Might as well throw in a fucking school.^^
Might as well throw in a fucking school.^^
DLC.. o_O
If this don't influence kids and people to go ape shit I don't know what will smh..
The social justice warriors and angsty adults of the gaming world are strong with this one.
Restarting the Superhero Genre
In 1953, Marvel tried to bring back superheroes. In Young Men #24 the three big Marvel heroes made their return. Captain America, The Human Torch, and Prince Namor the Sub-Mariner all had stories that explained what they were doing since World War II. It told that Captain America had become a history teacher and he had his young sidekick Bucky as a student. But then his old arch-enemy The Red Skull re-appeared and was now teaming up with the Commies. So Captain America and his sidekick sprung back into action to stop his evil plans.
The Human Torch was captured by gangsters and buried underground in the Navada Desert. Once America started testing the A-bombs there, the radiation made him more powerful than before. The Human Torch then freed himself and tried to find his sidekick Toro. He found out that the gangsters had sold Toro to the Commies. The Human Torch then had to re-capture his young sidekick Toro and free him from the brainwashing that the Commies gave him.
Prince Namor had nothing happen to him after the war. He simply went back to his underwater kingdom until America called for him once again. The American Navy had a problem with some of their ships mysteriously vanishing. They suspected the Commies were up to no good again. They called upon The Sub-Mariner to investigate. He found out the cause of the sinking ships was not the Commies, but were sunk by robots from the planet Venus! After the Sub-Mariner defeated their commander the robots went back to Venus, promising never to return to earth.
Sadly, Marvel's attempt to bring back superheroes was not successful. Shortly after this DC tried to bring back superheroes too and they were a success. This event is called the 'Silver Age' and you'll read about it in the next section.
The question you may ask is: why do they do this?
These days, when a lot of games are heading to be polite, colorful, politically correct and trying to be some kind of higher art, rather than just an entertainment – we wanted to create something against trends. Something different, something that could give the player a pure, gaming pleasure.
This is like a higher budgeted, 3D version of those flash games where you run around and shoot people till you die and repeat it all which makes the backlash I've seen about it both infuriating and hilarious ("I'm gonna quit video games waah!").
It's so EDGY to the point of self parody that I honestly hope that it has a boss who is like, the complete opposite of this guy in the trailer. Like a super optimistic captain of a Spirit Squad who attacks you with sunshine and color.
POLYGON DOT COM YEAH BABYI would by this game in a heartbeat if you could dress up as Boogerman and throw your boogers at people, with finisher animations having you fart in their faces.
Why is everyone going "social justice warrior" on the game?not a fair comparison, gta has tons of other stuff you can do besides killing. this is taking the "killing innocents" mechanic of gta and making it its own game.
It's like GTA with better graphics and more killing
The only scene I found particualry shocking in the trailer is the "execution" style murder anyway...
If they had their way we would be burning games like they did with comics.Yeah, I dunno about all that. That's a really disingenuous comparison; there's a fairly significant boundary between "this has no reason to exist/this shouldn't exist" and "this deserves to be destroyed so it no longer exists because it is poisoning the childrens". Like, I dunno, here's a bad comparison: the difference between saying the New 52 shouldn't exist and actually going out and burning down DC Comics, say.
Those arent Nazi, in the forties the Americans convinced themselves they had to be ethic warriors and destroy anything that might influence the kids to be violent/sexist etc.Not... really on the latter; it was primarily fear of the former, as well as fear of them promoting general delinquency, and of course the worry that Batman would make children gay.
If the game is bult around that, than that's the point of the game, it's a mechanic like any otherWhy is everyone going "social justice warrior" on the game?not a fair comparison, gta has tons of other stuff you can do besides killing. this is taking the "killing innocents" mechanic of gta and making it its own game.
It's like GTA with better graphics and more killing
The only scene I found particualry shocking in the trailer is the "execution" style murder anyway...
