You should feel bad

[DraQ]

I do disagree with Super Mario being defined as "violent" and the article should have given Special Ops: The Line more attention.

Also:

Deus Ex is not a murder simulator if you don't want it to be

There is DX1, DX:HR, Dishonored and some other games, including some prominent codexian RPGs that get about as violent as you make them (they still often have that problem where clearing levels is possible and rewarding, but they are step in the right direction nevertheless).

Protip: if you want to make a game that has a character for whom killing is hard, don't make killing the main gameplay element.
Go make an adventure game. Or an RPG that allows you to skip most combat encounters/solve them by diplomacy.
Or, in the case of Tomb Raider, make a game that focuses on exploring ruins and solving puzzles, like, you know, an actual Tomb Raider game.

This.

You can't treat killing like serious business in your game if you don't treat it like serious business in your game.

If you do treat killing as serious business in your game, it probably won't have it as main supporting mechanics, because if killing is treated seriously, then the odds are inevitably stacked against you, if you just go in swinging/blazing.

And don't, for fucks sake, reward clearing for the sake of clearing.

i've got amazing news for you guys
i don't feel bad because i know it's not real

That, my friends, is bullshit.

Of course it technically isn't real, but if you genuinely didn't care about semblance for reality, you'd be just as content slaughtering untextured cubes going "BOOP.".
Since that's probably bunk, we have to conclude that your fun relies to a large extent on it being a little bit real to you.

 

[Scruffy]

That, my friends, is bullshit.

Of course it technically isn't real, but if you genuinely didn't care about semblance for reality, you'd be just as content slaughtering untextured cubes going "BOOP.".
Since that's probably bunk, we have to conclude that your fun relies to a large extent on it being a little bit real to you.

Nope, sorry. I was content shooting imaginary aliens in space invaders, and i was content jumping on top of tortoises, not because it was " a little bit real to me", but because that was what the game was about and i enjoyed "beating" the game. I was content eating small lumps of white stuff and escaping from ghosts and i was content jumping barrels thrown by a gorilla. None of that was "real" in the slightest to me. This just happens to be a game where you have to kill people.

 

[Scruffy]

(which i never played, so i'm just using this as an example, i played the GTA though and stuff so the example still works)

 

[Trash]

All I want to see is games that don't simply have a protagonist who is all sensitive and conflicted and troubled about killing while me as the player butchers an entire gameworld for the sheer fun of it. GTA IV, Far Cry 3 and Tomb Raider are perfect examples of that.

If the idea is to bring a more intelligent and even, gasp, thoughtfull approach to storytelling in games than the actions are usually in stark contrast to the narrative. I think that reeks of hypocrisy. Otoh games that do go into the whole violence has consequences thingie and/or make the player deliberately a genuine part of it are usually much more interesting for it. Shame there are so very few. Otherwise just give me a simple and honest action flick like Doom or Hotline Miami that at least do not pretend that their violence is for anything other than the sake of violence.

 

[DraQ]

That, my friends, is bullshit.

Of course it technically isn't real, but if you genuinely didn't care about semblance for reality, you'd be just as content slaughtering untextured cubes going "BOOP.".
Since that's probably bunk, we have to conclude that your fun relies to a large extent on it being a little bit real to you.

Nope, sorry. I was content shooting imaginary aliens in space invaders, and i was content jumping on top of tortoises, not because it was " a little bit real to me", but because that was what the game was about and i enjoyed "beating" the game. I was content eating small lumps of white stuff and escaping from ghosts and i was content jumping barrels thrown by a gorilla. None of that was "real" in the slightest to me. This just happens to be a game where you have to kill people.

Abstract early games. Bah.

What with slightly less abstract doom or quake? Would it be as fun if you shot differently coloured cubes instead of graphically murdering bitmap/poly monsters?
Because I doubt it.

 

[tuluse]

That, my friends, is bullshit.

Of course it technically isn't real, but if you genuinely didn't care about semblance for reality, you'd be just as content slaughtering untextured cubes going "BOOP.".
Since that's probably bunk, we have to conclude that your fun relies to a large extent on it being a little bit real to you.

I heard this stated really well in a youtube video once.

On some level we see characters in fiction as human. If we didn't, it would all be meaningless.

 

[DalekFlay]

Of course it technically isn't real, but if you genuinely didn't care about semblance for reality, you'd be just as content slaughtering untextured cubes going "BOOP.".
Since that's probably bunk, we have to conclude that your fun relies to a large extent on it being a little bit real to you.

