUOTE=Bread_Baron;46720661]Yes, and it's intentionally disturbing.[/QUOTE] And you're arguing Hatred isn't intentionally disturbing? Postal and Hatred are pretty much the same game. The difference is you see their faces and hear them crying for their lives in Hatred.
[QUOTE=Thlis;46720647]Did you get an early copy? That is a really big except further punctuated by the fact you have to kill in order to progress through the game.[/QUOTE] [quote]Hatred is an isometric shooter with disturbing atmosphere of mass killing[/quote] Dev's website. They're advertising it as just mass murder. That's the intent of the game then, isn't it?
You guys with the moralist argues are dumb it just boils down to a ficitious made up scenario of pixels. "but you can kill innocent civilians!" They are neither innocent or civilians, they are pixels in a video game, a fictional world separate from the real world. The main point is should Valve have pulled the game? No in my opinion but of course Valve owns Steam outright and they can do what they want with their service, can't exactly fault them for it other than disagree with them. And as I previously said it may be a bad game on merits of gameplay, we don't know we have to play it. But to call it bad and to be banned cause the subject matter gets your morals in a knot, grow up does it really matter?
[QUOTE=Fort83;46720650]Hatred isn't even released yet, there could easily be other things to do in the game. Way to jump to conclusions based on trailers. Also you can kill civilians and cops in GTA for the purpose of killing civilians and cops.[/QUOTE] Based on the trailers, I highly doubt it. Hence why, imo, the game has a lame story, if you can call it that. Bonus points for having some pretty sick executions.
I'm not particularly interested in Hatred from what has been shown so far but I think Valve needs to be a lot more consistent when it comes to what gets on Greenlight and what doesn't and it's unfair to the Hatred team to get shafted almost immediately when permanently broken and unfinished games are either already Greenlit or up for nomination. If Valve actually put effort into policing Greenlight, communicated their standards, and executed them with impartiality then this wouldn't even really be noteworthy. But now it just looks like unfair treatment. That said, it's not censorship. Steam is a store owned by Valve and they decide what they want to sell. The Hatred team can find any other vendor they want. Hell they can start burning DVD's and selling them out of a garage. Valve can't force them not to develop their product.
As for myself, I'm a big fan of top-down games, although it saddens me that they're mostly soft enough to be spread on a bagel. The perspective has some great potential for hardcore experience - GTA2, among others of it's era, is a testament to that. As for the other parts, I'm not a fan of gore, like really please no. But I don't see what's bad about killing innocents in videogames, if it has combat in it chances are innocent people get hurt too. They're just pixels though so it's like whatever. It's not like videogames ever try to emulate reality anyway. Thing is though, after Doom, Wolfenstein, Carmageddon, GTA, Duke Nukem and so on and on, the concept/message of Hatred is actually overdone. It's just funny how we refuse to accept Hatred while naming Hotline Miami GOTY right off the bat. I'm curious to see what comes off this game. Not exactly looking forward to it as the trailer focuses more on the theme than gameplay (which btw I hate when devs/publishers do), but I definitely don't condone what Valve's done here either. I mean c'mon, you can barely tell what the game is about and you're already killing it, if anything that's rude and unfair. Imagine Sierra turned Half Life down for similar reasons back in the day, how would you like that.
[QUOTE=wulfe8857;46720665]We don't show 90 minute movies of literally just killing people without reason in theatres even though that's just colors projected on a screen. Why are pixels different?[/QUOTE] Have you even seen most slasher flicks?
I think the key lesson here is that implicit or explicit censorship of controversial material is wrong, and that people should express their disdain for material by buying or not buying it in an informed matter, and expressing their opinion openly. That or just ban everything forever, that works too.
[QUOTE=Aman;46720679]You guys with the moralist argues are dumb it just boils down to a ficitious made up scenario of pixels. "but you can kill innocent civilians!" They are neither innocent or civilians, they are pixels in a video game, a fictional world separate from the real world. The main point is should Valve have pulled the game? No in my opinion but of course Valve owns Steam outright and they can do what they want with their service, can't exactly fault them for it other than disagree with them.[/QUOTE] All forms of art get this kind of this kind of treatment, and like it or not videogames are now considered art. It doesn't matter that they're "just pixels." It's now part of the abstract concept of art and videogames now have meaning beyond the code.
[QUOTE=Aman;46720679]You guys with the moralist argues are dumb it just boils down to a ficitious made up scenario of pixels. "but you can kill innocent civilians!" They are neither innocent or civilians, they are pixels in a video game, a fictional world separate from the real world. The main point is should Valve have pulled the game? No in my opinion but of course Valve owns Steam outright and they can do what they want with their service, can't exactly fault them for it other than disagree with them.[/QUOTE]Whether or not you can kill civilians is not the problem for Valve, its about what the context for those actions is and how that will represent Valve if they choose to take responsbility for it.
[QUOTE=wulfe8857;46720702]All forms of art get this kind of this kind of treatment, and like it or not videogames are now considered art. It doesn't matter that they're "just pixels." It's now part of the abstract concept of art and videogames now have meaning beyond the code.[/QUOTE] Since when does art get banned cause "I'm offended!"?
[QUOTE=Duskin;46720699]Have you even seen most slasher flicks?[/QUOTE] Slasher flicks are about the survival of the main characters, not about the slaughtering of random civilians. Intent and perspective are important.
[QUOTE=wulfe8857;46720665]We don't show 90 minute movies of literally just killing people without reason in theatres even though that's just colors projected on a screen. Why are pixels different?[/QUOTE] Shit, you're right. Uwe Boll's Rampage was 85 minutes.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;46720709]Whether or not you can kill civilians is not the problem for Valve, its about what the context for those actions is and how that will represent Valve if they choose to take responsbility for it.[/QUOTE] Sure, and that's Valves decision and opinion I got nothing wrong with that. I'd like it to be on Steam, but oh well I can't change things. I just find it funny on a video game forum of all things we got posters acting like Jack Thompson.
[QUOTE=Aman;46720713]Since when does art get banned cause "I'm offended!"?[/QUOTE] It's not banned. The game will still be released. Just not on Steam and there's no good reason to get upset over that.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.