That's actually what I like about games like this. Or about ANY video game - I get to do in the game what I would NEVER EVER do in real life...shoot people, rob people, race in cars at dangerous speeds, hunt goblins and demons, and yes - have disgusting, casual sex with strangers. I don't think that it "disrespects" me as a woman as all.
This is a good write-up about the game. (http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2014/10/16/the-video-game-morality-questions-raised-by-mass-murder-simulator-hatred/)No it doesnt matter.If they had their way we would be burning games like they did with comics.Yeah, I dunno about all that. That's a really disingenuous comparison; there's a fairly significant boundary between "this has no reason to exist/this shouldn't exist" and "this deserves to be destroyed so it no longer exists because it is poisoning the childrens". Like, I dunno, here's a bad comparison: the difference between saying the New 52 shouldn't exist and actually going out and burning down DC Comics, say.
because the whole point of this is violence, theres no other plot, like most of the other stuffIf the game is bult around that, than that's the point of the game, it's a mechanic like any otherWhy is everyone going "social justice warrior" on the game?not a fair comparison, gta has tons of other stuff you can do besides killing. this is taking the "killing innocents" mechanic of gta and making it its own game.
It's like GTA with better graphics and more killing
The only scene I found particualry shocking in the trailer is the "execution" style murder anyway...
No one bats an eye about violent movies, no one bats an eye about books with questionable themes, so why do people still "flip" when a new violent game comes out?
Nothing game wise or book wise needs to adhere to a standart minimum of ART or whatever to be allowed to exist. And yes i do think that starting to argue that something shouldnt exist because of ethics or whatever is a step towards trying to censor or ban things like it happened with the books.But no one (or at least, not anywhere I've seen, and if I dig any deeper it wouldn't really be representative of anyone beyond a small number of loonies) is setting an invisible bar for games to pass, they're giving subjective judgements on whether they think this game should exist or not, and that's a far cry from demanding it be eradicated because it's causing some sort of objective harm. I can't even begin to count the number of reviews of (bad) movies, books, and what not that have something along the lines of "this doesn't need to exist"; it's not an especially deleterious statement. It's a quality judgement, not one born of a desire to censor.
They took your porn and horror comic books and it completely neutered the american comic book for decades until Vertigo started pushing decent comics for adults again.Alt/underground comics were doing that for decades before Vertigo :V
ive seen horror exploitation movies, its the same formula, but generally they dont get high profile releases like this do they? just wondering
i cant remember the last "exploitation film" that got a theatrical release, that wasnt r rated and not that bad
because the whole point of this is violence, theres no other plot, like most of the other stuffIf the game is bult around that, than that's the point of the game, it's a mechanic like any otherWhy is everyone going "social justice warrior" on the game?not a fair comparison, gta has tons of other stuff you can do besides killing. this is taking the "killing innocents" mechanic of gta and making it its own game.
It's like GTA with better graphics and more killing
The only scene I found particualry shocking in the trailer is the "execution" style murder anyway...
No one bats an eye about violent movies, no one bats an eye about books with questionable themes, so why do people still "flip" when a new violent game comes out?
basically because its trying so hard to get negative attention like this, its getting it. not that hard to understand.
If people dont want to see more games like those they should vote with their wallets and not buy those , not try to make campaigns against it or shit like that. To me, the act of trying to convince others that this shouldnt exist is the first steps that eventually leads to stuff like the book burning with praying americans.But no one is making campaigns. At most you have a few randos saying this is the outrageous and should be banned (who can easily be ignored), most of the rest is a general sentiment that the game looks like shit and the developers are just going for shock value, the news sites either blandly rephrase the developer's press release for their own articles (JOURNALISM!) or "this game looks like shit and the devs are just going for shock value". There's no real panic here. There's no real hand-wringing by anyone/thing major. It just doesn't make a ton of sense to compare this to one of the worst moments in censorship and hysteria in recent memory, IMO.
Also that game looks like shit so far, but it barely rates anything in the shock o meter. Not even close to those hollywood movies about torture porn that people are so into those days.Having the player partake in the brutality themselves gives it a more visceral level, I suppose.