Real enough to spark imagination, obviously fake enough to not really unsettle.

 

[Tel Velothi]

I played Soldier of Fortune II recently and while killing multiple enemies with some kind of automatic shotgun I laughed like some kind of psychopath and screamed something like "catch this!" (in Polish) etc., it was so much fun. Anyone of you guys react like this? I behaved the same way in Tomb Raider while Lara was ambushed by enemies and I was pawning them with firearrows/guns/explosive barrels.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

I played Soldier of Fortune II recently and while killing multiple enemies with some kind of automatic shotgun I laughed like some kind of psychopath and screamed something like "catch this!" (in Polish) etc., it was so much fun. Anyone of you guys react like this? I behaved the same way in Tomb Raider while Lara was ambushed by enemies and I was pawning them with firearrows/guns/explosive barrels.

It depends on my level of misanthropy/xenophobia at the given moment.
When I played SoF years ago I was unsettled to the point when I tried to get enemies to give up whenever it was possible.
When I played it recently in really bad mood, I really enjoyed killing them slowly.

 

[Scruffy]

That, my friends, is bullshit.

Of course it technically isn't real, but if you genuinely didn't care about semblance for reality, you'd be just as content slaughtering untextured cubes going "BOOP.".
Since that's probably bunk, we have to conclude that your fun relies to a large extent on it being a little bit real to you.

Nope, sorry. I was content shooting imaginary aliens in space invaders, and i was content jumping on top of tortoises, not because it was " a little bit real to me", but because that was what the game was about and i enjoyed "beating" the game. I was content eating small lumps of white stuff and escaping from ghosts and i was content jumping barrels thrown by a gorilla. None of that was "real" in the slightest to me. This just happens to be a game where you have to kill people.

Abstract early games. Bah.

What with slightly less abstract doom or quake? Would it be as fun if you shot differently coloured cubes instead of graphically murdering bitmap/poly monsters?
Because I doubt it.

games are games and to me they all serve the same purpose. enjoy them, beat them, relax. I've never been a great FPS fan, i've always either played rpgs or rts, and one of my favorite games of all times is "Solstice" for some weird reason. But if i was to shoot colored cubes to achieve some goal in a game that i find fun/engaging/interesting, sure, why not. Maybe it's a psychological thing, who knows, even in the GTAs i don't go around shooting people unless the situation requires it or sometimes just to get 5 stars and see how much i can last. I guess some people want to go on a rampage and other don't, i don't know.

 

[Tehdagah]

I played Soldier of Fortune II recently and while killing multiple enemies with some kind of automatic shotgun I laughed like some kind of psychopath and screamed something like "catch this!" (in Polish) etc., it was so much fun. Anyone of you guys react like this? I behaved the same way in Tomb Raider while Lara was ambushed by enemies and I was pawning them with firearrows/guns/explosive barrels.

Yes.

 

[Yeesh]

Conflating self-defence with murder isn't subtle. It's demented. I'm pretty sure that a lot of people here, including me could write a critique of extreme violence in games without idiotic sensationalist shit like that.

It's always self-defense when you ask the one who's doing the killing. How many games do we have where my dear America is the victim of some imaginary aggression, some preposterous peril, and that forms the basis and justification for righteous killing. But it's bullshit. And the fact that people think that way, the fact that there are people whom you could tell "Drone killed 8 children in an orphanage over in Paki-town" and they'll reply "Well they should have thought of that before they attacked us." It being real life doesn't change people's perspectives as much as one might think.

Suppose there's a movie of a girl being graphically raped and dismembered and befouled in twenty awful ways. Whether you can stomach that movie, and what your reaction is to what you've just seen, does not change when the filmmaker puts one of them olde timey placards at the start of the scene that reads This is a very, very evil person. You're either someone who can watch and possibly enjoy that sort of thing or you aren't. The very same applies to vidya games, except moreso because vidya games give you the chance to act rather than passively watch.

"They're" always evil, man. They're always subhuman. It's always them or you, and they've always done whatever to you first and pushed you too far, or they always deserve what they get for some reason. That's what callous people think while they coldly commit terrible atrocities in real life. That's what angry gunmen think as they shoot up the office for revenge.

If you like playing a game where you eat the flesh off people's faces while they scream and beg, the fact that those people have EvilCo name-tags on their shirts is not the reason you're enjoying yourself. You don't actually hate evil SOOOO MUCH that you just have to get hard from peeling back virtual flesh. It's something else.