If this game featured zombies, cyborgs, a militia or Nazis instead of innocent bystanders who are begging for mercy, then there wouldn't be too much of a fuss. Why didn't everyone get all crazy when Modern Warfare debuted with US Soldiers shooting Middle Eastern Soldiers?? Granted, the Middle Eastern characters had weapons and were the enemy, but you're still shooting someone and it's the same type of violence. The context of who you are shooting is what is causing the issue here if you ask me.That Forbes article I linked back earlier goes into this but I'll just quote it because it sums things up very well
es, in Grand Theft Auto you’ll be shooting at gang members much of the time, but everyone who has ever played that series knows that you as the player can easily go off the rails at any time and starting killing civilians, attracting the cops and then murdering them too. The same is true for other games in the open world genre from Saints Row to Fallout to Deus Ex to any game that gives you a weapon and places you around civilians. Only rarely do these “freedom of choice” games explicitly prevent you from killing innocent characters.
The difference here is that A) the game goes out of its way to be unusually brutal with its executions and B) the explicit purpose of the game is to kill these innocents, rather than it being a diversion or an action that’s actively punishable. Go on a rampage on Fallout and you might lose a huge collection of quests for killing NPCs who would have given them to you. Do the same in GTA and you’ll be unable to progress in the story due to the swarms of cops sent to kill you. But do it in Hatred? It literally is the entire content of the game.
Its entirely comparable. That kind of pearl clutching was what lead to that eventually,If people dont want to see more games like those they should vote with their wallets and not buy those , not try to make campaigns against it or shit like that. To me, the act of trying to convince others that this shouldnt exist is the first steps that eventually leads to stuff like the book burning with praying americans.But no one is making campaigns. At most you have a few randos saying this is the outrageous and should be banned (who can easily be ignored), most of the rest is a general sentiment that the game looks like shit and the developers are just going for shock value, the news sites either blandly rephrase the developer's press release for their own articles (JOURNALISM!) or "this game looks like shit and the devs are just going for shock value". There's no real panic here. There's no real hand-wringing by anyone/thing major. It just doesn't make a ton of sense to compare this to one of the worst moments in censorship and hysteria in recent memory, IMO.
PFT even god of war had that. walk up to a civilian , behead him or stab him or shove him into a spike.Also that game looks like shit so far, but it barely rates anything in the shock o meter. Not even close to those hollywood movies about torture porn that people are so into those days.Having the player partake in the brutality themselves gives it a more visceral level, I suppose.
Whats the ethical reason for the existance of super mario?
Its entirely comparable. That kind of pearl clutching was what lead to that eventually,But none of that is even remotely likely; even if there was some kind of wide-scale campaign, it sure as hell wouldn't be emerging from a small minority on Tumblr: it would be from cable news and idiot pundits. But even that is all old hat, not only is this game is not high-profile enough to reach their attention, the whole "violent video games are gonna corrupt the children" thing is all sort of old hat, whenever it pops up, it doesn't last. It died with Jack Thompson's respectability, and everytime is gets brought up in situations where it actually gains traction (like when the Vice President of the NRA complained that violent video games/movies were the real problem not guns), it always fades away from the conversation; there are far, far more pressing matters in the gaming world than a phantom of a imagined possibility of a problem. Worrying that a tiny subset of people on the internet could bring anything comparable to the backlash against comics in the 50s is pretty much the definition of pearl clutching. It's not even worth thinking about.
It isnt so bad now but just wait until the tumblr moral wannabes start trying to make a thing out of it on a larger scale.
The comic book burning is just the logical conclusion of that kind of stuff, what else do you expect to happen when you have people shouting "this shouldnt be made"? That they all politely agree on what should be made instead?
But none of that is even remotely likely; even if there was some kind of wide-scale campaign, it sure as hell wouldn't be emerging from a small minority on Tumblr: it would be from cable news and idiot pundits. But even that is all old hat, not only is this game is not high-profile enough to reach their attention, the whole "violent video games are gonna corrupt the children" thing is all sort of old hat, whenever it pops up, it doesn't last. It died with Jack Thompson's respectability, and everytime is gets brought up in situations where it actually gains traction (like when the Vice President of the NRA complained that violent video games/movies were the real problem not guns), it always fades away from the conversation; there are far, far more pressing matters in the gaming world than a phantom of a imagined possibility of a problem. Worrying that a tiny subset of people on the internet could bring anything comparable to the backlash against comics in the 50s is pretty much the definition of pearl clutching. It's not even worth thinking about.
there are far, far more pressing matters in the gaming world than a phantom of a imagined possibility of a problem.I disagree, what would those be? Discussion of censorship and potential breakdown seems far more pressing on the highlight of this trailer and the discussions it sparked.
Violent Video GAmes Do Not Corrupt Are Minds - However Bayonnetas Tight Ass is Corrupting our Youths. 4/10 Best I Can Give
you have a whole group of people taught that Sexism in videogames cause sexism in real life, how far from that is "violence in videogames create violence in real life" that Jack Thompson did?Most people, even the tumblr people everyone gets all bent out of shape about, actually argue about that. There's been enough studies to prove that violent videogames don't actually promote increased physical violence in the people who play them; however, there have also been a number of studies that the media we consume affects our views and the way we think about stuff. Media can be a very powerful tool for the latter, for good: a quick example would be shows like Ellen and Will And Grace leading to a growing tolerance of gay people (but not like, watching it instantly changed people's minds, it just opened them up to the possibility). I mean obviously it's not like those two shows were magic pills that changed everyone's minds instantly, but they led to some subtle shifts, that combined with a multitude of other factors (growing comfortableness with being openly gay, among other stuff) eventually led to very real change. What they're arguing is that, basically, and it's a lot more subtle and a lot less dangerous than what Thompson was going off about.
Situation is interesting and is related to the comic book censorship. It hasnt scaled to that point obviously nor do I think it will but its still comparable and giving that comparison benefited the thread.It's just that the comics thing is SO big and SO outrageous and dangerous that it feels like bringing a nuke to a gun fight. That was a dark period in history, where everything that could've gone wrong practically did, and I don't think it should be used as an example lightly.
I disagree, what would those be? Discussion of censorship and potential breakdown seems far more pressing on the highlight of this trailer and the discussions it sparked.The parasitic nature of the mainstream gaming press and the widespread harassment of females in games. Those are actual issues to be worried about.
The parasitic nature of the mainstream gaming press and the widespread harassment of females in games. Those are actual issues to be worried about.
gamona: A lot of gamers are worried, that Hatred might be exactly the kind of game, that gives the mainstream press the fuel to brand all gamers as violence loving, rough and aggressive people. Do you understand those concerns?
Jarosław Zieliński: No, they're simply exaggerating. Let's face it - most games are about killing, we're just telling it straight. There is also no simple, plain evidence that games are pushing people to go on a killing spree. Such controversy as ours happened before and will happen again. And we gamers and developers are still standing here, aren't we?
gamona: What would you say to someone who lost a loved one in a mass shooting and feels hurt by your game, who can't understand how anyone can develop a game where the player is supposed to shoot as many innocent people as possible?
Jarosław Zieliński: Innocent virtual people. That's the main point. Nobody get's harmed by our game. Anyway - war is a terrible experience for all soldiers out there, what would you say to them while playing Battlefield? But the difference is that soldiers are tough guys, not some moaning p**sies, so they don't complain about their experiences being reference for virtual entertainment. Back to the beginning of your question: I'm really sorry for anyone who has lost beloved ones, but it doesn't have anything to do with our game.
(http://i.imgur.com/NodS0wN.png)
“We don’t care. :)”Awesome response (not sarcasm).
Valve has removed Hatred from Steam Greenlight.
"Based on what we've seen on Greenlight we would not publish Hatred on Steam. As such we'll be taking it down," Valve's Doug Lombardi told Eurogamer moments ago.