 

[DwarvenFood]

I played Soldier of Fortune II recently and while killing multiple enemies with some kind of automatic shotgun I laughed like some kind of psychopath and screamed something like "catch this!" (in Polish) etc., it was so much fun. Anyone of you guys react like this? I behaved the same way in Tomb Raider while Lara was ambushed by enemies and I was pawning them with firearrows/guns/explosive barrels.

 

[Borelli]

"They're" always evil, man. They're always subhuman. It's always them or you, and they've always done whatever to you first and pushed you too far, or they always deserve what they get for some reason. That's what callous people think while they coldly commit terrible atrocities in real life. That's what angry gunmen think as they shoot up the office for revenge.

If you like playing a game where you eat the flesh off people's faces while they scream and beg, the fact that those people have EvilCo name-tags on their shirts is not the reason you're enjoying yourself. You don't actually hate evil SOOOO MUCH that you just have to get hard from peeling back virtual flesh. It's something else.

And that is why we have zombies. A subhuman monsters you could kill in scores and not feel a single bit of regret. A perfect videogame enemy. (from a emotive perspective, they usually have bad AI and are repetitive)

 

[dnf]

Talking about GTA4 made me think something. Say, if you try to larp a normal criminal(no more random killing, only in missions and such) will the game presents a better "ludo narrative"? The serious tone of the game made some retards behave like a normal criminal wich its dumb, because the game barely punish the player for constant misbehaviour(killing random citizens, robbing cars,etc)...

 

[DalekFlay]

Talking about GTA4 made me think something. Say, if you try to larp a normal criminal(no more random killing, only in missions and such) will the game presents a better "ludo narrative"? The serious tone of the game made some retards behave like a normal criminal wich its dumb, because the game barely punish the player for constant misbehaviour(killing random citizens, robbing cars,etc)...

It certainly makes more sense if you only kill in the missions, but it's still silly.

 

[chestburster]

Talking about GTA4 made me think something. Say, if you try to larp a normal criminal(no more random killing, only in missions and such) will the game presents a better "ludo narrative"? The serious tone of the game made some retards behave like a normal criminal wich its dumb, because the game barely punish the player for constant misbehaviour(killing random citizens, robbing cars,etc)...

Which is why GTA4 is a bad game and I stopped playing after the tutorial missions.

Yet I gladly murdered thousands of digital people in GTA3 and Vice City.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

And that is why we have zombies. A subhuman monsters you could kill in scores and not feel a single bit of regret. A perfect videogame enemy. (from a emotive perspective, they usually have bad AI and are repetitive)

From emotive perspective any enemy that isn't human is shit. Robots and zombies are the worst.

It's always self-defense when you ask the one who's doing the killing. How many games do we have where my dear America is the victim of some imaginary aggression, some preposterous peril, and that forms the basis and justification for righteous killing. But it's bullshit. And the fact that people think that way, the fact that there are people whom you could tell "Drone killed 8 children in an orphanage over in Paki-town" and they'll reply "Well they should have thought of that before they attacked us." It being real life doesn't change people's perspectives as much as one might think.

You're fucking retarded, I'll have to add you to ignore list. You keep bringing up irrelevant shit. Here's a clue - a bunch of psychos wants to murder you and your friends/family/whatever here an now. It's completely irrelevant to children in paki-town.
In Manhunt you aren't in someone else's country, killing random people unrelated to your enemies. You're being hunted down in isolated area by people who will gladly kill you for money.

It's similar in Tomb Raider.

"They're" always evil, man. They're always subhuman. It's always them or you, and they've always done whatever to you first and pushed you too far, or they always deserve what they get for some reason. That's what callous people think while they coldly commit terrible atrocities in real life. That's what angry gunmen think as they shoot up the office for revenge.

I agree. A social system when you can quit school/work where people are being mobbed in without any negative financial and social consequences would be much better than shooting up a work place. I think every person that is being psychologically abused at work and is in danger of losing their health and ability to earn money should simply decide that such system exists and use it.

If you like playing a game where you eat the flesh off people's faces while they scream and beg, the fact that those people have EvilCo name-tags on their shirts is not the reason you're enjoying yourself. You don't actually hate evil SOOOO MUCH that you just have to get hard from peeling back virtual flesh. It's something else.

Of course violence, especially virtual violence is enjoyable, what's your problem?