That didn't take long.
Hatred developer Destructive Creations has commented on having the game removed from Steam Greenlight, and has also provided some stats from its short-lived campaign.
The game received 13,148 yes votes and reached number seven out of just over 2,000 games on Greenlight. This would have put it on course for approval on Steam.
The developer said Valve was in its rights to remove the title, but questioned why other ultraviolent games were still available on the store.
"Even though games like Manhunt or Postal are still available on Steam we of course fully respect Valve’s decision, as they have the right to do so,” read a statement.
“In the same time we want to assure you that this won’t in any way impact the game's development, game’s vision or gameplay features we’re aiming for. The game is still to be released in Q2 2015 as planned."
Valve is a private business and has no obligation to put every game on Steam, and they have the right to refuse games from their service. There's no big conspiracy here.
Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuh, they removed a game that got in the top 10 in two hours for totally vague reasons. How does that make them neutral at all?Among the options they had, it was probably seen as the one likely to court the least amount of controversy for them. Valve doesn't want to touch this with a ten foot pole, most likely.
a lot of sjw champions on twitter bring up the developers probably being neonazis. why does that matter. would this same exact game be super cool if it was made by hipster doofus #53?I heard that was discredited? Unless there's something I missed.
Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuh, they removed a game that got in the top 10 in two hours for totally vague reasons. How does that make them neutral at all?Among the options they had, it was probably seen as the one likely to court the least amount of controversy for them. Valve doesn't want to touch this with a ten foot pole, most likely.
a lot of sjw champions on twitter bring up the developers probably being neonazis. why does that matter. would this same exact game be super cool if it was made by hipster doofus #53?I heard that was discredited? Unless there's something I missed.
Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuh, they removed a game that got in the top 10 in two hours for totally vague reasons. How does that make them neutral at all?
But the entire Postal series on Steam and Postal 2 alone is way worse than this.Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuh, they removed a game that got in the top 10 in two hours for totally vague reasons. How does that make them neutral at all?Among the options they had, it was probably seen as the one likely to court the least amount of controversy for them. Valve doesn't want to touch this with a ten foot pole, most likely.
People aren't defending the game because it's good or because it represents them, but because a move like this encourages stuff like that to happen more often whenever a controversial game comes out, it doesn't even need to be a violent game.I dunno it's just so cartoonishly "90's politician's worst fear about violent videogames", so engineered to court controversy that it doesn't seem like it would set a lot of precedent, IMO. If there starts to be a pattern I would be worried, but I just can't get very worked up about it.
If there starts to be a pattern I would be worried
The controversy on this one seems like it's bigger than anything Postal has done.People aren't defending the game because it's good or because it represents them, but because a move like this encourages stuff like that to happen more often whenever a controversial game comes out, it doesn't even need to be a violent game.I dunno it's just so cartoonishly "90's politician's worst fear about violent videogames", so engineered to court controversy that it doesn't seem like it would set a lot of precedent, IMO. If there starts to be a pattern I would be worried, but I just can't get very worked up about it.
GTA banned from Target and Kmart in Australia and now this. Yeah, you should be worried at this point.I was mostly talking about a pattern of Steam doing it, but yeah that Australia ban is concerning. At least things are better than they were 10 years ago, at least (what with games now being allowed to have 18+ ratings).
postal was literally the poster child for "violent games harm people"I remember Postal, I don't remember it ever being banned or anything (although it apparently was, in New Zealand? huh), but yeah, this seems like a bigger deal. GTA strikes me as a much better comparison, but of course that series has obviously attracted a lot more attention.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postal_2#Controversy
Back off guys. He obviously hasn't included everything into the game yet, but I can tell he cares about diversity and inclusion. I was born with my thumbs on the wrong side of my hands. I've been mocked for it all my life. When I look at the art for this game I almost cried. I've been playing video games for over two decades now (with a special controller) and this is the first time I've seen someone with my condition represented.