Also, one doesn't exclude another. Just because you enjoy cutting people to pieces while they scream doesn't mean that you aren't cutting them to pieces while they scream because you hate evil so much. There's a whole lot of people that you don't cut to pieces and a whole lot of people who you wouldn't be able to cut to pieces.

Also, with higher emotional sensitivity, both kicks from committing violent acts and sympathy towards victims of evil and thus hatred towards evil can be much higher than with callousness. It's kinda unintuitive but that's how it works.

 

[JarlFrank]

"They're" always evil, man. They're always subhuman. It's always them or you, and they've always done whatever to you first and pushed you too far, or they always deserve what they get for some reason. That's what callous people think while they coldly commit terrible atrocities in real life. That's what angry gunmen think as they shoot up the office for revenge.

If you like playing a game where you eat the flesh off people's faces while they scream and beg, the fact that those people have EvilCo name-tags on their shirts is not the reason you're enjoying yourself. You don't actually hate evil SOOOO MUCH that you just have to get hard from peeling back virtual flesh. It's something else.

And that is why we have zombies. A subhuman monsters you could kill in scores and not feel a single bit of regret. A perfect videogame enemy. (from a emotive perspective, they usually have bad AI and are repetitive)

Zombie games are the most boring games ever because zombies are such boring enemies. They're stupid and only have melee attacks - so you usally just press "walk backward" and shoot at hordes of zomibes.
It makes me feel regret that I'm not spending my time playing something that's actually fun.

 

[Yeesh]

You're fucking retarded, I'll have to add you to ignore list. You keep bringing up irrelevant shit. Here's a clue - a bunch of psychos wants to murder you and your friends/family/whatever here an now. It's completely irrelevant to children in paki-town.

First, I thought I was already on your ignore list.

Second, I don't generally question people's intelligence, and you seem smart enough. So I can only assume that you're just willfully missing the point. Yes indeed, in the fictional violence simulator under consideration by that the journalist you derided, the player is Good, and the Bad Guys are Bad. I do not believe that was lost on the journalist, nor is it lost on me. (Re-read those last two sentences a few times so you don't forget them when I get to this next part.) But that doesn't fucking matter, the fictional motivations of your play pretend hero are not your motivations. They are an excuse, a trope, a way to set the scene for the action you'd want regardless. Again, since you've probably forgotten, I say this with full knowledge that in this and most video games you play the Good Guy and you only attack the Bad Guys. That fact just doesn't mean fuck all.

It's OK if you don't agree or don't get the point at all, but you're silly to deride someone for:

fail[ing] to notice that these games (like Manhunt or the newest Tomb Raider) are about trying to avoid getting horribly murdered by various kinds of sick fucks that probably don't even deserve to be called "human".

Because people who write about vidya games are probably well aware that UR PLAYIN THA GUD GUY DURR HOW YOU NOT GET TAHT? Because they've played vidya games before. The topic is not the rightness or wrongness of fictional characters' motivations.

But if you can't even see this post, then what difference does it make? I've been cut off from possibly the smartest and most non-retarded mind on the codex, and the mere fact that I'm completely right can't even start to soothe the ache and pain of that loss.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

If you like playing a game where you eat the flesh off people's faces while they scream and beg, the fact that those people have EvilCo name-tags on their shirts is not the reason you're enjoying yourself. You don't actually hate evil SOOOO MUCH that you just have to get hard from peeling back virtual flesh. It's something else.

And what is that?

(for the record, a turtle's shell is joined to its spine, so jumping on koopas in as gruesome as Sub-Zero's fatalities)

 

[Alex]

JIBE WITH THE NARRATIVE

NOT JIVE

JIBE

I dunno. I think I would prefer Jive anyway.

 

[Azarkon]

The joy of violence - when it is without risk / conscience, as in the case of games - not only says a lot about the evolutionary path humanity has taken, but also the extent to which the imaginative context determines our enjoyment.

Ask yourself this: why is it that shooting circles at cubes just doesn't have the same satisfaction when the game mechanics and challenge level are equivalent?

 

[Gurkog]

Violence in and of itself is not entertaining, to me. I revel in challenging game mechanics that require me to strategize and alter tactics on-the-fly in order to succeed. That is why I absolutely adored TFC while loathed CS. CS is pretty mindless two dimensional shoot'em up while TFC had extremely varied experience based upon chosen classes. CS was the herald of decline for FPS games.

 

[KidBoogie]

this is why i play serious sam, to laugh at fagets like this